We all enjoy checking out the gains our community members make in the Dyno section of the forum, as it gives us a good idea of what to expect from different part combinations. However, there is an ever increasing trend of "man that seems low, my car made +a million with the same mods". Not only is this petty, counterproductive, and just plain false; but it also leaves the OP with a sour taste in their mouths and thoughts dancing in their head (did my tuner do something wrong? will me car explode?, etc.).
So in light of that I propose a new means of tracking performance gains, something I nick-named Relative Delta:
(New HP- Old HP)/New HP
Now before you all start screaming about how difficult math can be, hear me out. Constantly seeing "I gained +50/+35 from XYZ part/tuner" leaves the impression that if other do that they will see similar results. However, this is often far from the truth:

Situation 1: A +50whp gain by any other name....Now invariable Car B will post their dyno plot to share with the world why he gets out of bed every day; and all the Car A fanbois will clamor how Car A had 300/300 before XYZ w/ a re-tune. AND on top of that they will say "even if you had a dreaded LowReadingDyno, you still had fewer gains; your toiner OBVIOUSLY has no clue what they are doing".
To which I say guess what, Car B actually had BETTER results:
So a new thread would go sometting like this:
"Brostical, my new tuner is da bombisal. Dat foolio squeezed out an extra 22.6%whp/ 27.4% WTQ from a simple drop-in and tune!!!"

Well, I'm just sayin'.....no hard feelings if you don't like my moment of inspiration spawned by a lack of ANYTHING going on at work

EDIT: WILL NOT WORK FOR DYNO HOPPERS

 

Think steam just shot outta both my ears and my hair caught on fire while reading that

 

I think it's a great idea. There are so many variables to be taken into account for each individual persons dyno conditions that final numbers alone create discrepancies in the results between people with identical setups. At least way it can account for some variations in dyno variables/conditions and look to see if there consistent gains that go beyond just final numbers.

 

Funny, Cobb has been doing this for years.

 

Maybe you should change your signature from +45/+65 to percents

 

This thread reminds me of the South Park episode where they measured their *****, and Randy had an overly complex formula to make everyones ***** seem bigger.


On topic: I like it, but I also like the simplicity of +50 whp. +50 hp is +50 hp doesn't matter if it's 100 - 150 or 1100 - 1150 it's still just 50.

 

That just confused the crap out of me

 

Yea that's what I was thinking as I read it. It makes since, and I'm sick of people posting their plots and wondering why they didn't make as much as an OP. That's why on Cobb's map page, everything says a 18%hp/17%tq or something like that.

It's not that confusing..

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AZ6fYmEjeA

 

SOOOOO complex:

(New-Old)/New

In a real life situation, my sig would read:
(255-210)/255 = 17.6%
(295-230)/295 = 22.0%

 

Yes, it does matter:
(150-100)/150 = 33.3%
(1150-1100)/1150 = 4.3%

 

Side Note, that video is AWESOME!

 

lol, updated the sig with %. I think it's a very "flame-retardant" way to post dyno gains

 

That is the flaw of your system, 50 hp is still 50 hp no matter how you put it.

Try this one out:

Stock to stage 2 (low reading dyno) 210 to 260 = 19%


Stock to stage 2 (high reading dyno) 265 to 315 = 15%

Using your method the low reading dyno gets the advantage over the higher reading one even though they gained the exact same power. That's why I mentioned the South Park episode, you are messing with the numbers to make your **** look bigger

 

And that's why you are wrong, 50 whp is NOT 50 whp. You just proved it yourself in your last post.
You are only further proving my point. People actually believe that 50whp on a low reading dyno is the same as 50whp on a high reading dyno. They are not the same thing.