Quote:
Originally Posted by uspspro
You know, this assumption you're making is very weak. You used the same assumption when comparing your E85 NA torque curve to the Vortech (you added your own correction factor).
Perhaps you'd be willing to cite some examples to provide some basis for your dynojet <-> dynapack conversion factor? It seems there is no consistant comparison, it depends on way too many factors. Here is an example where the Dynojet put out higher numbers: http://s2000.com/forums/forced-induc...vortec-sc.html . There are other examples with the Dynojet was lower, and others where the numbers are around the same.
I agree with your last point. It would be nice to see this thing on a 3rd party dynojet for a better comparison to other setups. |
In addition to my prior knowledge, there is a nice sticky thread in the Engine forum of this site.
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20572
So I'm making my assumption on what I conceived to be general knowledge of the differences between a dyno that accounts for inertia, and a dyno that does not. Likewise, if they posted 240 on a mustang dyno, I would have assumed it was more powerful on a dynojet. You should also note that I used HALF of the correction factor on my comparison than a normal dynapack, so I am giving them even more credit. In the end the numbers are still there, correction or not.
But as I said, we won't know for certain until someone posts up a third party, dynojet dyno.
