So, how do you guys feel about this topic?

Since these software road dynos can throw out fluke numbers from time to time, it seems that using multiple runs to show that power is consistent and not a fluke is a great way to have more accuracy in these road dynos. Some people here are already doing this practice. Should it be required?

 

Nice post.

 

Yes it should be required. I also think they should post the approximate amount of fuel in the car to avoid having all these 3700lb Evos being posted. It gets old seeing all of the BS results being posted anymore.

 

I think it would be beneficial that people post at least two runs in VD, one going up the road and one going the opposite way on the same road. That would show the inconsistencies of the road.

 

You cannot do that when you use the highway though.

 

Just weigh the car before a run. I tend to have a lot of crap in my car so it always weighs on the high side.

 

This is the reason why we see inflated results, people setting the weight on the "high side."

If anything you should want to set the weight too low.

 

The easiest thing is to go to the track and weight it with you in it. A 50-100 lbs difference is only a couple hp difference in VD.

 

A picture of the road where it was ran would be cool as well.

 

Maybe it should be the rules to post a graph with 0 smoothing along with the regular graph, as you can normally tell by looking at the 0 smoothed graph whether it was a clean run or not. As far as weight is concerned, anyone can say their car weighs this and that so if someone wants to deliberately cheat it then they can. You could easily use a road that is smooth but down sloped and run on that same road three times and get great hp numbers.

 

All this effort to "prove" the legitimacy of VD results.

Hell, mind as well just go to a real dyno

I've used both a ton in my day, i just post them and people can chose to believe them if they want.

We can just mark the VD numbers with an asterisk and call it a day!

 

Well then that would cost people time and money. Some would have to drive several hours just to get to a dyno, for me it would take a few hours round trip. Also for 3 pulls for ~$75 plus the amount of fuel to drive those few hours I would rather not make the trip and spend it on actually having fun with the car.

 

I get that, but why are people so concerned with their numbers that they feel the need to compare VD numbers to real dyno numbers?

Even the same dyno is hard to compare numbers to sometimes, let alone all the different ones.

I agree multiple runs on VD are a good idea with no clutch slips or weird bounces etc. But beyond that, just accept its VD and realize it is easily thrown off by variables.

I don't think the majority of us "fudge" VD numbers but I am sure many people just run VD and don't realize their numbers are inaccurate.

I think its safe to assume that if a number looks "too good" it probably is. most setups have been proven enough times for people to know roughly what one should make.

If people want to set records or make crazy new setups and make extraordinary numbers, they should probably hit the dynojet and call it a day.

I am not for or against VD, I use it all the time but I know its not perfect. Just take the results for what they are worth

 

I agree with these two statements 100%

 

Why would you want to weigh the car and then set the number lower? I would think if you set the numbers as close to exactly the known variables then that would be the best way to try and get accurate numbers. The interstate is the only place I've been able to get good clean logs.