Top 10 FI Z's
I have, and I have to say that with the same mods on my car, near the same time, my pulls on the dynopack were always higher, by more then 10rwhp~. For example, I did a pull on a dynopack with a new exhaust, it landed me 250rwhp, did it on a dynojet, it was 239rwhp.
Originally posted by GaryK
Anyway, I was just curious if anybody here had been on both with the same car/setup...
Anyway, I was just curious if anybody here had been on both with the same car/setup...
Last edited by LSs1Power; Dec 21, 2003 at 04:03 PM.
Originally posted by GaryK
Easy G...I'm not doing anything but asking a question. If you do compare numbers between the two for the same car, they are always higher on the Dynopack from what I've seen. I don't want to get into an argument about what dyno is better, although I would say a Dynopack may be more repeatable...not necessarily more accurate. The Dynopack uses a hub attachment, so the mass of the wheels/tires and the rolling friction don't come into play, nor do you have to worry about tire slip on a roller. If you consider those facts, then you would really have to expect the Dynopack to dyno a little higher.
Anyway, I was just curious if anybody here had been on both with the same car/setup...
Easy G...I'm not doing anything but asking a question. If you do compare numbers between the two for the same car, they are always higher on the Dynopack from what I've seen. I don't want to get into an argument about what dyno is better, although I would say a Dynopack may be more repeatable...not necessarily more accurate. The Dynopack uses a hub attachment, so the mass of the wheels/tires and the rolling friction don't come into play, nor do you have to worry about tire slip on a roller. If you consider those facts, then you would really have to expect the Dynopack to dyno a little higher.
Anyway, I was just curious if anybody here had been on both with the same car/setup...
Exactly my point, as the Dynojet has a correction multiplier built in to the calculations.
In fact tuning is more reliable on a Dynopack when compared to a Dynojet.
Actually, I was planning to get onto a dynojet, as I mentioned in my earlier post; just never had the time; and next, the Dyno Dynamics dynamometer at the end of February, as a dealer in the area has ordered one for his shop.
Relax GK, don't have to get so defensive.
G
--------------------------------
Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success. ~ Henry Ford ~
Last edited by 350Zzzz; Dec 21, 2003 at 04:47 PM.
Originally posted by 350Zzzz
Relax GK, I was merely asking......I don't think that I implied otherwise.
Exactly my point, as the Dynojet has a correction multiplier built in to the calculations.
In fact tuning is more reliable on a Dynopack when compared to a Dynojet.
Actually, I was planning to get onto a dynojet, as I mentioned in my earlier post; just never had the time; and next, the Dyno Dynamics dynamometer at the end of February, as a dealer in the area has ordered one for his shop.
Relax GK, don't have to get so defensive.
G
--------------------------------
Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success. ~ Henry Ford ~
Relax GK, I was merely asking......I don't think that I implied otherwise.
Exactly my point, as the Dynojet has a correction multiplier built in to the calculations.
In fact tuning is more reliable on a Dynopack when compared to a Dynojet.
Actually, I was planning to get onto a dynojet, as I mentioned in my earlier post; just never had the time; and next, the Dyno Dynamics dynamometer at the end of February, as a dealer in the area has ordered one for his shop.
Relax GK, don't have to get so defensive.
G
--------------------------------
Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success. ~ Henry Ford ~
The Dynopack has the ability to run at a static load, which is indeed better for tuning than any inertia dyno. But, it seems that regardless of the correction factors used by either dyno, the Dynopack will yield higher numbers by some amount.
Here is paulo's dyno graphs.
Link to Large picture
The 413 was a "oops" run when he fired NO2 through the intercooler sprayer and it went up through the air filter. So if you dont want to use that one, the other is the basic procharger run.
I dont think he will be filling the intercooler sprayer with N02, even if they are out of C02 again. (A/F was not ideal)
Link to Large picture
The 413 was a "oops" run when he fired NO2 through the intercooler sprayer and it went up through the air filter. So if you dont want to use that one, the other is the basic procharger run.
I dont think he will be filling the intercooler sprayer with N02, even if they are out of C02 again. (A/F was not ideal)
I have never seen a dyno jet graph like like that, hey be cool bro because they tested your A/F at the tail pipe right?
I guess with your exhaust you are ok. I wish you could get a fuel reading, that seems to be the hot topic.
Someone break out the CD and get some specs on fuel delivery.
I guess with your exhaust you are ok. I wish you could get a fuel reading, that seems to be the hot topic.
Someone break out the CD and get some specs on fuel delivery.
This what that matters
http://tinyurl.com/2znqb
and
This is my new 2nd photo album I am working on.
http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=4288177437
http://tinyurl.com/2znqb
and
This is my new 2nd photo album I am working on.
http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=4288177437
Daking, the point I was making was I gray scaled it so color ink wasn't needed. Trying to help even though you are "East Coast."
BTW, You know Tupac was from San Jose California not NYC right? hahahahaha!
BTW, You know Tupac was from San Jose California not NYC right? hahahahaha!




and the Dyno Tech wasn't certified.