Not photoshopped for sure. It wasn't perfectly inline but very very close.

Perhaps they manipulated the temp sensor for the weather station as they did not publicly show the CR and when I asked for the dynojet run files they fell silent.

The WS manipulation seems the easiest to me. I know a certain DynoDynamics owner was guilty of that awhile back.

Hey look we started talking about Correction Factors again. Yay.

- Bryan

 

Photoshop i guess is a possibility..

 

Puff.....Enter the magic dragon!

Actually it can be done but the dyno sheet will show the conditions etc.

 

this is some fun reading, being winter an all. but it sure will be nicr when all u start racing again, hopefully soon for u guys down south and out west! action speaks louder than bull**** rock on.

 

Down south will be racing soon.

 

thats good to here can't wait to see some real RACING ew are gettin another 6-7 inches good luck to everyone

 

I'm not sure I understand what the big deal is... GST, Buschur, Cobb!, CBRD, etc don't all read exactly the same. I think we all know that all Mustangs DON'T read the same. Does TTP's read like a Dynojet? Maybe... so what.

Bottom line, customers should know what whp gets you what trap speed from a dyno before going there. TTP's whp/trap speed examples are not nearly as impressive as Buschur's... so uhm duh! Of course TTP's dyno reads higher.

Mustang should get their act together and do something like DynoDynamics which has a shootout mode, which prints ALL PARAMETERS at the bottom of the sheet and guarantees all DD's will read the same when run in this mode.

I think what this thread is an example of, is vendors knowing not all customers are well informed, and being concerned said customers will be lured into TTP's "700 whp Mustang" number. But if customers are so ignorant they go to the tuner with the nearest big number thread, I don't think you want those customers!

 

Out of curiousity, can TTP, GST, CBRD, and Buschur all post at least 4 examples of trap speed, whp, and weight? Let's take a look at this more closely and stop arguing.

 

Buschur, GST, CBRD, and STM have all agreed that their dynos do read the same. This is nothing new. Cobb's dyno does read higher. A lot of other MD dynos mentioned earlier in this thread I know for a fact read higher too. When I worked at MD, we'd get calls all the time from car enthusiasts or other dyno owners asking about this shop or that shop's dyno. So we quickly find out which of our customers were messing with things and which weren't.

MD has their act together and their make money maker isn't building performance dynos. So I understand why they don't put the R&D into this like some of the other dyno manufacturers out there that only make performance dynos.

I know of 5 BR cars that have had pretty much full disclosure in this thread - David's, Celica2Evo, SloRice, SPIN2GST and vwjeff. The last three make substantially less power, weigh about the same and are going substantially faster than TTP's car.

 

If I had a thermometer that said it was -20degF in the middle of summer in florida would that make it more accurate since it is lower? If I had a dyno that said BR's RS made 220whp would that be right since it is lower? No, definately not. I dont understand how people assume that since all the alike low reading dynos agree that they are somehow more accurate. Just because a dyno like a DJ might read higher doesnt mean it is wrong.

Another thing that bothers me is how people talk about doing a tune on a DJ and it varies from the dyno to the street because it hits different load cells. ALL load cells should be properly tuned. Whenever I do a full dyno tune I start at WG boost and tune that then slowly turn the boost up and tune all cells between base boost and max boost. Then if you get off the dyno and hit different cells than the boost controller is set to you will be tuned. If the boost goes above what you tuned for then turn it down to the max safe limit you tuned for on the dyno. Pretty simple idea. There should be no tunes where only max load is tuned and everything else under that load is ignored.

Also I posted a while ago and agree with TTP that the SAE correction should only show a max +/- 3% so a CF from 0.97-1.03 should be all it shows since out of those limits the SAE states it should be disregarded.

 

Ok, Ill change some stuff here about my car for a better example. My car now is probably quite a bit lighter than TTPs and has substantially more power, same with Daves RS.

Ill step back in time some to when the 4 of us had our builds done.

My car weighed 3050 without me in it, I weight 196 pounds. That puts it at 3250 with me in it basically. Full interior, AC, PS, heater core, 17" wheels with MC slicks, factory brakes. EVERYHING!

It made 604 hp/ 460 tq and went 9.89 @ 146.xx. You can compare those with VWJeff, SloRice, Spin2GST. As thats when my car was still the same as theirs. My car is quite a bit different in many ways.

So now you can stop comparing my car in its current form to how it was when it had everything and still went quicker and faster with everything in it. Also, my car is a GSR, not an RS.

 

Crcain it think the main problem is that someone says they have a low reading mustang dyno to their customers and when infact it reads high. So customer A goes and gets tuned on the High reading mustang dyno and gets told he is on a low reading dyno when it fact its not. Then customer B goes to a normal low reading mustang dyno and makes less power and wonders why or thinks his tune sucks. The problem is people post these high reading dyno numbers up on the forum when infact they are BS and every other customer wants to compare their numbers to these high reading sheets. Thats what the big problem is. Everyone wonders why they are not making 450whp on the stock turbo with exhaust and a boost controller when someone else is for some reason, or atleast thinks he is lol

 

Ah man I am not on that list?

Mitch

 

Who makes 450whp with an exhaust and a boost controller and on who's dyno?

 

Just making a general statement, are you assuming i am taking about you?