I'm starting to use this now a bit.

It's nice to check the tune in a bunch of different loads. With this simulator on I can drive the car "around" on the dyno. Row through the gears, boost WOT, boost part-throttle, etc etc. All the stuff I would do on the street.

Of course, and I agreed with you about this earlier in this thread, I do also check it on the street as well.

 

And this differs from driving on the DJ in what way? Possibly less load??? Possibly more load??? Possibly the difference between having 1 person on the car or 4 people in the car?

 

Please re-read all my posts and replies to you in this thread and see if you need to ask me that question again.

 

I understand what the MD does. That is not the question. I have 6 years of operating a MD on a daily basis. I know how it works.

What I am asking is what difference does this make to how the car is tuned? The car sees VARIED load on the street. Constant load has NO BEARING on how well the car is tuned. Its a pointless option.

 

Quickest Evo VIII in the WORLD tuned on a DynoJet

Most powerful Evo in the WORLD tuned on a DynoJet

Most dominant US based Time Attack car tuned on a DynoJet

Fastest Quickest stock suspended KA powered 240sx in the WORLD tuned on a DynoJet


Wow... tunes on a DynoJet must suck!!! LOL

The biggest reason to have a DynoJet is so that you dont have to say "Well.... on a DynoJet, my car would make XXX HP"

There is a reason that everybody relates their numbers to DynoJet.. BECAUSE ITS THE STANDARD TO BE MEASURED BY!

 

I don't think the amature tuner has a response.

Great point. Everyone does always relate their number to a dynojet.

 

Your above comment demonstrates your ignorance. Please talk about something you know about, as you haven't a clue about Bryan's tuning abilities.


Furthermore, this entire thread was predicated on sharing data. It wasn't designed to devolve into a pissing match. Ivan has tried to turn this into an argument. He even went with, for all intents and purposes, the "My dad can beat up your dad" argument. Let's try to keep this thread professional.

 

You misunderstood my response.

I was not saying you do not know how the MD works. I never once said tuning on a Dynojet "sucks".

What I was saying with my response is that I am neutral with this whole "my dyno is better than yours" thing. As I have stated in this thread already (this is what I meant with my reply to re-read), that I do not have enough experience on a dynojet to say if its better/same/crap/etc.

I also stated in this thread before that it was not my aim to debunk any other dynos in creating this thread. I posted the data because I thought it was interesting. Considering I use this dyno every week to tune customers cars (a lot being tuned with ecu-controlled boost), I was interested in seeing how close to the street load it was replicating. Just data I wanted to see and I posted it to share.

Ivan, I have not challenged you in this thread, if I have made responses that sound like it, I apologize as that is not my purpose here.

I understand your comments/replies to other postings in this thread. Just please realize I am not the one flinging poop in this thread and should not be a target to you.

I love Evom

 

"I don't think the amature tuner has a response. "

as for that comment,

i think bryan is one of the most talented stock ecu tuners out there....

cb

 

razorlab, you and I better give up, 9sec240 isn't going to get it.

Next shootout when we start loading cars on the dyno and the ones with the power that fall off up top, misfire and have problems I'll post this time. The ones from last year were tuned on Dynojets. That will prove the point I am trying to make.

9sec240, you should look into the Dynojet numbers more since they are all over inflated and not a factual wheel horsepower number. There is quote I put up here from Hot Rod Magazine a year or two ago from the owner/designer of Dynojet. He openly states that he built the dyno's didn't like the power numbers and jacked the calculations up to match flywheel numbers. This formula still stands today. The reason the are the "standard" to compare to is they have been around the longest with their phony calculations and numbers. This isn't something I am dreaming, it was in two major publications the same month.

Asking what point being able to vary load on a car while you are tuning makes you look, uh, not very smart and I know that's not the case. I think this is a case that since you guys own a Dynojet you are just going to say it is the best, when it isn't even close.

The MD adds load the faster you go, you know that. So if you tune the car in 3rd the car adds so much load at XX MPH, if you tune in 4th it then calculates for more load at XXX MPH to compensate for wind drag and other resisitance. This is all calculated from the Load @ 50 mph you enter when you put the car on the dyno.

 

I have a good bit of respect for the MDs.

 

I agree with you about the statement. My intent in this thread was never to question anyones tuning ability.

I do appreciate the info you posted. I love filling my head with test data and thank you for the time you took to post it.

I came to this thread to stop the misinformation that was being stated. Its NOT true that you can tune better on a MD. Its NOT true that a tune on a DJ is no good.

The truth of the matter is that its all about who is behind the keyboard.

 

I do appreciate your contributions to the post. I also apologize if it sounded like I was attacking you personally in my posts. Again, not my intentions. It bothers me when misinformation is being shared and taken as truth. I tend to quickly jump in to defend. I usually do end up stepping on peoples toes that probably dont deserve it and for that I am sorry.

I have a LOT of experience using a MD and a lot of it was not good. My negative opinions aside, I will say it works just fine to tune a car.

So, again, if I stepped on your toes, I am sorry.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-l5K4dc6us

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8LZkny54vM

 

I am just imagining what this post would look like if AMS used a Mustang Dyno. I think the post would look something like this:

Someone hit it on the head with the comment about the Porsches. One of the big factors in our decision in purchasing the MD was the track width limitations on the Dynojet preventing many high-performance vehicles from being able to use it as well as the dynojet's two rollers not being linked together to roll at the same speed which can damage biased (non-50/50) drivelines. We are not interested in taking on the risk of our dyno damaging a 911 TT driveline. We can only imagine what the repair bill would look like on something like that.