MK5 Golf GTI
All Things Mk5 => Mk5 General Area => Topic started by: Janner_Sy on November 21, 2009, 09:57:00 pm
-
you hear alot about the dyno lottery when it comes to power figures and different dynos.
Got this idea after reading DomT's signature
his Ed30 made(hope he doesnt mind)
345bhp 364Ibft on an MD mustang dyno
368bhp 352Ibft on a maha dyno
322bhp 320Ibft on a dyno dynamics
thats an average of 345bhp 345Ibft (thats a pretty good average)
which one is the most accurate is anyone guess
We might be able to pick up a trend as to what your car could achieve on other rollers.
Any body else have figures to add. could be interesting
-
they are all a lottery just dont read to much into it...
unless your are massively down on power then you know you have some problems
thats the whole point of these dynos so you can test your car in a controlled environment rather than exceeding the speed limit on roads - plug in vagcom and look at the graph to make sure everything is running well if not then at least you are aware and can have it looked at
the power numbers differ so much between them due to loads of factors not just air temp but also with how much force the car is strapped to the rollers with, the person running it on the dyno, these are just a few
just use it as a guide to how much power you car is giving out
-
more than happy with how my car is running!!
im just interested to see what dyos read what as a comparison. If correction factors are entered corectly then how tight its strapped or air temp, air pressure etc shouldnt make a difference
-
have a read of this, yes its by jkm who's dynos are a little more conservative than most but explains how they work well
http://www.jkm.org.uk/performance/dynotesting.htm
-
have read that. interesting read. I for one rate the dyno dynamics.
as the 1st post states im just interested to see what peoples cars have made on different makes of dyno's. to see if certain dynos consitantly over or under read etc.
its merely an interest thing
-
I have an inbuilt trust of dyno dynamics RRs. I've never felt like I have had a reliable reading at one that wasn't. Tried Maha and others. A lot of it also comes down to the operators and most tuning places that know their stuff will go for the DD roads.
-
I agree. but stll it would be good to have a comparison of how much they differ to other dynos on average
-
I ran mine on Stealths rollers and got 260bhp, then ran it on JKM's and got 228 bhp (car was standard on both of them) :stupid:
-
ed 30/GTI. what roller does stealth use?
-
There's a "TDI" dyno day in march that I am going to, which uses a DD road. Another tuning place down the road has offered to dyno 5 of the cars F.O.C for comparative purposes. I am hoping mine is chosen as one of those five so I can get two dynos on the same day.
-
Its an interesting subject which always generates a certain degree of controversy.
My general information post about the merits of the revo stage2+ upgrade on another forum turned into something of a discussion about the flaws of dyno X and the constraints of the K04 turbo.
Relative numbers would be good if it could be proved they were relative but with so many variables/roller brands it's always somewhat subjective.
-
....
I agree very much with what GTIjames has posted - Rolling-roads are essentially a diagnostic/monitoring tool and what's most important is the shape of plotted curves and data relative to different sessions on the same car.
So, for example, I regularly (all year round) plot around 240bhp/400Nm on the same rollers (JKM's Dyno-Dynamics) and so I'm far more interested if any changes occur there than seeing 270bhp on other rollers (Superchips Maha).
I see a rolling-road meet as lighthearted good fun willy-waving, but I'm experienced enough to know and enjoy what my willy does and I don't need to wave it :laugh:
-
are hub dyno's any more/less accurate?
-
im not disputing that guys, my car @stage 1 on 3 seperate dyno dynamics rollers placed 241bhp 249Ibft give or take about 2bhp and 3Ibft.
I tend to sway more towards the dyno dynamics rollers for accuracy. I also agree on using the same dyno for consistancy.
But thats not the reason i started this thread. I purely want to see if we can get some sort of trend of how some dynos read in comparison to others.
-
But thats not the reason i started this thread. I purely want to see if we can get some sort of trend of how some dynos read in comparison to others.
....Which is why I posted 240 neddies on Dyno-Dynamics (JKM) and 270 on Maha (Superchips). I actually visited James at Superchips later to try to understand why there were differences for my car's plots but it got a bit technically over my head and I've come to the conclusion that each rolling-road operating business has its own justification for what they do. Consequently I find comparisons on the same rollers with same operatives (as Dom and others have said) to be far more meaningfull and the rest is just an excuse for a fun meet.
I'm looking forward to next weekend's r-r meet but won't be too bothered what the number of neddies are.
-
misread your post then,
you made 240bhp on dyno dynamics rollers 270bhp on a maha dyno
Domt made 322bhp on dyno dynamics rollers 368bhp on a maha Dyno
so already just with these two results that the maha dyno reads about 11-12 percent more than dyno dynamics.
Thats the sort of thing I want to see.
-
misread your post then,
you made 240bhp on dyno dynamics rollers 270bhp on a maha dyno
Domt made 322bhp on dyno dynamics rollers 368bhp on a maha Dyno
so already just with these two results that the maha dyno reads about 11-12 percent more than dyno dynamics.
Thats the sort of thing I want to see.
True, but I don't think you can apply these types of adjustments rationally across different dyno platforms as there are just too many variables involved, many of which are down to the operator and may not be reliably replicated. I take them with a pinch of salt really - if you want to check true relative figures then just keep using the same dyno with the same operator, with the same air pressure in tyres, same securing of the car on the dyno, same atmospheric pressure etc.... :wink:
-
*When* my car was working correctly, i geot almost the same figure on Awesomes DD and AMD technics dyno, cant remember the type?
That was whp and bhp figures.
-
awesome use a dyno Jet. and from above AMD use a dimtek
-
Yes sorry thats it :)
-
well it seems theres a lot of strange results going on across the board..
if my car made 360 @ AMD then at surrey RR dyno dynamics i can expect 320 ish and still be happy ? Who knows... its a strange one, people look too much into the figures.
The horsepower and torque available from a normally aspirated internal combustion engine are dependent upon the density of the air... higher density means more oxygen molecules and more power... lower density means less oxygen and less power.
The relative horsepower, and the dyno correction factor, allow mathematical calculation of the affects of air density on the wide-open-throttle horsepower and torque. The dyno correction factor is simply the mathematical reciprocal of the relative horsepower value.
-
im tempted to go to AMD again though and see what my car is making now. as ive till got all my dyno sheets from before. just dubious to know if they will enter the details in correctly this time as a pose to the last two times. They said it was an issue with the software which might be true,
-
There any reputable rollers in Germany sy. I used to go to H&G Tuning bt they didnt hae a RR
-
Unless you pull your engine out and bench dyno it you wont ever get an accurate figure.
-
Unless you pull your engine out and bench dyno it you wont ever get an accurate figure.
Which is why I use JKM - they had an engine bench dyno'd to compare with their DD rollers and it was very accurate when looking athe comparison. A variation of 0.72% on 'peak' power and 3% on the 'peak' torque level. I know it has been posted before, but for those that are interested in this sort of thing and want to understand more about the technical varaible in dyno processes take a look at this - http://www.jkm.org.uk/performance/dynotesting.htm (http://www.jkm.org.uk/performance/dynotesting.htm)
Dom
-
your all completely missing the point of why i started this thread.
it wasnt about what dyno is more accurate than another, or why dynos ae used, and whats more important figures or drivability.
it was to get a comparison of how they compare to each other on average so in the fututre when someone posts a dyno graph up from a dyno thatyou havent taken yours to before, you could gauge what it would be ROUGHLY to the dyno sheet of your own car
for example if you had a stage 2+ ko4 and had 320bhp on a DD roller, then someone posted their graph up from a maha which was 360bhp. rather than saying thats not worth the paper its printed on you could think well the maha is usually about 11 percent higher figures than a DD roller. so actually they are pretty similar in output.
this is a rough guide but it can be a guide none the less to a certain degree. assuming all the data has been entered correctly
-
When i was a t jabba last, mmy RR figures were really low, so they adjusted the loading figures and the bhp went up. they explained why but not sure I ever understood. why can yo jusy adjust the loading figures willy nilly like that?
-
your all completely missing the point of why i started this thread.
it wasnt about what dyno is more accurate than another, or why dynos ae used, and whats more important figures or drivability.
it was to get a comparison of how they compare to each other on average so in the fututre when someone posts a dyno graph up from a dyno thatyou havent taken yours to before, you could gauge what it would be ROUGHLY to the dyno sheet of your own car
for example if you had a stage 2+ ko4 and had 320bhp on a DD roller, then someone posted their graph up from a maha which was 360bhp. rather than saying thats not worth the paper its printed on you could think well the maha is usually about 11 percent higher figures than a DD roller. so actually they are pretty similar in output.
this is a rough guide but it can be a guide none the less to a certain degree. assuming all the data has been entered correctly
Don't think we are - you can't just say correct dyno x by this factor to give realistic bhp - too many variable's. Dyno discussions will always end up having a healthy discussion like this IMHO, dyno talk = can of worms.
-
this is a rough guide but it can be a guide none the less to a certain degree. assuming all the data has been entered correctly
Don't think we are - you can't just say correct dyno x by this factor to give realistic bhp - too many variable's. Dyno discussions will always end up having a healthy discussion like this IMHO, dyno talk = can of worms.
i see your point and I do agree. there are a lot of variables to take into consideration that can skew the results.
as i said though im still interested to see how they compare to each other.
Cant agree more on the fact that if someone mentions the word 'DYNO' then all hell breaks loose. :wink:
-
Superchips = 230BHP & 241FTlbs standard GTi= load of crap :laugh:
Although the wheel power did seem right for a standard GTi of 161 BHP
-
Superchips = 230BHP & 241FTlbs standard GTi= load of crap :laugh:
Although the wheel power did seem right for a standard GTi of 161 BHP
nice. thats just about what i made at stage 1 bluefin, lol
-
Superchips = 230BHP & 241FTlbs standard GTi= load of crap :laugh:
Although the wheel power did seem right for a standard GTi of 161 BHP
nice. thats just about what i made at stage 1 bluefin, lol
I know crazy days, Greenouse's face at the time was priceless when I told him the figures :laugh:
-
you might have had en ed30 engine by accident, lol
-
My last two dyno's were:-
Dyno Dynamics at RS TUNING ( reputation for running low figures like JKM's :chicken:) 339.8bhp and 380lbft
Sun Roller (Like maha) at Noble motorsport - 366.3bhp and 336lbft.
Both on REVO software.
Superchips dyno (when running on custom code) 363bhp and 362lbft
Noble Motorsport Sun Roller ((same Custom Code) car set-up as S/C dyno) 333bhp and 322lbft.
So, the Custom Code v's REVO basically gives 33.3bhp and 14lbft extra on REVO
Which as a direct comparison means I'd have probably made over 395bhp on the Superchips dyno with REVO :grin:
-
380Ibft torque on a DD rollers is phenominal, that must pull like an absolute train.
reference super chips dyno, they're quoted figures for their software obviously come from their own dyno which might explain why they under perform against REVO. also might explain why a revo stage 2 could keep up with my car @stage 2+ bluefin.
-
Greenouse did 348bhp on the S/C rollers if I remember rightly and he is on Superchips software. I'd agree that the S/C dyno was reading on the high side.