Should I be afraid of a SuperFlow dyno?
11-10-08, 02:30 PM
#1
Should I be afraid of a SuperFlow dyno?
So I have had my car on the dyno twice in the past. Both times were on the same Dynojet. I am now having trouble getting back on the same dyno and I'm very impatient so I made an appointment for tomorrow at a shop with a SuperFlow.
Any thoughts?
I don't really care if one reads higher than the other, blah blah. But, I was hoping to get on the same dyno just so I can have an accurate result based on the changes I've made.
KC
Any thoughts?
I don't really care if one reads higher than the other, blah blah. But, I was hoping to get on the same dyno just so I can have an accurate result based on the changes I've made.
KC
11-10-08, 04:25 PM
#3
superflow is fine, they should be able to give you an sae hp/tq rating and a "dynojet" comparative reading. at least when i had my bike dynoed the shop was able to give me the 2 different readings. it was done on a superflow bike dyno. one will be higher which would be the dynojet i believe.
11-10-08, 06:41 PM
#5
Well, unless you plan on running it on the superflow dyno just to see what the numbers look like and then run it on the dynojet when it becomes available.
KC, you've put alot of time in it already.. Whats a few more days to get on the dynojet. Besides the fact that you've run baseline and other pulls after mods on it.
Thanks again for sharing your project with us. I enjoy your write-ups because your setup is much more budget friendly. The more i read your posts, the better I feel about keeping my 1uz instead of swapping for a 1jz.
Keep up the good work.
KC, you've put alot of time in it already.. Whats a few more days to get on the dynojet. Besides the fact that you've run baseline and other pulls after mods on it.
Thanks again for sharing your project with us. I enjoy your write-ups because your setup is much more budget friendly. The more i read your posts, the better I feel about keeping my 1uz instead of swapping for a 1jz.
Keep up the good work.
11-10-08, 08:32 PM
#6
Thanks for all the input guys. Couple of things I'd like to comment on....
Does appear that the Superflow can be told to read Dynojet numbers. If so, I'll have them run it as so for at least one run.
After some quick researching, seems that many people agree that the Superflow's are the most accurate out of all chassis dynos.
I will try and call the shop with the Dynojet before going to the shop with the Superflow. Give it one more shot. I just feel like he's giving me the run around for some reason. Not sure why, I've only been there twice and I'm pretty sure I didn't **** him off or anything.
IS_250, seems logical but once I make up my mind to do something (in this case get the car back on the dyno) I go crazy until I get it done.
KC
Does appear that the Superflow can be told to read Dynojet numbers. If so, I'll have them run it as so for at least one run.
After some quick researching, seems that many people agree that the Superflow's are the most accurate out of all chassis dynos.
I will try and call the shop with the Dynojet before going to the shop with the Superflow. Give it one more shot. I just feel like he's giving me the run around for some reason. Not sure why, I've only been there twice and I'm pretty sure I didn't **** him off or anything.
IS_250, seems logical but once I make up my mind to do something (in this case get the car back on the dyno) I go crazy until I get it done.
KC
Trending Topics
11-11-08, 01:27 PM
#9
Driver
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: fl
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have and awd dynojet in house and realistically any dyno will be a great tool to get your car done. The only diferences are that some read lower than others and some actually create load like mustang dynos but at the end of the day they are just a helpfull tool to get your car tuned right.
11-12-08, 05:39 PM
#10
So I did get back on the Dynojet yesterday but I'm having trouble getting them to email me my runs...still waiting for them.
I'm not going to mention numbers untill I have a graph to post but I will say they are a bit lower than I expected...but I'm getting used to that. Not dissapointed by any means just lower than I thought.
I had rigged a switch so that third gear could be held, worked great but for some reason the operator still had trouble getting a snapshot of anything much under 4000rpm, so I think my TQ numbers are actually higher than what I saw. Last time, he seemed amazed at how fast the car revs up, he still seemed amazed.
I'll post the graphs when I get them.
KC
I'm not going to mention numbers untill I have a graph to post but I will say they are a bit lower than I expected...but I'm getting used to that. Not dissapointed by any means just lower than I thought.
I had rigged a switch so that third gear could be held, worked great but for some reason the operator still had trouble getting a snapshot of anything much under 4000rpm, so I think my TQ numbers are actually higher than what I saw. Last time, he seemed amazed at how fast the car revs up, he still seemed amazed.
I'll post the graphs when I get them.
KC
11-12-08, 08:27 PM
#12
the BEFORE numbers
I still don't have the stupid files. They are starting to get on my nerves, took a week just to get on the dyno and now they're not sending me my runs...WTF! On the plus side, I was only charged $50 instead of $75, he gave me a discount for taking so long.
Just so you all know, despite what my signature says, my before numbers are 314.46rwhp and 272.49rwtq. The numbers in my signature are from the first time I was on the dyno without the intercooler, just never changed them. Made similar hp but less tq with the intercooler. I also state the numbers shown uncorrected with smoothing set to 0.
Couple of notes. In my case, setting smoothing to 0 usually adds a few hp. From what I can tell, smoothing does exactly what it sounds like it should do, it smooths out the lines to make them look pretty. Well, my cars power curves are smooth as heck without it.
While doing some research on the different correction factors I figured out that the best is uncorrected to determine what any given car actually made under the conditions it was subjected to when the pull was made. The different correction factors change the numbers based on preset conditions. Example, if you dyno your car when it's 100 degrees outside and then set the graph to correction factor x, it will show the hp your car should make under a preset ambient temp which could be say 70 degrees.
The main purpose for using a correction factor in my case would be to determine the exact amount of gain from the mods I've done since the last dyno. Other than that, CF's are useless to me. IMO anyway. Really, this all goes out the window on a boosted car (mine at least) since the actual intake temps are significantly higher than the ambient temp anyway. If the "ambient" temp was taken from the air going into my engine, using a CF would likely make the numbers much higher.
Anyway, sorry to type so much. I'll update when I get the new files.
KC
Just so you all know, despite what my signature says, my before numbers are 314.46rwhp and 272.49rwtq. The numbers in my signature are from the first time I was on the dyno without the intercooler, just never changed them. Made similar hp but less tq with the intercooler. I also state the numbers shown uncorrected with smoothing set to 0.
Couple of notes. In my case, setting smoothing to 0 usually adds a few hp. From what I can tell, smoothing does exactly what it sounds like it should do, it smooths out the lines to make them look pretty. Well, my cars power curves are smooth as heck without it.
While doing some research on the different correction factors I figured out that the best is uncorrected to determine what any given car actually made under the conditions it was subjected to when the pull was made. The different correction factors change the numbers based on preset conditions. Example, if you dyno your car when it's 100 degrees outside and then set the graph to correction factor x, it will show the hp your car should make under a preset ambient temp which could be say 70 degrees.
The main purpose for using a correction factor in my case would be to determine the exact amount of gain from the mods I've done since the last dyno. Other than that, CF's are useless to me. IMO anyway. Really, this all goes out the window on a boosted car (mine at least) since the actual intake temps are significantly higher than the ambient temp anyway. If the "ambient" temp was taken from the air going into my engine, using a CF would likely make the numbers much higher.
Anyway, sorry to type so much. I'll update when I get the new files.
KC
11-13-08, 01:43 PM
#15
Forum Administrator
iTrader: (2)
KC, where did you end up going for the dyno?