Rb 2860-5 Highest Hp?

[fatz]

Doesn't count as cops arse never drives it

Still 70 hp short of America

[MrStabby]

Is using one of the "shootout" modes on a DynoDynamics a solution to getting comparable numbers? Do those modes help at all with cross-dyno variability?

[Piggaz]

Doesn't count as cops arse never drives it

Still 70 hp short of America

.

Talk to mick and hypertune!

[Jc052685]

Not sure itd be easy to go to the strip in the states in winter, think we'll have to be patient to see what it does

Track closes 2 weeks for Christmas & new year...

[Jc052685]

And I still have not gotten an answer to whether you guys will accept Mainline dyno numbers.

[GTSBoy]

And I still have not gotten an answer to whether you guys will accept Mainline dyno numbers.

We will....but here's the problem. Dynos do measure power, but the different brands and models have all got different relationships between the amount of power delivered to the tyre/roller interface and the number that gets spat out of the software after measuring at the retarder. That much is obvious. But I will elaborate.

So here in Australia the dominant brand is Dyno Dynamics, and the accepted relationship between what they report as "measured at the wheels" and the engine is close enough to 80%. And there has been a lot of argument about whether FWD or RWD or AWD have different losses based on the efficiency of the driveline....but in reality the majority of the 25% difference is lost at the tyre/roller interface. And that is a seriously wobbly loss, because you can change it by tying the car down differently, using different tyres etc etc.

Dynos with 2 rollers each wheel probably lose a different amount to dynos that sit the tyre up on a single larger diameter roller. The way the power is transmitted from the roller to the final measuring cell will differ from dyno to dyno. So there is no wonder that the relationship between "measured at the wheels" and true engine power will vary. Now, Dyno Dynamics don't claim that the relationship for their stuff is 75%. That's just a number that has come out of concencus from dynoing cars where the engine power is actually known. And DD do not attempt to tell you what the engine power is. They just report the power they measured, such as it is. Other brands of Dyno in Australia may choose to "calibrate" their dynos to report numbers that will more or less agree with DD in order to align with the majority recognised numbers. Some do. Hub dynos are a complication that we shouldn't talk about here.

Now to the core of the matter. What is the old dyno brand that seemed to be dominant in the US? Was it DynoJet? Something like that? Anyway, from what we could tell from here in Australia, it looked as if that brand was set up to measure the power at the rear and then scale it up to output a number that was supposed to be representative of the actual engine power. Certainly the "losses" seemed to be no more than 10%. And 10% is actually a far more reasonable number for real driveline losses compared to the 25% that a lot of people actually thought was the real loss here in Australia. This led to US dyno numbers looking silly here, as has been alluded to in posts above already. Now....it seems to us that the old "scaled up" approach (which is more flawed than a lot of the other possible approaches, courtesy of the reasons outlined in my second paragraph) has become the dominant method in the US, and a lot of people seem t have forgotten how it got there.

Factor in that the internet has turned everyone into a bunch of e-wankers trying to outcompete on raw power numbers instead of on actual vehicle performance and you get a tendency for people to want to see the higher number, then treat it as gospel, instead of it just being a tuning tool. All a chassis dyno is really suitable for is tuning, not fuelling the e-wank fest.

So a Mainline dyno in the US could still have a different calibration compared to what we might expect here in Oz, and so our willingness to "accept" the numbers is still subject to the bullshit I described above.

[Hadouken]

The e-wankers are also on the other side of the playing field, don't forget.

Pretty sure this started with "is this the new record for -5's".

Besides the point. Do you have a video of the final power run for this car?

Interested to see how it hussyle

[Hadouken]

Hustles*

[fatz]

Ps ausi blokes love a good stir and seppos are known for getting but hurt when their 700hp car gets hosed by a ausi 500 hp car so your an easy target

Sadly you joined in the fun and didn't get all America rules the world which is odd... Sure your American ?

[BrynDETT]

Lol this thread has been great

[Jc052685]

Ps ausi blokes love a good stir and seppos are known for getting but hurt when their 700hp car gets hosed by a ausi 500 hp car so your an easy target

Sadly you joined in the fun and didn't get all America rules the world which is odd... Sure your American ?

Not only that, but I am Texan!!!

I am off work in a few hours so I will be back when I have some time to sit down and go through all of this.

[mr skidz]

I was surprised too that he didn't bite lol.

Must be a nice guy.

Welcome to sau[emoji482]

[Rickyv42]

The e-wankers are also on the other side of the playing field, don't forget.

Pretty sure this started with "is this the new record for -5's".

Besides the point. Do you have a video of the final power run for this car?

Interested to see how it hussyle

FWIW this build has been 1.5 years in the making. During that time I did a lot of research on this site. I've always said that this set up was going to make 550-600 hp. When it made 700 we both thought wow wonder what the record is. I've never seen any -5s that high so I posted it asking what you guys thought. I went with -5s because I was happy with hp in the 550 range.

[Hadouken]

Sorry. Must have come across as a dig at you.

Just saying for the sake of saying.

But once again 550 aussie hp 700 murica hp haha

[Rickyv42]

No worries. I'm also not saying it didn't make the 700. We'll find out after our drag strip outing.

[Hadouken]

Still want dyno video

[Jc052685]

We will....but here's the problem. Dynos do measure power, but the different brands and models have all got different relationships between the amount of power delivered to the tyre/roller interface and the number that gets spat out of the software after measuring at the retarder. That much is obvious. But I will elaborate.

So here in Australia the dominant brand is Dyno Dynamics, and the accepted relationship between what they report as "measured at the wheels" and the engine is close enough to 80%. And there has been a lot of argument about whether FWD or RWD or AWD have different losses based on the efficiency of the driveline....but in reality the majority of the 25% difference is lost at the tyre/roller interface. And that is a seriously wobbly loss, because you can change it by tying the car down differently, using different tyres etc etc.

Dynos with 2 rollers each wheel probably lose a different amount to dynos that sit the tyre up on a single larger diameter roller. The way the power is transmitted from the roller to the final measuring cell will differ from dyno to dyno. So there is no wonder that the relationship between "measured at the wheels" and true engine power will vary. Now, Dyno Dynamics don't claim that the relationship for their stuff is 75%. That's just a number that has come out of concencus from dynoing cars where the engine power is actually known. And DD do not attempt to tell you what the engine power is. They just report the power they measured, such as it is. Other brands of Dyno in Australia may choose to "calibrate" their dynos to report numbers that will more or less agree with DD in order to align with the majority recognised numbers. Some do. Hub dynos are a complication that we shouldn't talk about here.

Now to the core of the matter. What is the old dyno brand that seemed to be dominant in the US? Was it DynoJet? Something like that? Anyway, from what we could tell from here in Australia, it looked as if that brand was set up to measure the power at the rear and then scale it up to output a number that was supposed to be representative of the actual engine power. Certainly the "losses" seemed to be no more than 10%. And 10% is actually a far more reasonable number for real driveline losses compared to the 25% that a lot of people actually thought was the real loss here in Australia. This led to US dyno numbers looking silly here, as has been alluded to in posts above already. Now....it seems to us that the old "scaled up" approach (which is more flawed than a lot of the other possible approaches, courtesy of the reasons outlined in my second paragraph) has become the dominant method in the US, and a lot of people seem t have forgotten how it got there.

Factor in that the internet has turned everyone into a bunch of e-wankers trying to outcompete on raw power numbers instead of on actual vehicle performance and you get a tendency for people to want to see the higher number, then treat it as gospel, instead of it just being a tuning tool. All a chassis dyno is really suitable for is tuning, not fuelling the e-wank fest.

So a Mainline dyno in the US could still have a different calibration compared to what we might expect here in Oz, and so our willingness to "accept" the numbers is still subject to the bullshit I described above.

Off course even dynos of the same brand will have some sort of variance. I think that is why the USA likes the dynojet stuff because it seams to be the most consistent and there is no way to artificially inflate the HP that it reads other than putting a hair dryer or something on the weather station. But you would still see that in the run conditions.

We work with primarily Chevrolet any more. Started out in the import world. Just an FYI, we see anywhere from 15-20% losses on most cars from their rated crank HP. Any thought on this?

Does anyone one happen to know what any of the factory chevy products are putting down on your dynos?

We have a mainline dyno ordered that should be with us when we move from out current 4500sq/ft facility to our new 18,000 sq/ft building that we have built. So what if we were to just take the dyno out of the crate and run the car? Any reason those numbers would not hold up?

Still want dyno video

Dont have one at the moment

Edited February 19, 2016 by Jc052685

[GTSBoy]

I must correct one item in my last post. Where I said the DD relationship was 80%, I actually meant 75%. I have no idea how I managed that slip.

And that difference (between our accepted 25% loss and the 15% sort of number bandied around in he US) has often been the source of the inflated flywheel numbers we hear from the US.

As to you setting up a fresh Mainline and giving it a run.....you could ask on here for contacts to a couple of trusted dyno shops here in Oz that use Mainlines to discuss settings to try to make sure you get as close to what they've been doing. Might be worth the effort involved for the comparison.

As to factory Chev stuff here.....not much. There's a few Camaros and 'Vettes running around. Our Commodores use LS engines, but they all have a local tune, so you'd need to take possible difference there into consideration. But there are going to be billions of dyno threads on those cars on other forums. Just be prepared for a higher level of stupidity than you have ever experienced before if you go looking for it.

[SimonR32]

Injectors, like others have said don't match the power

My 1250's are totally maxed out at similar hp on what some would say is a generous dyno (when I say totally maxed out they run over 120% duty haha)

[burn4005]

Injectors, like others have said don't match the power

My 1250's are totally maxed out at similar hp on what some would say is a generous dyno (when I say totally maxed out they run over 120% duty haha)

pardon my ignorance, but how you open injectors for more than 100% of the time? is it calculating say a 36ms required pulse width when the cycle time is only 30ms, but in reality, the injector has saturated?

Edited February 19, 2016 by burn4005