Hey everyone!

I know there's been a lot of discussion about the differences in Dyno Dynamics vs. Dynojet power numbers. Well here's a little comparison for everyone. I'm hope this sheds some light on some of the misconceptions that pop up when comparing different dyno types.

This EVO X was tuned on a Dynojet at another local shop on Monday. The owner of the EVO, a mutual customer of ours, stopped by yesterday night and we threw his car on our Dyno Dynamics to see how the numbers would compare.

Although, there are a few factors that would cause a variance in the % difference, this particular example shows that the Dyno Dynamics dyno reads ~12% lower in peak power than the Dynojet dyno. It's not called the 'Heart Breaker' dyno for nothing

-----

Dynojet Graph:



Dyno Dynamics Graph:




Thanks for looking!
Decker

 

i wonder how dyno dynamics compare to a mustang dyno?

i have similiar numbers on a DynoDynamics. they are definitely heart breakers!

 

there was a shop that used to do dyno tuning here in norcal with a dyno dynamics. compared to the other 2 shops that use mustang dynos, the dyno dynamics would read about 1-2% higher on average. just enough to tell there was a difference.

 

this sounds about right. Back when i was stock turbo i did 340whp on a local mustang dyno(which read high like a dynojet) and dyno'd on a dyno dynamics right after to see the difference and i did 304whp. I trapped 113mph at the track, so for SURE the dyno dynamics was reading super low as my trapspeed confirmed i should be laying down the higher reading, lol.

But that being said... i still believe Dynojets are the standard. The description "high reading" is only in reference to other dynos. They still read lower than flywheel horsepower and i like the fact they dont vary much from dynojet to dynojet since variables cannot be manipulated. Correction factors are set by the dyno itself. MUSTANG DYNOs can be altered to read stupid low or higher than dynojets (i've played w/ it myself). It allows you to adjust roller weight, vehicle weight... all kinds of stuff to play w/ the numbers. Its only as honest as the operator setting it up. Therefore you cannot compare one mustang dyno to another. In the end its just a tuning tool... so to each his own. Peak #s dont mean crap. BUT one thing to be careful of... is that Mustang Dynos can be altered so bad that you can put too much load on the rollers and mess up the car. This one local shop didnt set theirs up right and i once pulled a 380load on the street (28psi 35r) and then on the dyno load raised and went to 32psi w/ no changes. My AFRs even confirmed load cell changes etc... (like if i was driving up a hill) so we had to correct the dyno settings. scary stuff...

 

Did you ever thing the tune would be hitting different load cells when driven on a dyno that provides correct load to the powertrain.. Depending on the tune the numbers could go either way.. The numbers comparison is not worth anyones times.. Dynojet is the industry standard for numbers here in the US, but most everything else is better as a tuning tool. I have seen as high as 22% difference from mustang to dynojet.

 

Since when is a dyno capable of giving the drivetrain a more "correct" load than the actual STREET? Maybe you didnt read my post correctly... but the jist of it was, my loads increased ALOT from the street to when it was strapped on. Regardless... we discovered the settings were wrong. This is fact... the owner even acknowledged it. My point was that it can be wayyy off. Just bringing it up because most people that strap their cars down don't tune or know how to operate a dyno and so would be clueless. People are coming here for good information, right?

Yes, i've seen the same 15-20% difference from Mustang to Dynojet... I've also seen them matched.. and also the Mustang HIGHER. the point it... the Mustang Dyno is ADJUSTABLE. So making a simple reference that they always read lower is WRONG. The dynojet... be it as it may, cannot be adjusted by the operator. That being said, for standarized numbers, i'd go w/ dynojets (for people comparing #s) for tuning... sure a properly calibrated Mustang Dyno is awesome, I agree. I also agree a low reading Dyno Dynamics is really good too for tuning.

 

He's probably stating that DynoJets don't provide load. At least MD and DD dynos provide a load to make the tune more "real world".

 

DynoJets do have load. Shops in the past didn't set them up to use the load function

 

http://www.modified.com/tech/modp-09...son/index.html

Regardless, everyone always tries to compare X dyno to Dynojet #'s because they all read the same (within 1% anyways the site says).

 

Did you notice how the Dyno dynamic test in that link you posted was the only one out of the 4 that was done in 4th gear the other 3 dynos where done in 3rd gear. That isn't an even scale for that test.

 

You can most certainly fudge dynojet numbers....

 

Most dynojets are inertial dynos which means they in fact do NOT have load. They have made load holding dynos tho.

 

Just another data point...

Had my 15 Evo X tuned on a dyno jet at one shop. The very next day, same fuel in gas tank (pump 91), the car was base lined at a different shop using a dyno dynamics dyno. No changes.

Dynojet - 369HP/ 345TQ
Dyno Dynamics - 302Hp / 275TQ

That's a 18% difference in the HP readings.

This is all presuming that they were using the same correction factors and the dynos were calibrated properly (respectively).

TonyG

 

Hello just recently got tuned on a Dyno Dynamics. It was hot as hell, 95F.

"Stock" Evos Baseline at that specific dyno around 200-220whp

My FBO 2014 Evo MR baseline at 254whp.

91 map - 273whp | 275wtq
E85 Map - 308whp | 327wtq

E85 FBO Evos - Average 315whp-340whp. The evos closer to 340whp being the 4G63 guys most of the time. As you can see my SST ate up some whp but pulled off some nice wtq numbers. This is a conservative tune, to prevent heavy wear from clutches. Car as tune at 25psi.