[clg82]

I know what the difference is, but why do some Dynos consider themselves "heartbreaker" because they come in so low, and what method can you ACTUALLY use to determine how much real life HP and Torque you actually have?

[Nimair.ZL1]

Most dynos or not all have "weather stations". These weather stations take into account the conditions at the given time on the dyno and use them to spit out corrected number. The most common use is SAE correction. This offsets the high or low number and spits out a number that the car would see given ideal weather conditions. That is my understanding.

[Big Swole]

The best way to actually figure out your WHP is to go to a track (Given DA conditions will vary), make a few passes AFTER having weighed your car with you in it for the race weight, then use an HP calculator to plug in the race weight and trap speed.

This method has worked very well and almost matched my dyno hp to a T in the past with other vehicles.

Other than that, you're relying on different dyno's and operators of them with correction factors. In the end, trap speed / weight will tell the story.

[CalgaryZL1]

I’ve never been a fan of reading horsepower, it’s the torque that matters in my opinion. A stallion and a Clydesdale are both one horse. But guaranteed one has more torque.

[KamZL1]

Originally Posted by CalgaryZL1

I’ve never been a fan of reading horsepower, it’s the torque that matters in my opinion. A stallion and a Clydesdale are both one horse. But guaranteed one has more torque.

I see this topic come up all the time; a sound and interesting engineering/physics explanation of these concepts: https://youtu.be/u-MH4sf5xkY?si=zP9JfG9f0nubwMYF

[CalgaryZL1]

Originally Posted by KamZL1

I see this topic come up all the time; a sound and interesting engineering/physics explanation of these concepts: https://youtu.be/u-MH4sf5xkY?si=zP9JfG9f0nubwMYF

Great explanation, that’s why the Camaro can easily break loose with the wide tire they come with. I guess that’s why I love the torque of the LT engines

[clg82]

If both dynos are using the SAE factor why can one be substantially lower than the other than?

[CalgaryZL1]

I’m not even sure how these Dynamometer’s with different designs would be calibrated to a standard? What makes one more accurate than the other?

[clg82]

Originally Posted by CalgaryZL1

I’m not even sure how these Dynamometer’s with different designs would be calibrated to a standard? What makes one more accurate than the other?

IDK, i'm asking you that lolllllllllll

[CalgaryZL1]

Originally Posted by clg82

IDK, i'm asking you that lolllllllllll

I am too, looking for an explanation. I’m just getting on board with you. lol, when you get to the point it starts to cost thousands of dollars for horsepower, accuracy is kind of important.

[Joshinator99]

Originally Posted by clg82

I know what the difference is, but why do some Dynos consider themselves "heartbreaker" because they come in so low, and what method can you ACTUALLY use to determine how much real life HP and Torque you actually have?

Load bearing “Mustang” dynos are more accurate than inertia drum “Dynojet” ones in my experience. Dynojet numbers are always higher, so most guys like to use them for bragging rights. But the tune is generally lean once you get to the track. So I only use load bearing dynos for that reason…when I get to the track my tune is pretty much spot on, and I can back up my dyno number with a correlating improvement in trap speed. Furthermore you should be able to match up MAF airflow to estimated crank HP and then to measured WHP.

For example, my car reads 123 lbs/min of airflow on the MAF which is generally around 1230 HP at the crank. At 15% drivetrain loss, that’s 1045 WHP. My car actually dynoed 1059 WHP, so well within the margin of error.

[CalgaryZL1]

Originally Posted by Joshinator99

Load bearing “Mustang” dynos are more accurate than inertia drum “Dynojet” ones in my experience. Dynojet numbers are always higher, so most guys like to use them for bragging rights. But the tune is generally lean once you get to the track. So I only use load bearing dynos for that reason…when I get to the track my tune is pretty much spot on, and I can back up my dyno number with a correlating improvement in trap speed. Furthermore you should be able to match up MAF airflow to estimated crank HP and then to measured WHP.

For example, my car reads 123 lbs/min of airflow on the MAF which is generally around 1230 HP at the crank. At 15% drivetrain loss, that’s 1045 WHP. My car actually dynoed 1059 WHP, so well within the margin of error.

So load bearing Dino’s are where you remove your wheel and attach the unit directly to your axle?

[clg82]

Originally Posted by Joshinator99

Load bearing “Mustang” dynos are more accurate than inertia drum “Dynojet” ones in my experience. Dynojet numbers are always higher, so most guys like to use them for bragging rights. But the tune is generally lean once you get to the track. So I only use load bearing dynos for that reason…when I get to the track my tune is pretty much spot on, and I can back up my dyno number with a correlating improvement in trap speed. Furthermore you should be able to match up MAF airflow to estimated crank HP and then to measured WHP.

For example, my car reads 123 lbs/min of airflow on the MAF which is generally around 1230 HP at the crank. At 15% drivetrain loss, that’s 1045 WHP. My car actually dynoed 1059 WHP, so well within the margin of error.

When you say track are you specifically talking about 1/4 mile straight line or road courses? With that being said how much HP is too much HP if you're strictly doing road course racing?

[CalgaryZL1]

With the road course scenario, coming out of a corner that’s where I think torque comes in?