Dyno baseline for nearly stock '05 V

[AAIIIC]

Last weekend I took the V down to Steve's Pacific Import Auto to do a few dyno runs. PIA is a Subaru shop, and I've used their AWD Mustang dyno a number of times for my Subaru, so I know them well and figured I'd bring the V by just for shits and giggles. My Kooks headers recently returned from being coated by Swain Tech, so I wanted to get a baseline before I install those and dyno the car again.

Thus far the car is essentially stock when it comes to the powertrain. I have a K&N panel filter, a Magnaflow cat-back, and synthetic fluids throughout.

We did 3 pulls pretty much back-to-back. The 1st pull was the most consistent, with peak torque and peak power slightly lower than the 2nd pull. On the graph you can see the 2nd pull started out lower than the 1st and stayed a few ft-lb lower all the way up until just before peak torque, at which point it jumped up and held that higher level all the way to redline. The 3rd pull was lower for an even longer time - past peak torque - but about 5200rpm came back up and merged on the 2nd run to produce nearly identical peak power. I'm assuming the differences in the three runs were due to heat soak and the ECM pulling some timing, but I don't have any way to datalog to prove that.

Here's the graph:


Peak numbers were 350.5hp @ 6150rpm and 348.1ft-lb @ 4750rpm. I'm sure some will say those are typically high Mustang numbers, but based on my Subaru's dyno results, this particular Mustang dyno reads probably 6 or 7% lower than the one Dynojet I've had that car on. Every dyno is different, which is why I wanted to get my own baseline before I install the headers.

I only posted the AFR curve for the first run. The other two were very similar, a bit richer at the low end, but by ~3600rpm they pretty much were tracing over the first curve. Note that the scale on the right hand side of the graph is a little weird - each tick is 0.4, so there is no tick for 13:1. At the top end it was running 13.2:1.

And here's a quick video of the 2nd run, shot with my digital camera.

My intention now is to get the headers installed, get my spare ECM reflashed (most likely by wait4me), then get new dyno results. It'll probably be a couple months, though, as I'm about to head back out to sea.

[03blwn281]

I have not dynoed my 05 V yet but I would venture to say those numbers are a bit on the highside from other comparisons.

Nice ride though and keeps us informed on the Headers..

[AAIIIC]

I repeat...

Originally Posted by AAIIIC

Every dyno is different, which is why I wanted to get my own baseline before I install the headers.

This same topic comes up in pretty much every dyno thread, and yet people still insist on trying to compare dyno numbers from different dynos run on different days in different atmospheric conditions at different altitudes. I don't get it.

[maxspeed96ct]

What size headers did you buy 1-7/8 or 1 3/4 ?

and are they catted?


Ill be dynoing my catted 1 7/8 kooks soon, but ill also have a lighter flywheel since my last dyno so It might be slightly higher, but at least Ill have something to compare to with what you gain..

Im hoping for a gain of at least 30 since i have a small cam, what do you think?

[CTSVmapper]

Originally Posted by AAIIIC

I repeat...


This same topic comes up in pretty much every dyno thread, and yet people still insist on trying to compare dyno numbers from different dynos run on different days in different atmospheric conditions at different altitudes. I don't get it.

?? whats to get?
If the operator is sane, you SAE CORRECT (with PROPER values) to adjust for those varying conditions to bring the run to a standard comparable level.
SAE J1349 is your standard non-force induction correction.
If done correctly, you should be able run several runs in varying different altitudes, temps, pressures, cities and yield the SAME number when corrected no matter where. Hence why you should be able to compare dyno runs. If done correctly, its an accurate comparison to others. This of course, is when using a comparable dyno setup.
When doing a dyno, the operator has the ability to adjust these correction values, which would skew results.
TURBOS are the biggest issue... I see time and time again.. its a WHOLE different ball game and you can NOT SAE correct for TURBO applications...

As for your curve... I would point out its not common on an LS6 motor to achieve that much TQ with your mods. If you TUNED your ECM, that HP is pretty close, I got 346 RWHP 330TQ when completely stock, even the paper intake filter using HP Tuners... if you didnt tune it... your really high.

Glad to hear you are coating the headers.


Many references: http://engineers.ihs.com/document/ab...FZFBAAAAAAAAAA

and another:
http://wahiduddin.net/calc/cf.htm

[maxspeed96ct]

Originally Posted by CTSVmapper

?? whats to get?
If the operator is sane, you SAE CORRECT (with PROPER values) to adjust for those varying conditions to bring the run to a standard comparable level.
SAE J1349 is your standard non-force induction correction.
If done correctly, you should be able run several runs in varying different altitudes, temps, pressures, cities and yield the SAME number when corrected no matter where. Hence why you should be able to compare dyno runs. If done correctly, its an accurate comparison to others. This of course, is when using a comparable dyno setup.
When doing a dyno, the operator has the ability to adjust these correction values, which would skew results.
TURBOS are the biggest issue... I see time and time again.. its a WHOLE different ball game and you can NOT SAE correct for TURBO applications...

As for your curve... I would point out its not common on an LS6 motor to achieve that much TQ with your mods. If you TUNED your ECM, that HP is pretty close, I got 346 RWHP 330TQ when completely stock, even the paper intake filter using HP Tuners... if you didnt tune it... your really high.

Glad to hear you are coating the headers.


Many references: http://engineers.ihs.com/document/ab...FZFBAAAAAAAAAA

and another:
http://wahiduddin.net/calc/cf.htm

You just talked all that B.S. about how you can compare dynos

then at the end you say how his numbers are realy high.


Bottom line is all dynos run diffrent

Ive seen mustang dynos that make the same numbers as dynojets, and some 15 % lower.

Theres stock Vs on here that have made 300 on a mustang dyno and theres some that have made 340 on a mustang dyno.... Even if the numbers are corrected they are not compareable.

A Dyno is a tunning tool, and so you can compare your baseline numbers.

[AAIIIC]

Originally Posted by maxspeed96ct

What size headers did you buy 1-7/8 or 1 3/4 ?

and are they catted?

I went with 1-3/4" with cats. I honestly have no real idea what to expect for gains.

Originally Posted by maxspeed96ct

Ill be dynoing my catted 1 7/8 kooks soon, but ill also have a lighter flywheel since my last dyno so It might be slightly higher, but at least Ill have something to compare to with what you gain..

I had a UUC flywheel, but it was stolen out of my garage (along with a variety of other stuff) when my house was broken into back in January while I was at sea. I'll almost certainly end up doing a lightened flywheel and new clutch, just need to decide what types to go with.

[CTSVmapper]

Originally Posted by maxspeed96ct

You just talked all that B.S. about how you can compare dynos

then at the end you say how his numbers are realy high.


Bottom line is all dynos run diffrent

Ive seen mustang dynos that make the same numbers as dynojets, and some 15 % lower.

Theres stock Vs on here that have made 300 on a mustang dyno and theres some that have made 340 on a mustang dyno.... Even if the numbers are corrected they are not compareable.

A Dyno is a tunning tool, and so you can compare your baseline numbers.

Its not BS...
Dynos do run different, BRAND wise.. but a DYNOJET is a DYNOJET and a MUSTANG is a MUSTANG... if they are within tolerance and PROPERLY calibrated and maintained... the values should be corrected to the SAME value. I should be able to hop on ANY DYNOJET and get the same value IF a) the operator KNOWS wtf they are doing, and the equipment is calibrated and proper.
you are right though, I should not have said those numbers were high as I ran on a Dynojet, not his brand of dyno..
You caught me there... (nudge on the shoulders).
I stick to my "BS" though... I have had Many talks with Dan Hourigan VP of DynoJet and have talked about this.

[AAIIIC]

[quote=CTSVmapper;2049277]Its not BS...
Dynos do run different, BRAND wise.. but a DYNOJET is a DYNOJET and a MUSTANG is a MUSTANG... if they are within tolerance and PROPERLY calibrated and maintained... the values should be corrected to the SAME value.[quote]
I agree with maxspeed on this...

Originally Posted by maxspeed96ct

I've seen Mustang dynos that make the same numbers as Dynojets, and some 15% lower.

Dynojets seem to have a very good reputation for repeatability, and from reading various automotive forums that seems to be legit. For whatever reason, though, Mustang dynos just don't seem as repeatable. I don't know if they have more settings that an operator can set improperly or something, but I've seen the same phenomenom on this forum, on the Subaru forum, etc. Some Mustangs read "high", and some read "low". Not sure what the deal is.

Originally Posted by CTSVmapper

I should be able to hop on ANY DYNOJET and get the same value IF a) the operator KNOWS wtf they are doing, and the equipment is calibrated and proper.

The other problem is that a chassis dyno has a whole bunch of extra variables that an engine dyno doesn't have. Tire pressures and fluid temps (not just in the engine, but throughout the drivetrain) are probably the two biggest. I wouldn't be surprised if I would see different numbers just going back on my snow tires instead of my summer tires.

[CTSVmapper]

QUOTE: The other problem is that a chassis dyno has a whole bunch of extra variables that an engine dyno doesn't have. Tire pressures and fluid temps (not just in the engine, but throughout the drivetrain) are probably the two biggest. I wouldn't be surprised if I would see different numbers just going back on my snow tires instead of my summer tires.[/quote]

Thats interesting point, though i would think this would be minimal. Fluid temps, maybe, but that is why you do multiple pulls. (back to the operator error) I will try a few runs with low tire pressure vs over pressure as well as swap tires next dyno session...and I WOULD be surprised to see any difference as we are not talking about wild numbers here. 600+.
I have went on several different dynojets and different shops,with my other cars, with all what I mentioned prior, consistent numbers are given. I dont think I was a fluke.
I would agree that since you are looking at these factors as possibles, you are right... but I believe these are likely to be out by 1-2 maybe 3 hp... and not enough to discredit anyone's numbers by comparison (obviously based on the same brand of dyno)

Lastly, I didnt mean to go off topic on your thread.

[maxspeed96ct]

Originally Posted by AAIIIC

I went with 1-3/4" with cats. I honestly have no real idea what to expect for gains.




I had a UUC flywheel, but it was stolen out of my garage (along with a variety of other stuff) when my house was broken into back in January while I was at sea. I'll almost certainly end up doing a lightened flywheel and new clutch, just need to decide what types to go with.

I went with a spec stage 3+ kit with steel fly.

But i went through hell man
I first orderd the hendrix which was just so junk i sent it back, then i orderd a monster kit, was on backorder for 3 weeks then it got pushed back more so i canceled and went with a spec 3 which will arive next week.






And as far as dyno brands giving out the same numbers that is incorrect.

If you look at any mustang dyno numbers using the same type of car the numbers can vary up to 50 hp diffrent ...
Could be like ctsvmapper said were they are not calibrated and maintained

[rand49er]

Originally Posted by AAIIIC

...




...

Sure wish I'd gotten mine coated.



Dyno comparisons? I ain't goin' there.

[VfReaK]

you silly kids. this old dick swinging argument is pointless.
a dyno is a tuning tool, nothing more, as it will only expose what wrong,
not whats right. based on that stand point, numbers are just values to determine gains made, or errors to be adjusted.
so lets not dwell on peak numbers, but try to gain knowledge on the various ways to make gains by each implementation via various combinations.

[SkullV]

Originally Posted by VfReaK

you silly kids. this old dick swinging argument is pointless.
a dyno is a tuning tool, nothing more, as it will only expose what wrong,
not whats right. based on that stand point, numbers are just values to determine gains made, or errors to be adjusted.
so lets not dwell on peak numbers, but try to gain knowledge on the various ways to make gains by each implementation via various combinations.

Mike speaks the truth.

[CTSVmapper]

i agree VfReaK (somewhat),

Its obvious you should remain using your desired dyno shop to see what changes are made to remove other shop consistencies...
For the 'dyno' to be a tool though, consistency must exist, and to verify that consistency, dyno numbers should be comparable visa versa ESPECIALLY to your own car. otherwise, its in err. with every run you pull. You should be able to go next week and hit the same curve (very close), corrected of course...

as you said:" numbers are just values to determine gains made"
What would be the point to see if a mod actually changed something if your numbers changed every run you did on different days without changing anything? Today Im high, tomorrow im down, ?? was it the Mod? was it tire pressure? Its just the dyno?? (what?)

these are expensive tools! And I have seen many that do not know how to use them and maintain them. Or many shops are small, and buy used dynos... who knows.

What I was trying to say.. is to be a 'TOOL; as you state and I agree a 'tool'...ie. as in a TORQUE wrench.. I should be able to take Mine and yours on one bolt... and get it to the same desired torque... different wrenches. Calibration and use are the big changing factors if they are out. not the wrench. If I dropped mine on the floor a dozen times, it may not work as well... or have 4 extensions on it with a knuckle.

I see what you are trying to say, but to say its pointless is wrong.. it SHOULD be able to be compared if a dyno tool is properly used. It is an engineering standard for a reason.


AAIIIC - GOOD luck on the install! And enjoy!