Ok guys, HERE is a version with adjustable smoothing on the dyno graph page. Could we get it to show NO smoothing as well? I'll try to toy with this stuff more tomorrow. Thanks man.

 

looks good! Well done. here is a 3rd gear pull from today w/ correction factor 1.200... Now if I could get them to be as smooth as bryans pulls... lol

 

Your pull is fairly smooth, its just the smoothing factor is better on his since he had less lines of data to smooth in his files he sent. A correction factor of 1.200 is no longer valid for a Dynojet comparison, you gotta use 1.121 for Dynojet and 0.953 for a Mustang Dyno with the new settings. GST Motorsports and Buschur Racing both keep their SAE Weather Corrections disabled so if you want to know what you'll do on their dyno's just keep the SAE corrections disabled by setting 77*F for air temp and 29.235 for Barometric Pressure.

I suggest using the Weather Corrections for your personal tuning if you are doing different logs on different days though. That way its easier to see the gains/losses from the tune, rather than from climate changes.

The newer version of Virtual Dyno Room will have everything be set from drop-down boxes for:
Dyno Choice, SAE Correction Enabled/Disabled, Smoothing Factor, and for the Gear you're pull was performed in. Most of these will be on the Dyno Graph Page rather than on the spreadsheets so you can physically see the changes to the graph as you switch between dyno types and such. I just need to find someone who knows how to make a stand-alone program for this so everything is in an ACTUAL program so most of the formula based pages can be hidden and simplified.

 

Ok, here is a 3rd gear pull I did 2 weeks ago, I will do one today and compare. Mods are on signature.

 

Its close enough in my book too

 

Try a smoothing factror of 9 or 11 and she should look a bit smoother and resemble a dyno graph's printout a bit more.

 

i use a site called mrexcel for any complicated formula's. replys are pretty quick too.
this smoothing my need an alogorithm (if thats the right expression?) to smooth the sharp peaks rather than all of it generally otherwise you could smooth out an area that perhaps needs more tuning on the actually motor! ?

 

i think something is wrong here. or something i did lol

on my dyno run on an SAE corrected dyno i made 315whp and 322wTQ.

i used this exact same log on DLL and got numbers withing 10HP and the TQ was spot on.

when i use the log in the new spreadsheet i get 220whp and 219wTQ?

 

Its gotta be something you did. We've had enough confirmations to show that the Dynojet and Mustang numbers are well within an acceptable range thus far. Post up your log and we'll take a look at it. What kind of Dyno were you on when you got 315whp/322wtq? Also post up the air temp and baro that were recorded on the day of your dyno pull (or at least for the datalog).


Even the standard Dyno software uses the same kind of smoothing technique we are using, its all a bunch of averaging. If you saw the raw data from a dyno it'd look like a seismograph from a 10.0 earthquake lol. The only thing missing in the latest version is the smoothing factor only alters the RPM and Time and not the 'Base HP Smooth' column which I will edit so all 3 recieve the same smoothing factor.

 

Dynojet, SAE corrected.

another friend used the same spreadsheet (latest one with smoothing) and got much lower values. when he change the correction to 1.2 as in he old excel spreadsheet he gets very close the actual dyno curve. its the same with me.

is 1.121 the correct value for a dynojet?

yup terrible eathquake lol. i will continue to use the spreadsheet and provide feedback.

 

Good to know! I always input the outside temp. and baromic press. I was gonna add that the #'s were a lil off, but didnt wanna be a noodge... Turns out, w/ right the correction factor, ^^ (1.121) should put me right where I really am. Having all of the corrections, etc. on the graph page sounds like a good idea. Great work !

 

I think the spreadsheet is very accurate. There is a rule of thumb in the UK that you can divide DynoDynamics at the wheel figures by 0.78 to get the approximate flywheel figure. As Bryan GST Motorsports has said, the Mustang Dyno reads very close to the DynoDynamics. My car has never been on a Mustang or DD but has been on a Dastek dyno that figures out flywheel horsepower by measuring friction on coastdown and makes 390 flywheel horsepower on my standard tune and 414 with water/meth injection. Dividing my spreadsheet results, 303hp and 321hp respectively by 0.78 gives 388.6hp and 411.5hp. It all ties in.

My car is an Evo 8 with AEM intake, AEM meth injection, HKS 272s, 10.5 hotside, APS IC, 3" elbow, sports cat, and a quiet Blitz exhaust.

 

Question for Bryan,

Once you get your personal Evo back together and do a dyno pull, could you enable the SAE Corrections for that pull and tell us what the Air Temp (Fahrenheit) and Barometeric Pressure (in./hg. ----aka inches of mercury) that you inputted into the dyno's computer were? I just want to make SURE the dyno correction factor I have listed for the Mustang Dyno is accurate when users have enabled their SAE Corrections.


Thanks again man! You are one heck of a resource for us on here!!!! GREATLY APPRECIATED BY ALL!

 

Good News... I changed the corrections factor, from the last/same pull, to 1.121, and it read almost exactly what I had, last time I was on the dyno (dynojet) in Jan.

Dynojet = 330/340
Excell Virtual Dyno = 330/344

Excellent work! The only issue, is that its not showing full/peak TQ @ the correct RPM... Its still ~ 200 rpm late. This pull I hit full TQ @ 3656, and it read @ 3844. I plotted another pull, that I hit full TQ @ 3375, and it read it @ 3500...

Thanks for sharing this lil tool/toy.

 

We already figured out that the reason is because the 'street' has a slightly different 'load' than the dyno does. If you look at GST Motorsports Dyno Graphs vs. the Evoscan logs from that EXACT same pull, the peak torque is the exact same RPM as the Dyno's torque on all 3 examples he so generously gave us. So its not the program....its the road's pre-load is slightly different than a dynomometers. Just as GST Motorsports pointed out previously, a 4th gear pull always has a lower 'peak torque' RPM over a 3rd gear pull by the same car.