HP Without Dyno

[Milliardo]

How will you know how much HP you have without dyno? For instance, you have added the usual I/H/E setup, and you have or plan to have other mods?

[dirty91crx]

true way to find out is dyno....you could get a gtech but the gtech readings will be lower than dyno because its factors in wind resistance, rolling resistane and all that other crappy stuff...put it this way....ive got 178whp on the dyno....on gtech it says 169hp....and thats after its been calibrated and the correct vehicle weight is set.

[jcrx]

Originally Posted by dirty91crx

true way to find out is dyno....you could get a gtech but the gtech readings will be lower than dyno because its factors in wind resistance, rolling resistane and all that other crappy stuff...put it this way....ive got 178whp on the dyno....on gtech it says 169hp....and thats after its been calibrated and the correct vehicle weight is set.

Dyno it on a Mustang dyno and I bet you get less than 178whp. Since they use a current brake to simulate the weight and drag it gives you a more realistic figure instead of the ego, I mean dynojet. So the Gtech probably isn't that far off from an actual figure.

[dirty91crx]

this dyno was on a 55 shot of zex....you do the math....im comparing this dyno taken 2 months ago as compared to my gtech readings...this is the only type of dyno in the area.....so i say the gtech is about as close as your mustang dyno? and how can a mustang? dyno calculate the aerodynamics of the car like a gtech can? i say there about close to each other though as far as results....but still i think the mustang? dyno will ret in a higher reading.

[whtteg]

Go to the drag strip and race your car as many times as you can. Then go to http://www.speedworldmotorplex.com/calc.htm and put in your info. I have found that the tarp speed method is more accurate, than the 1/4 mile method b/c of wheel spin etc. this will not be an exact hp but it will be fairly close just as close if not closer than the gtech.

[jcrx]

Originally Posted by dirty91crx

this dyno was on a 55 shot of zex....you do the math....im comparing this dyno taken 2 months ago as compared to my gtech readings...this is the only type of dyno in the area.....so i say the gtech is about as close as your mustang dyno? and how can a mustang? dyno calculate the aerodynamics of the car like a gtech can? i say there about close to each other though as far as results....but still i think the mustang? dyno will ret in a higher reading.

[dirty91crx]

hahahahaha i like that! BTW im hawaiian so broken english is what you get

[jcrx]

Originally Posted by dirty91crx

hahahahaha i like that! BTW im hawaiian so broken english is what you get

Haha, I see, no offense then. But what I was trying to say is that hte current brake used by a Mustang dyno, slows the rotations in accoedance with the information input at the beginning of the testing. Like a Gtech, but on the ground. Hence they produce lower numbers than dynojets.

[dirty91crx]

previous post to my last, i was tryin to understand what you were saying. as ive only been on a dyno jet. i guess i need to read up on this type of dyno your talkin about....dyno jet is good just to let you know whp with no acting forces on the engine other than the base dyno......and the gtech as well as this dyno you are talking about would be for reall world whp....hmmmn but all n all all three methods IMO will give you a # that you can work with.

[jcrx]

Yes, all three will give you an accurate relative number. :

[dirty91crx]

Go to the drag strip and race your car as many times as you can. Then go to http://www.speedworldmotorplex.com/calc.htm and put in your info. I have found that the tarp speed method is more accurate, than the 1/4 mile method b/c of wheel spin etc. this will not be an exact hp but it will be fairly close just as close if not closer than the gtech.

the only problem i see with this is the formula is based on rwd drivtrain.....25% drivtrain loss for rwd and 11-15% for fwd....good enough to give a reading if thats what your after....youll just have to do a lil more math to get the proper readings....ie mult hp fig givin by hp calc....mult by 24%....that gives you bhp.....then mult by .11 that should give you your whp as you being fwd...

[boosted331]

Originally Posted by dirty91crx

the only problem i see with this is the formula is based on rwd drivtrain.....25% drivtrain loss for rwd and 11-15% for fwd....good enough to give a reading if thats what your after....youll just have to do a lil more math to get the proper readings....ie mult hp fig givin by hp calc....mult by 24%....that gives you bhp.....then mult by .11 that should give you your whp as you being fwd...

24% drivetrain loss? Maybe with a power hog like a C6 or TH400 with a loose, unlocked converter. RWD drivetrain loss with a stick isn't much/any higher than that of a FWD car, which is typically 13-18%.

[whtteg]

They are using a 18% drivetrain loss. And you could always just use the bhp figure and then divide it by what ever the correct % of drive train loos your particular car has, if you happen to know it.

[crxlvr]

most honda trannies run a 15% drivetrain loss.