Quote:
Originally Posted by synolimit
Interesting stuff. To see most accurate dyno setting do you have a favorite drag racing calculator? Last time I went near stock I was 106.5mph trap. Weight with me I wanna say with 1/4 tank should have been 3342lbs. That on the dyno was 280. A calculator I found said I should have 274.
|
Sorry for the uber-long rambly discussion in the last post...
I like the idea of drag racing (real or calculated) as the most meaningful measure of real power, but a lot of other factors come into play like wheelspin, conditions of the track, the driver, along with all the usual suspects, such as ambient conditions, so I usually take that with a pinch of salt, and just go by averaged recorded performance that people at the track report (taking into account their mods and trans).
That said, the values usually converge with dynojet readings, give or take 5-10 whp, so its just additional evidence that points to overall engine output at WOT.
I'll admit to also being a sucker for magazine recorded 0-60 (or, really 0-100 kmh) runs, as well as Top Gear test track laps and the like (see further
http://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/n...ota_ft-86.html ). As I said, more data is usually preferable to less, so I like to have more info to go by when trying to figure these things out and meaningfully interpret them.
I think what I would advise anyone to do is that if they want to take the time, look up NWS data (e.g., temp, dew point, etc) for the day and time the car was run on the dyno along with the elevation based on location (easily googled) and then plug into the calculators at that wahhidudin cite and apply the derived CF to the uncorrected dynojet values. Then you can compare and contrast with the dynojet SAE values that were obtained.
Interestingly, checking on some my last ones, the dynojet applied pressure and humidity readings were way off as compared to actual weather, so I would have had a more or less generous correction on a few of them (and the typical dynoshop is hardly a sealed dyno cell...)
Looking at the TSM data, and assuming the car was run within a day or two prior to the posting, I got a 1.03 correction plugging in all the data.
I think that means the uncorrected would have been about 330, and an SAE of 340 is about right -- remarkable, and reasonable to be a little skeptical of without further verification given how high a value that is -- but legitimate and defensible from a measurement standpoint, at least based on what we were given.
So, yeah -- TSM, build some stuff, show more dynos to verify the claimed merits, and price it to sell!
Other important take away: Dynojets always use the same yardstick -- a huge source of variance on load holding dynos -- every time. Only the correction factor and actual weather conditions need to be checked/taken into consideration when drawing conclusions. For non-inertia type dynos, its going to to be much, much harder to compare and contrast across shops, units, etc.