Big names team up for 815hp on E85!!!
are you serious? the 815 dynojet was only 648 at cbrd? thats like 25% difference holy hell.
648 x .025 = 162 (25%)
648 + 162 = 810
Last edited by tscompusa2; Jan 1, 2011 at 01:51 PM.
648/815=.79 so the CBRD dyno was reading 20% lower than the DJ that day. 770/.79=975 on the dynojet. That is pretty badass. You should go back to the DJ at the new power level and see if it really is that difference because that would beat all T3 power records I beleive. If thats the case then the 6765 is doing its job!
no to find percentages you multiply by the percent 0.20 = 20% 0.19 = %19 ..
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&expIds=...05a7bb65e82229
770 x .025 (25%) = 192
770 + 192 = 962whp dynojet (estimated from actual comparison)
648 (cbrd) x .025 = 810 dynojet (espec)
If his car dynos 962whp dynojet from 770whp at cbrd and cbrd's dyno is 25% difference, then that is beyond the lowest reading mustang in the world.
Will are you positive thats what it did with the espec tune?
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&expIds=...05a7bb65e82229
770 x .025 (25%) = 192
770 + 192 = 962whp dynojet (estimated from actual comparison)
648 (cbrd) x .025 = 810 dynojet (espec)
If his car dynos 962whp dynojet from 770whp at cbrd and cbrd's dyno is 25% difference, then that is beyond the lowest reading mustang in the world.
Will are you positive thats what it did with the espec tune?
Last edited by tscompusa2; Jan 1, 2011 at 02:23 PM.
no to find percentages you multiply by the percent 0.20 = 20% 0.19 = %19 ..
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&expIds=...05a7bb65e82229
770 x .025 (25%) = 192
770 + 192 = 962whp dynojet (estimated from actual comparison)
648 (cbrd) x .025 = 810 dynojet (espec)
If his car dynos 962whp dynojet from 770whp at cbrd and cbrd's dyno is 25% difference, then that is beyond the lowest reading mustang in the world.
Will are you positive thats what it did with the espec tune?
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&expIds=...05a7bb65e82229
770 x .025 (25%) = 192
770 + 192 = 962whp dynojet (estimated from actual comparison)
648 (cbrd) x .025 = 810 dynojet (espec)
If his car dynos 962whp dynojet from 770whp at cbrd and cbrd's dyno is 25% difference, then that is beyond the lowest reading mustang in the world.
Will are you positive thats what it did with the espec tune?
Tom if you do the math correctly you will see how it works. Percentages vary wether you are starting with the larger or smaller number. It is a ratio. 815 is 20.5% higher than 648 and 648 is 25.5% lower than 815.
If 648/815 is what the same tune did then the ratio from 770/"X" is what it should make on the DJ.
So 770/X=684/815
So to solve for x you take:
(770/648)*815=968.
So theoretically the car should make 968. Since I had only used 2 decimal places when I did the math the first time it was off by a couple HP.
If 648/815 is what the same tune did then the ratio from 770/"X" is what it should make on the DJ.
So 770/X=684/815
So to solve for x you take:
(770/648)*815=968.
So theoretically the car should make 968. Since I had only used 2 decimal places when I did the math the first time it was off by a couple HP.
no to find percentages you multiply by the percent 0.20 = 20% 0.19 = %19 ..
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&expIds=...05a7bb65e82229
770 x .025 (25%) = 192
770 + 192 = 962whp dynojet (estimated from actual comparison)
648 (cbrd) x .025 = 810 dynojet (espec)
If his car dynos 962whp dynojet from 770whp at cbrd and cbrd's dyno is 25% difference, then that is beyond the lowest reading mustang in the world.
Will are you positive thats what it did with the espec tune?
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&expIds=...05a7bb65e82229
770 x .025 (25%) = 192
770 + 192 = 962whp dynojet (estimated from actual comparison)
648 (cbrd) x .025 = 810 dynojet (espec)
If his car dynos 962whp dynojet from 770whp at cbrd and cbrd's dyno is 25% difference, then that is beyond the lowest reading mustang in the world.
Will are you positive thats what it did with the espec tune?
Tom if you do the math correctly you will see how it works. Percentages vary wether you are starting with the larger or smaller number. It is a ratio. 815 is 20.5% higher than 648 and 648 is 25.5% lower than 815.
If 648/815 is what the same tune did then the ratio from 770/"X" is what it should make on the DJ.
So 770/X=684/815
So to solve for x you take:
(770/648)*815=968.
So theoretically the car should make 968. Since I had only used 2 decimal places when I did the math the first time it was off by a couple HP.
If 648/815 is what the same tune did then the ratio from 770/"X" is what it should make on the DJ.
So 770/X=684/815
So to solve for x you take:
(770/648)*815=968.
So theoretically the car should make 968. Since I had only used 2 decimal places when I did the math the first time it was off by a couple HP.
our numbers are all but the same..
http://www.worsleyschool.net/science...fa/number.html
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...1142748AAHnzio
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rr-IXInEVc
you say 20% so.. 20% of 648 is 129 as backed up by google http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...q=20%25+of+648
so i take 648 + 129 = get your dynojet number since you say its 20%.
that would be 777whp dynojet which is 100% wrong.. he already said he did 815 at espec so its not 20%.
Last edited by tscompusa2; Jan 1, 2011 at 03:49 PM.
If it is 20% LOWER you use 20% of the larger #. 815*0.20=163. 815-163=652. If it was 20% HIGHER it would start with the LOWER number than multiply by 0.2 which 648*0.20=129 648+129=777. You have to realize which number you are talking about to figure the percent change.
Here is the most basic example. If you have $1 and take 50% of your dollar I would take 0.50. But if you have 50cents and I INCREASE it by 50% then I add 25cents and you have 75cents. In order to get back to $1 from 50cents I have to increase by 100%. It is basic math but it confuses many people!
Here is the most basic example. If you have $1 and take 50% of your dollar I would take 0.50. But if you have 50cents and I INCREASE it by 50% then I add 25cents and you have 75cents. In order to get back to $1 from 50cents I have to increase by 100%. It is basic math but it confuses many people!
ya i just read this lol http://www.ehow.com/how_2165137_calc...nt-change.html
and followed that and it came out to 20.5% difference from 815 to 648 .. still a lot. that means my 522 was actually 626 dynojet lol.. so i guess i gained less then i thought over the tune + fmic. i know i did make lots more mid range tho after i altered tune.. whats odd tho is it only displayed 580 on vdr/vd ..... i think because of the air temp vs timing tables in ecu crippled the tune once the car left the dyno
and followed that and it came out to 20.5% difference from 815 to 648 .. still a lot. that means my 522 was actually 626 dynojet lol.. so i guess i gained less then i thought over the tune + fmic. i know i did make lots more mid range tho after i altered tune.. whats odd tho is it only displayed 580 on vdr/vd ..... i think because of the air temp vs timing tables in ecu crippled the tune once the car left the dyno
Last edited by tscompusa2; Jan 1, 2011 at 03:52 PM.
All your calculations are out of the window since the fuel system was "de-bugged" and they afr's weren't the same from one dyno to the next.
When he goes back to a dynojet with the current tune that will probably be a better comparison.
It's ok man,,,, It's real easy to jump to conclusions with out all of the DETAILS and FACTS. What's important here is that the pizzaman's whip is ready to whip some major a$$!!
I'm happy that his fuel system is back in check. Buschur was very helpfull through out this process and as usual stood by their product. At 815hp this car was capable of mid 150's traps, now he should be touching 16xx as long as the car can go on a diet and get some traction.... I can't wait to see it go!
Wasn't as cold out either, I think 48 degrees.
I don't care about any of it, 700+whp is gnarly on our Dyno!!!
Cheers
Cb
