I think we expect the Evo to make more power than the 350z. But it's closer than it looks, since the Evo's HP# was from a typically high reading Dynojet, and the 350Z was measured on a low reading Dyno Dynamics dyno.

Anyone know the what the typical delta is between the 2 type of Dynos? I do know that when Navid tested his no-cat, bigger ic pipe? SP Evo on a Dyno Dynamics Dyno, it made around 280 hp. Then it ran a 12.8 sec 1/4 mile.

 

To make a complete picture here, torque numbers should be paired with total gearing for at least 2nd gear in order to compare these two. I also agree that two different dyno types are extremely hard to compare!

 

Made it to packwood! Set up camp with the other Idahomies at the RV park. If anyone else is in town feel free to come kick it with us.

 

Not sure of the delta between the 2 types of dynos, but here is a link to the shop's dyno info - http://www.dynocomp.com/tuning.php


According to the shop, a manual transmission 2WD car has a powertrain loss factor of 25% on their dyno. A 2003 350z is advertised to make 287hp at the flywheel/engine and 274 ft-lbs, so a stock 350z would make ~215 whp and ~205 ft-lbs on that particular dyno, give or take. The link above also gave an example of a C63 AMG and the percentage was a tad off in that case.

 

This. Don't use a form letter approach. Take the time to individualize your message.

 

One of my autox buddies in on the SEB. I can ask him the best way to go about this?

 

A 280 HP evo on dyno dynamics should be a low 12 second car probably with a trap above 110 mph.

A drag evo I built this winter put down 735HP and 585 ft-lbs on dynojet. We took it to a local shop with a dyno dynamics dyno and it made 575 HP and 475 ft-lbs.

Those dyno dynamics are the worst heart breaker dynos.

 

FWIW, my BSP 350z makes a little over 300whp on a dynamics.

 

Congrats on taking the win for STU this weekend, Geoff! I didn't get a chance to meet many people, but good job to the rest of you that came to Packwood for the Tour too! It seemed as though all the Evos did well (the prepped ones anyways...). Dallas did will in SM as well, only losing to the carbon GTR.

I was a little bummed I didn't get to run with you STU guys like I planned, but it wouldn't have made much of a difference in regards to my overall standings. Top times in both STU and ASP are a long ways out for me... a few mods will help, but I need more seat time in the new car.

For my first national event, it was definitely a humbling experience... and a really fun one too. I'm glad I came out. Now I know I still have quite a ways to go to be competitive out here... Until next time...

Good luck with the rest of your seasons gentlemen.

 

I edited my post from earlier, I found a bit more info on the 350Z (quoted above)


What did we decide the delta was between the two dynos we were chatting about? Someone want to draw up a chart equalizing and comparing our graphs? (understanding it's not exact science)

 

I read it was around 12%.

 

12%...?
ok, well then that's 297/280 comparatively, for his 350Z, a year ago, and I understand he's been on the dyno at least twice since then.


xx% more tire/wheel??
xx% (less) power??
xx% less weight on the front corners??
= what?


(same for the vette)

 

An STU 350z can get down to 3000lbs even without issue....

My car is 2910 in BSP trim (with the aero).

 

Spring rates for Z seem to be more inline with what I would expect these cars to be. Any reason why EVOs keep those rates that much lower?

 

^^ Those wheel rates aren't right, MR wasn't squared.

0.688^2 * 1000 = 473 (to many sig figs on MR, it isn't not nearly that static)
0.649^2 * 850 = 358

0.96^2 * 10*56 = 516
0.73^2 * 12*56 = 358

With the weights of the 350z being so much closer to balanced, I'm surprised it runs that much front spring. Front N.F. are much higher than rear.