Would "the mothership" like to respond to all these 180awhp threads??
Evolving Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
From: DFW, Texas
Originally posted by rdrkt
Shiv: I have no idea why you are using that dyno. They do make AWD dynojets. If I was someone that sold tuning services and turbo packages I would want my numbers to be comparable to everyone else’s. This 17% difference seems bad for business to me.
Shiv: I have no idea why you are using that dyno. They do make AWD dynojets. If I was someone that sold tuning services and turbo packages I would want my numbers to be comparable to everyone else’s. This 17% difference seems bad for business to me.
As for Dynojet "AWD dyno," its actually just a 2WD dyno with a add-on attachment.
Like Shiv said, "It's a hard habit to break." Hopefully this will shed some light for some "DSM" fans.
Newbie
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
From: Reading, Pa
Originally posted by dazz
One has to look beyond their own backyard first to find out why tuners in other country have laugh about our US dyno tuning methods for years.
One has to look beyond their own backyard first to find out why tuners in other country have laugh about our US dyno tuning methods for years.
Newbie
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Originally posted by rdrkt
Shiv: I have no idea why you are using that dyno. They do make AWD dynojets. If I was someone that sold tuning services and turbo packages I would want my numbers to be comparable to everyone else’s. This 17% difference seems bad for business to me.
Shiv: I have no idea why you are using that dyno. They do make AWD dynojets. If I was someone that sold tuning services and turbo packages I would want my numbers to be comparable to everyone else’s. This 17% difference seems bad for business to me.
Anyways, 180 AWHP is low, but isn't it strange how the Evo VII in SCC's Evo vs. WRX article put down 247 HP to the wheels on a Dynapack 6000? We can argue about how Shiv's dyno makes our cars look weak, but if it's precise, at least we can compare cars like the Evo, WRX, S4, etc. which have been dynoed on it.
Evolving Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
From: DFW, Texas
Although this article was written by a WRX driver, but this may give a good insight on the differences between the two dyno debate.
HTH!
Hi Everyone,
I'm a curious person (just like the most of you), but I found it increasingly difficult to understand who's products makes how much power. But from all the posts and dyno plots, it seems that everyone had slightly different scenarios (so no apples-to-apples comparison). So I'd figure I'd try and help out our community by ponying up the $$$ and getting some real-world answers.
So what was the plan for the today? Let's take the exact same car and go to two different dynos to see the differences (keeping as many variables the same).
Who are the gineau pigs? ATP (Fremont, CA) using their in-ground Dynojet and Vishnu Performance Systems (Pleasanton, CA) using their DynoDynamics. They are approximately 20 miles from each other (25 minutes). And finally my car ... 2002 WRX (silver - its the fastest color) with 25,910 miles on it ... the mods are a full Vishnu Stage 2.
What was the test setup? Of course with my luck, the fan ATP used to cool the TMIC broke. Oh well, to be consistent NO fan was used to cool the TMIC at Vishnu's either. I've also seen some posts about the fans used to cool the radiators ... let me tell you that the one at Vishnu's was massively stronger that the one at ATP (so we pulled it a lot farther away that the one used at ATP). I don't think this makes too much of a difference, since the engine coolant temps stayed the same. For those **** people ... ATP was 60deg.F and Vishnu was 61deg.F and I don't think there is more than a 100' of elevation change. I did forget to measure the temperature of the intercoolers (but oh well). The car were driven to their each location, sat around for 20 minutes, driven onto the dyno, sat around for another 10 minutes and then first two runs were pulled and printed. That's all folks ... we don't want to make this more complicated that it needs to be.
The Results:
ATP (Dynojet) - 275.8whp and 232.2 torque
Vishnu (DynoDynamics) - 224.7whp and 192.2 torque
So depending on how you look at it ... Dynojet runs 22.74% higher than a DynoDynamic or DynoDynamic runs 18.53% lower than a Dynojet (with regards to whp). Check out these graphs ... (oops ... I can't figure out how to get multiple attachments with a single post)
Interesting observations ...
Setup on the Dynojet vs. DynoDynamics ... all I got to say is that it was a lot harder getting my car on the Dynojet ... first thing was that we didn't get the tracks pulled apart far enough until we rolled the car on to it (so we had to back off the car, stretch the dyno and put the car back on). The second thing, was that it was tough getting the car balanced on top of both rollers ... so about 20 minutes elapsed from getting into the garage to the first pull. The DynoDynamics was really simple ... drive car onto ramp and fall into the first set of rollers (in case you didn't know they have 8 rollers - two for each wheel) and use a simple control to slide the rear rollers into place, strap it down and you're ready to go (5-6 minutes tops). The other thing I noticed was that you had to bring the car to a complete stop on the Dynojet ... the DynoDynamics could run back-to-back pulls really quickly - you don't have to bring the car back to 1st gear.
The important thing I've learned is that when you want to know the differences between modifications, you need to have testing tools that repeatable (ie. stick to the same dyno and record the environments - so you have the same correction factors in play).
Conclusion
So what have I accomplished with all this ... nothing, my car still make the same power it did going to both dynos. So, I wanted to help put some of those concern people at ease ... I'm sure you're making the power you made (since you have dyno plots), just know there is a significant difference between dynos. All I'd like to see are vendors advertising the % differences they have measured (and world peace).
I'm a curious person (just like the most of you), but I found it increasingly difficult to understand who's products makes how much power. But from all the posts and dyno plots, it seems that everyone had slightly different scenarios (so no apples-to-apples comparison). So I'd figure I'd try and help out our community by ponying up the $$$ and getting some real-world answers.
So what was the plan for the today? Let's take the exact same car and go to two different dynos to see the differences (keeping as many variables the same).
Who are the gineau pigs? ATP (Fremont, CA) using their in-ground Dynojet and Vishnu Performance Systems (Pleasanton, CA) using their DynoDynamics. They are approximately 20 miles from each other (25 minutes). And finally my car ... 2002 WRX (silver - its the fastest color) with 25,910 miles on it ... the mods are a full Vishnu Stage 2.
What was the test setup? Of course with my luck, the fan ATP used to cool the TMIC broke. Oh well, to be consistent NO fan was used to cool the TMIC at Vishnu's either. I've also seen some posts about the fans used to cool the radiators ... let me tell you that the one at Vishnu's was massively stronger that the one at ATP (so we pulled it a lot farther away that the one used at ATP). I don't think this makes too much of a difference, since the engine coolant temps stayed the same. For those **** people ... ATP was 60deg.F and Vishnu was 61deg.F and I don't think there is more than a 100' of elevation change. I did forget to measure the temperature of the intercoolers (but oh well). The car were driven to their each location, sat around for 20 minutes, driven onto the dyno, sat around for another 10 minutes and then first two runs were pulled and printed. That's all folks ... we don't want to make this more complicated that it needs to be.
The Results:
ATP (Dynojet) - 275.8whp and 232.2 torque
Vishnu (DynoDynamics) - 224.7whp and 192.2 torque
So depending on how you look at it ... Dynojet runs 22.74% higher than a DynoDynamic or DynoDynamic runs 18.53% lower than a Dynojet (with regards to whp). Check out these graphs ... (oops ... I can't figure out how to get multiple attachments with a single post)
Interesting observations ...
Setup on the Dynojet vs. DynoDynamics ... all I got to say is that it was a lot harder getting my car on the Dynojet ... first thing was that we didn't get the tracks pulled apart far enough until we rolled the car on to it (so we had to back off the car, stretch the dyno and put the car back on). The second thing, was that it was tough getting the car balanced on top of both rollers ... so about 20 minutes elapsed from getting into the garage to the first pull. The DynoDynamics was really simple ... drive car onto ramp and fall into the first set of rollers (in case you didn't know they have 8 rollers - two for each wheel) and use a simple control to slide the rear rollers into place, strap it down and you're ready to go (5-6 minutes tops). The other thing I noticed was that you had to bring the car to a complete stop on the Dynojet ... the DynoDynamics could run back-to-back pulls really quickly - you don't have to bring the car back to 1st gear.
The important thing I've learned is that when you want to know the differences between modifications, you need to have testing tools that repeatable (ie. stick to the same dyno and record the environments - so you have the same correction factors in play).
Conclusion
So what have I accomplished with all this ... nothing, my car still make the same power it did going to both dynos. So, I wanted to help put some of those concern people at ease ... I'm sure you're making the power you made (since you have dyno plots), just know there is a significant difference between dynos. All I'd like to see are vendors advertising the % differences they have measured (and world peace).
off-topic.. but i wonder what people are thinking.. is it good to get the oil changed within the next few miles to get all themetal pieces out.. of the new engineand whatnot... has anyonen with an evo done it. yet.. vishnu.. yay or nay for early oil change?
Newbie
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
From: Reading, Pa
Originally posted by KK
I wish someone around here had a Dyno Dynamics unit to use
I wish someone around here had a Dyno Dynamics unit to use
Newbie
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
From: Reading, Pa
Originally posted by luminari
Maybe because Shiv is out for more accurate measurements to actually improve his products rather than sling more goods based on inflated HP numbers?
Maybe because Shiv is out for more accurate measurements to actually improve his products rather than sling more goods based on inflated HP numbers?
As for Shiv and his commitment to deliver outstanding products and tuning. I still haven’t see a car tuned by his shop that did anything special. For as much as SCC fawns over him and as smart as he says he is you think he would have had a few power house cars by now.
Newbie
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
From: Reading, Pa
Originally posted by Nzo
rdrkt you have obviously lived a very sheltered, and ignorant life.
rdrkt you have obviously lived a very sheltered, and ignorant life.
Originally posted by rdrkt
They can laugh all they want but our cars are much faster than their cars. Until they can put a list together like this I will stick with our ego stroking dynos.
They can laugh all they want but our cars are much faster than their cars. Until they can put a list together like this I will stick with our ego stroking dynos.
Ever heard of the Rigoli Bros? How about JUN Auto?
And most sophisticated souls overseas could give 2 ****s about how fast your car is in a straight line. 
America's obsession with the 1/4 mile is very similar to it's stupid obsession with NASCRAP.
Real drivers turn right too!
America's obsession with the 1/4 mile is very similar to it's stupid obsession with NASCRAP.
Real drivers turn right too!
Originally posted by rdrkt
That is some pretty tough talk. Do you have an tech to substantiate that? Or are you just spouting off? I mean I am hitting 117 traps on pump gas with a factory internal motor with a SAFC for tuning I have to be doing something right.
That is some pretty tough talk. Do you have an tech to substantiate that? Or are you just spouting off? I mean I am hitting 117 traps on pump gas with a factory internal motor with a SAFC for tuning I have to be doing something right.
They can laugh all they want but our cars are much faster than their cars. Until they can put a list together like this I will stick with our ego stroking dynos.
Last edited by Nzo; Mar 12, 2003 at 05:04 PM.
Newbie
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
From: Reading, Pa
Originally posted by BADWRX
Ever heard of the Rigoli Bros?
Ever heard of the Rigoli Bros?
Originally posted by BADWRX
How about JUN Auto?
How about JUN Auto?
Originally posted by BADWRX
And most sophisticated souls overseas could give 2 ****s about how fast your car is in a straight line.
And most sophisticated souls overseas could give 2 ****s about how fast your car is in a straight line.
Originally posted by BADWRX
Real drivers turn right too!
Real drivers turn right too!
Newbie
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
From: Reading, Pa
Originally posted by Nzo
You obviously have no experience with cars in other countries or else you would not make uninformed statments like this:
You obviously have no experience with cars in other countries or else you would not make uninformed statments like this:
Originally posted by Nzo
I also went ahead and called you ignorant because you asked a question immediately after shiv had just spent a whole post explaining the answer.
I also went ahead and called you ignorant because you asked a question immediately after shiv had just spent a whole post explaining the answer.
Last edited by rdrkt; Mar 12, 2003 at 05:10 PM.
Evolving Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
Originally posted by shiv@vishnu
The cars we've tested actually put ~180 hp to the wheels. The very same way air-cooled 911 Turbos put 300-310hp to the wheels. Horsepower is a quantifiable unit of measurment- just like an inch, meter or pound. Our dyno measures it properly. This is not hard to do with the necessary components and design.
[......]
The cars we've tested actually put ~180 hp to the wheels. The very same way air-cooled 911 Turbos put 300-310hp to the wheels. Horsepower is a quantifiable unit of measurment- just like an inch, meter or pound. Our dyno measures it properly. This is not hard to do with the necessary components and design.
[......]
); or do you not do that in the interests of accuracy? The problem is with the viral nature of the internet, that all that comes out is the number, and then Evo owners have to deal with "I heard your car makes 100hp less than claimed". Oh well, more fool them when they're lined up next door on the strip or trying to pass out of turn 11 at Laguna Seca 
One thing I was wondering, which you may have mentioned somewhere else. What was the ambient temp, and was the IC sprayer on auto, switched off, or being used manually. I'm sure you had a fan on it, and MMC really seem to rate (inter)cooling and airflow at a high priority.