Your car dyno`d? Dyno Jet or Mustang Dyno?

[BLKBULLITT]

This has been a bugger for me for a while now.

Most of the people on this site are running 480+ hp on stock motor, with say a vortech or procharger etc.. any kind of power adder lets say.

When you get your cars tuned is it on a Mustang Dyno (which generally reads a heck of a lot lower) or a Dyno jet?

Ill use my buddy who has a whipple charged 07 I think it is? (white_lightning) user name on here.. I think lol. His car is 387rwhp ON a Mustang dyno. Im sure it would read more if it was placed on some dyno jet.

Somebody give me some education as to why a mustang dyno reads less and generally as per a lot of the car guys ive talked to it gives `real hp and tq numbers to the wheels`

/My stupid thread of the day ​

 

[fdjizm]

Because mustang dyno's use eddy current to simulate load per the weight of the car (almost real street simulation) and dynojets are inertia dyno's and once the heavy as rollers get going it's not so much a street simulation of actual load.

Dynojet is still more popular but the best reading is that trap speed in the 1/4

 

[chad05gt]

320 Mustang

388 Dynojet

12.05 @ 117

Dyno, tuning tool... Period.

 

[linnE]

^^^ this.

The #s on a Dyno Jet are formulated by the weight of the roller(s).
The results on a Mustang or any other eddy current generated braked dyno uses a formula that uses the weight of the vehicle,drag coefficent and weather correction. The results are more real time like being on the street or track.

Although many cars that are modififed will never see track time, the true indication is at the track.
Too many guys put too much emphasis on dyno #s when it should be considered a tuning tool..period.

 

[Steedman07]

dyno queens worry about dyno numbers..men with big shlongs worry about 1/4 times/mph..

 

[linnE]

^^^LOL.. I have to disagree though. Size has nothing to do with it.

 

[twisted_GT500]

I've only used dyno jet, but thats because they're the only thing around me. As posted before, HP #s are just that...#s. Real racing takes a lot more than HP...weight, traction, suspension, gearing, driver, etc....

 

[fdjizm]

^^^LOL.. I have to disagree though. Size has nothing to do with it.

That's what they all say lol

 

[Brezick]

I like to see my numbers on a dyno, but HP and TQ is maybe like the fifth most important number behind A/F, Timing, Boost, and even RPM....

 

[BL00DSH0T]

Because mustang dyno's use eddy current to simulate load per the weight of the car (almost real street simulation) and dynojets are inertia dyno's and once the heavy as rollers get going it's not so much a street simulation of actual load.

Dynojet is still more popular but the best reading is that trap speed in the 1/4

Not totally true...dynojets use eddy current also.

Dynojets are the industry standard as they are easily repeatable. I know the older Mustang dynos required more setup time, input variables, and operator skill which made they vary from dynojets.

They are both very good tuning tools. I like them for the gains from mod to mod as I dont hit the 1/4mile as much as I have in the pass.
I always thought the numbers were right on for all of my cars when dyno'd stock with a dynojet.

 

[Marc s]

Mustang dynos can be setup to read numbers that are every close to a Dynojet. The dyno I tune with is a Mustang. On the same day, I have had my car on the Mustang dyno and my friends Dynojet. The Dynojet only read 1.5% higher.

 

[StangPower05]

Mustang Dyno here...

 

[Black 5.0]

Not totally true...dynojets use eddy current also.

Dynojets are the industry standard as they are easily repeatable. I know the older Mustang dynos required more setup time, input variables, and operator skill which made they vary from dynojets.

They are both very good tuning tools. I like them for the gains from mod to mod as I dont hit the 1/4mile as much as I have in the pass.
I always thought the numbers were right on for all of my cars when dyno'd stock with a dynojet.

Dynojets are basically an inertia dyno. Only recently have they had the OPTION of also having load bearing (eddy current) installed.

I use a Dynodynamics Dyno (eddy current) because they are only 10 minutes away from me. It is aledgedly within 2% of true numbers as it took them a year to get enough data and numbers from numerous vehicles for it's calibration. As has been said though, the track will give you the bottom line. The dyno is just a tuning tool. However, I'm like most of you and like to see the numbers.

 

[linnE]

A Mustang Dyno has a brake that puts resistance against the roller to simulate the weight of the vehicle. Therefore the results are based on the weight of the vehicle and not the weight of the roller(s) like an inertia dyno is.

It really doesnt matter what type of dyno you use to see the gains from a mod.When you do a baseline before the install then redyno after the install you will see the gains.

Where the debate starts is which dyno is best for tuning. And you will get differing opinions about that.

 

[BL00DSH0T]

A Mustang Dyno has a brake that puts resistance against the roller to simulate the weight of the vehicle. Therefore the results are based on the weight of the vehicle and not the weight of the roller(s) like an inertia dyno is.

It really doesnt matter what type of dyno you use to see the gains from a mod.When you do a baseline before the install then redyno after the install you will see the gains.

Where the debate starts is which dyno is best for tuning. And you will get differing opinions about that.

I don't think there has ever been a debate of which is better for tuning, atleast I have never seen one. Either in capable hands are very good tuning tools.
The only debate I can find in that is the tuner and not the machine.

 

[05mustang_TT_charged]

I don't think there has ever been a debate of which is better for tuning, atleast I have never seen one. Either in capable hands are very good tuning tools.
The only debate I can find in that is the tuner and not the machine.

I agree with you somewhat but till recently a Mustang Dyno was more effective to tune a turbo car. The Mustang Dyno loads the car and helps load the turbo. We saw a problem with a friends turbo 3V that was tuned on a non loaded Dynojet. A/F was perfect on the dyno but data logging at the track showed the car being lean. The dyno did not load the car enough to make the turbo spool like it would on the track or the street.

 

[BruceH]

I don't think there has ever been a debate of which is better for tuning, atleast I have never seen one. Either in capable hands are very good tuning tools.
The only debate I can find in that is the tuner and not the machine.

IMO it's best to have the motor loaded as close to real world as possible.

Could you imagine what would happen if someone tuned a motor with as much spark advance as possible on a non-loaded dyno and changed the knock sensor sensitivity? It would make big numbers but once on the street or track the poor owner would have serious detonation.

 

[linnE]

I don't think there has ever been a debate of which is better for tuning, atleast I have never seen one. Either in capable hands are very good tuning tools.
The only debate I can find in that is the tuner and not the machine.

There has always been debate about which dyno is better for tuning. Just as there has always been debate about who is the best tuner and which is the best tuning device to use.

Any time a decision has to be made.. There will be debate.

 

[BL00DSH0T]

You are forgetting that dynojets have the same eddy current option. Even the older dynojets without the option could get perfect tuning from good creative tuners.

All I'm saying is in the hands of a good tuner the type of dyno makes no difference.
I have seen the debate on tuners and which dyno reads the most accurate but never which dyno is better for tuning.....that is ALWAYS dependant on the tuner.

 

[The Big Herm]

My car is tuned on a Dynojet but I have run on a Mustang as well. The numbers were, of course, different but not as far apart as some people have noted.

I ran 652 RWHP on a Dynojet and a few days later, everything on the car the same, I ran a 634 on the Mustang. As many have said, it's not only in the eye of the beholder but in the hands of the tuner and the performance you are happy with.