Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Well how does this grab ya...Carlos from Millenium Motorsports ran 599kw at Queensland 2 days before Autosalon on his Mainline dyno...and at the same boost levels ran 601kw on Autosalon's dyno.....he must have the "special" software too!

Mainline dyno's even run the same no matter if its 2WD or 4WD...we proved it in front of hundreds of people at Final Battle...there was 1kw difference between the runs.

I think what Mik is trying to say is Croydon's dyno is happy...if its so happy i should be rolling almost 520AWKW......i think im gonna have a word to Jim about my deflated power figures.

You thought wrong Paul. What I am saying is that it is fairly common knowledge that dynologs read lower than dyno dynamics. (And dyno packs read even higher again).

Ask anyone that works on diesels (lots of them use mainline dynos)

Also, a 300kw Gen III commodore makes 180-190 rwkw...they make over 200 on Dyno Dynamics.

One interesting thing is that the torque reading that the dynologs give is surprisingly accurate. A mate of mine has put his GT2 and GT3 on his dyno and the torque reading was almost exactly what Porsche quote. It was a similar story with his Galardo too.

Out of interest Paul, how much torque did the GTR make at autosalson?

But in the end...who cares, the dyno is only a tuning tool...Buster has the right idea.

Something very perculiar is happening if the GTR made the same power in AWD as it did in 2wd...it is physically impossible!!

I work with and do alot of tuning on a Dynolog dyno, and can verify that it is quite common to see 15%+ going from ours to a Dyno Dynamics dyno in shootout mode. Its the norm to add at a min 10% to our results to compare with others on DD dynos... but 15% is more common.

The Dyno log dyno's are a nice bit of gear, with the oil temp loggers, air temp, 3 map sensors, 8 egt sensors, and the fuel flow meters. you can diagnose most problems presented to you.

Its quite common to see quite large figures quoted in the magazine's, and one cant help but be impressed, however when you see the MPH, if posted, its usually alot lower than expected, an indicitave of not such an impressive number. At least relative to what im used to seeing on a dynolog dyno.

Anyway, in summary of my ramble, for you guys who use dynologs, add about 15% to your value and your in ballpark dyno dynamics teritory.

Gary

Edited by Fastrotor

all depends on what options you add to it, but your looking at $200k + for a 4wd dynolog with options as above .... now you know why it costs so much !! alot of dollars to re coup !

Gary

Edited by Fastrotor

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...