What are the RPM's for both in 4th gear then? They should be much closer, meaning a more fair comparison.
Actually, I kind of am only speaking about Dynojets and SAE correction factors for just that reason -- to keep everything on the same scale when making comparisons from vehicle to vehicle and in order to more accurately determine the impact of mods.
I guess I personally care less about what people do on other dynamometers as you can't easily compare from one to the other anyway.
See further here
Turbo Magazine's Dyno Dash - Tech Review - Turbo Magazine
However, for dynojet users, we should be able to get stable values across run conditons, vehicles, and transmission types.
Or... if MT drivers feel like they aren't getting to take advantage of their mechancial advantage in 5th, it's important that they take note of the gear because it's going to greatly affect how we interpret the impact of mods.
This may also explain why even on dynojets, claims about stock power and torque values are surprisingly variable.
I see consistency in obtained values across vehicles and transmissions when everyone is gear limited to about 125 MPH and has approximately the same mechanical advantage in acelerating the drum (i.e., 4th gear for both AT and MT).
Anyway, no matter what gear is used, it's important to use the same gear across runs or sessions in order to give the ECU a chance to see the same load cells in the fuel/spark/vvel maps in order to apply adjustments.
In other words, if you dyno in 4th and then later in 5th, you're going to get very different results from run to run.
EDIT:
in 4th gear using 1500 = AT drive shaft = 7110, so yes, they are much closer in drive shaft rotations when both dynoed in 4th.
That mechancial advantage of 2000 RPMs clearly translates into significantly higher torque values measured at the wheels (and slightly higher power) for the MT on the dynojet when dynoed in 5th over 4th.