Wow, before I type anything serious in nature I can say that some of the other posts have made reading through trying to find the original topic at least fun.
Anyways, back to what you were saying RRRoamer. I apoligize for taking so long to get a post back. I got pretty tied up here but so far with the time I did have here is what I have found. I think that some of the errors seem to be based on the original excel spreadsheet with the various dyno graphs from different tests being jumbled up. After looking over it again and again to try and find ryhme or reason as to what was what and where the issue was I thought at first it was random. The data just appeared mixed up with no real intentional order to it. Then after looking though it seems as some of the cells and rows that had alternate tests with different configurations are mixed into these tests. The problem is it is not every cell or a complete row that the data looks like that.
At first I was thrown off because the peak number seemed right at first glance but when I started comparing the individual numbers down in different cells I started noticing cross ups where data was flipped. So that started making more sense. The peak number is right, but the data that is under the curve is mixed up.
So, I am pretty sure that MM&FF would have nothing to gain by jumbling the numbers up. I guess maybe they could sell more magazines if the numbers were higher but I am still pretty sure that they don't have any concern as to the numbers. As for Livernois of course a higher number looks better but based on how the data is distributed with the peak number being the important one in most instances as far as advertising goes and since the peak number is one of the only correct numbers I would say it's fair to assume that again there was no intention. That and the fact that I did get to see some of the original numbers and spreadsheets with dyno graphs on them I am pretty sure that this is just a case of the numbers getting transposed in the translation between us and the magazine guys. It was a mistake and I do apoligize for any incovenience it has caused. I am going to post the first dyno graph that I had mentoined previously that was a chassis dyno test of that exact same combo but in a car. Hopefully some better numbers might shed some light on it.
Don't let this brief interruption stop the playful bickering though. I was starting to enjoy it.
Thanks
Mike