IIQuickSilverII

iTrader: (13)

Yah man i was not refering at all to dyno dynamics but the dynojet in this case.
So with your point of dynojet uncorrected not as meaningfull as uncorrected in dynodynamics...then why not post the industry standad SAE correction. I.E. the one almost everybody uses.

Just saw you ninja edit:
"Sam likely chose STD correction because like Sharif mentioned the correction added to the actual numbers isnt as "stingy" as SAE and you can compare between STD #'s on a Dynojet to STD #'s on a Dyno Dynamics-like Sharif runs. Even then on my car at 15psi I dyno'd 40whp higher on a Dynojet, using the same correction."

well that makes no sense to use STD correction in a dynojet when it still reads so much lower than a dynodynamics with STD. Whats the comparison point then for whp. just as you clearly showed in you dyno graphs.
Again i just wanna hear why he choose in the dynojet STD over SAE when SAE is the one mostly used and it would probably take the 800 whp claim away (for NOW, again i dont doubt his abilities i am sure he can get it there no matter what or no correction used)

Sharif@Forged

iTrader: (92)

No worries...its easy to get caught up in all the verbiage. Our dyno uses STD atmospheric correction. But due the manner in which our dyno measures trq and power, the number is going to be lower than a DynoJet running STD correction, OR SAE correction. It's just a number...at the end of the day. Some dynos allow the operator to select the various correction types, but ours locks us into STD correction, and we dont have any other options.

The BS correction that Alberto speaks of, is an arbitrary correction, in order to simulate a DJ number. We never use this type of correction on our dyno.

Acree

iTrader: (29)

EDIT. I just read the very post and answered my own question. Thanks. Grats on the numbers.

-Acree

IIQuickSilverII

iTrader: (13)

So Sam:
Can we see the SAE corrected dynosheets??

Devil Z

iTrader: (6)

So if a car is tuned . . . if one uses a Dynojet and the other a Dyno Dynamics and both reads say 400whp . . . the car on the Dyno Dynamics would be reading higher on a Dynojet? (using corrected numbers).

Thanks as I know nothing about dynos except not to use the godly Scott Performance dyno LOL.

IIQuickSilverII

iTrader: (13)

its jsut a tool. if scotss dyno reads high, the the who numbers might be well representative but if the a/f reads good then it can be used for tunning, just be aware that you are using inflated whp numbers.

Which, back to this thread, is why i ask for ther SAE numbers since STD are the most inflated ones of all.

Devil Z

iTrader: (6)

No no . . . Scott's has been proven to read somewhere between 100-200whp higher than anyone else's.

IIQuickSilverII

iTrader: (13)

hahaha
thats the overkill of inflated...

enoguh with the OT plz

Sam@GTM

iTrader: (7)

1- You are turning this thread into a dyno debate, which is not cool.

2- you are making it sound like we are deliberately inflating our dyno numbers on a DYNOJET for crying out loud and I really don't appreciate that

3- go ahead and find one single dyno graph from us that we show any different correction other than STD, you won't, as a mater of fact that correction has never been changed on our dyno since day one, 7 years a go, and we are definitely not going to do this now (simply don't care) sorry

4- dynos are tools to gauge performance so to play the correction game on the internet and change it around , does not make any sense it will only confuse people and make this thread more complicated for no reason.

5-the power we achieved was a celebration and accomplishment for all of us in this community not only GT Motorsports, and we are not in a competition to have the highest dyno graph out there. It is only a matter of time before someone will go beyond the 855whp that we made (standard correction) there are some other promising projects out there that I think will do even better, the MRC project comes to mind.

6- Now go ahead and debate this graph, 855rwhp and 820rwhp at 22psi on 105 octane (unleaded), Standard Correction.

regards,

Sam

GT Motorsports



Overlay with previous dyno. Standard Correction:

Sam@GTM

iTrader: (7)

To everyone else that has been following this thread with out going Off Topic BIGTIME, what we did to fix the top end power loss was clean up the A/F ratio, add a bit more time (as we said before the drop off was due to timing be TOO conservative) and a little more boost as you can see. Engine feels strong and solid.

Stay tuned.....

sam

dutchboy

iTrader: (1)

Amazing power curves. Keep up the good work. I can't believe you are up this early (or late?).

siua

Sick work man! Wouldn't wanna mess with that Z on the street!!!

tig488

iTrader: (18)

getting sicker and sicker, great job guys.

Dubai

iTrader: (15)

ahh getting closer and closer to hit 4 digits. Great job guys!

IIQuickSilverII

iTrader: (13)

no, the entire time in mentioned how awsome the power curves looked and gave you porps on the excellent work ont he car
I simple asked why you used STD instead of SAE when almost everybody else uses SAE, and its no secret STD reads higher generally. Never called you a lier ot anything, nor comparing to other shops that DO show inflated number no matter what correction. I dont think the numbers are inflated but you are just using the correction that shows the highest numbers and thats fine, i am just sayign industry standard is SAE, other shops for other cars supras, R34s use SAE, so why not stay with SAE.

okey, its your choice and its fine, just wondered why you choose that, not asking you to change it. Nobody dissagrees with your job quality or antyhing, just asking why you choose std from sae from the beigning.

I already said that whp numbers mean nothing unless you can put it on the ground at the track. Why would it confused poeple to say that you have a 800 whp car on STD correction, 760s on SAE and so on depending on which correction you pick.

I truly agree, and i said that from my very first post! Congrats.

looks good!....the 22 psi increased quit a bit more with the extra fixes on teh a/f you did.... btw are you even close to maxin out the injectors? or is the cjm stage3 close to what it can be maxed out yet?

IIQuickSilverII

iTrader: (13)

+1000 i am sure the Z can get there !

Hydrazine

iTrader: (53)

Amazing results Sam!

I am curious. I know this was brought up earlier in this thread, but by increasing the boost, low RPM TQ decreases. Maybe I missed it, but do you know why it does this?
Is boost moderated at the lower RPM range by the FCON or is there some other dynamic at work?

EDIT: Or am I looking at the overlaid plots correctly?

EDIT2: HAHAHA! Never mind. I looked at the plots more closely. I criss crossed the lines.

Fantastic results!

BrianLG35C

iTrader: (2)

Congrats Sam! Would love to see video of any of these dynos!!

BamBam

iTrader: (4)

Sam, it is looking better and better each time you post more info...

Good job and thanks for putting all that time in (looks like you were up late yet AGAIN last night.. LOL)

I am sure you will continue to work your way up that power curve..

GurgenPB

iTrader: (2)

Wow Sam, amazing stuff.... Making me regret not coming over last night...although if I did, you'd make 1000hp, you knaw...'cause i am good luck and all....

Beautiful. You are the man!