Anyone make 340TQ or more at 3000 RPMs?
Just so we can sqwash this dyno thing and move on before it gets out of hand. His numbers would not be that high on a different or older DD dyno but on the local dynojets, they would be at least equivalent or probably higher. So you are correct. If I still had my stock 05 ninja 636, you could try to holeshot me but your efforts would be in vein.
in vain
Obviously the OP is talking about "dynojet" numbers, thus which dyno it is on IS relevant. There's a dyno in Maine that was putting out 400+whp figures for cars that couldn't even trap 112. Then you have cars that dyno at Buschur racing, put down ~350whp and trap 120. These numbers are not what the OP is looking for.
As far as dafunk's car it's hard to believe that he'd make 470wtq on a 2.0 bottom end with only a 28psi spike.
Obviously the OP is talking about "dynojet" numbers, thus which dyno it is on IS relevant. There's a dyno in Maine that was putting out 400+whp figures for cars that couldn't even trap 112. Then you have cars that dyno at Buschur racing, put down ~350whp and trap 120. These numbers are not what the OP is looking for.
As far as dafunk's car it's hard to believe that he'd make 470wtq on a 2.0 bottom end with only a 28psi spike.
Last edited by anjapower; Feb 16, 2007 at 11:44 AM.
Actually I'm not talking about DJ #'s. I did not want to bring any brand into this. I just wanted to see ANY graph that showed over 340TQ at 3000rpms. The educated public can draw their own conclusions about "relative" power without needing to say "mine is bigger than yours".
BTW, mine made 340TQ at 3000 rpms on a Mustang Dyno. . .
EVOlutionary
BTW, mine made 340TQ at 3000 rpms on a Mustang Dyno. . .
EVOlutionary
Actually I'm not talking about DJ #'s. I did not want to bring any brand into this. I just wanted to see ANY graph that showed over 340TQ at 3000rpms. The educated public can draw their own conclusions about "relative" power without needing to say "mine is bigger than yours".
BTW, mine made 340TQ at 3000 rpms on a Mustang Dyno. . .
EVOlutionary
BTW, mine made 340TQ at 3000 rpms on a Mustang Dyno. . .
EVOlutionary
Sorry for getting everyone kicked started on the Dyno topics... didnt intend for that to happen!
For those of you making 300+ ft/lbs at 3k rpm it would be interesting to see what kind of mods you have...
For those of you making 300+ ft/lbs at 3k rpm it would be interesting to see what kind of mods you have...
I believe we went WOT at 2000 rpms. Might have been 2500, can't remember. The dyno was set to start recording at 3000rpms.
The upward slope is absolutely of value on any dynograph. It is a representation of how fast and at what RPM the turbo is able to make full boost. IMHO, the whole dyno graph, after you have gone WOT, is of use.
The upward slope is absolutely of value on any dynograph. It is a representation of how fast and at what RPM the turbo is able to make full boost. IMHO, the whole dyno graph, after you have gone WOT, is of use.
You can set your cam gears to make the turbo spool earlier and make torque lower in the RPM range but top end will be sacrificed. A stock turbo on an EVO can only spool so fast.
It puts down 350lb/tq @3200rpm. We must observe every detail. Look at slowcar dyno one more time and read/view the small square on each quadrant.
Carlos
I just didn't quite meet the parameters I was looking for, but a great accomplishment nonetheless. . .
I see.. no problem. I was just saying to just consider those cars that are making insane torque just on the edge of your criteria.
Carlos



