What octane was the fuel you were using. Do you have any det. control like meth? Sick numbers, love to see some vids of that pig in action. Thanks for sharing!

 

No.

Maybe 750.

 

Actually yes. I work at a Technical College and we just had a Mustang brand dyno installed. The rep told us there would be about 30% lower numbers on the Mustang vs and dynojet.

One of our students has a 2006 Mustang GT with a Vortech supercharger and 10psi boost. He just had it dynoed/tuned this past saturday on a dynojet at a mustang shop in Marietta, GA. He put down 486/409. LAST NIGHT, we put the car on the mustang dyno and it put down 354/345, which works out to about 30% lower than a dynojet.

There are ways to make a mustang read like a dynojet, but based on the weather corrected #'s i'd say the weather correction hasn't been tampered with.

 

Yeah but dyno Jet's read 20% high as well soooo...

 

That is the problem with Mustang dyno's, the operator is in charge of F'ing up the numbers.

If the Mustang dyno read that low on his car then the operator did not have a clue sorry.

We dyno engines on the engine dyno here and put them straight into a race car after. A 600hp engine on the engine dyno will make about 510 to the tires. About a 17% loss through the drive train right. So if the Mustang dyno reads 400 then its right????? I doubt it.

I would put money on it reading 750 or so on a dynojet. We have seen plenty of cars get strapped onto a local mustang dyno and come over here and put down the same numbers within 5%.

 

Its the same issue with Dynojet operator's. I'll take the Mustang Dyno #'s anyday over a Dynojet for real world number's. I've seen both.

A dyno is just a tuning tool and we all know that, however...can you run a simulated 1/4 mi pass on a Dynojet???....Didn't think so.

Between a Dynojet and a Mustang chassis dyno vs an engine dyno has been between 10-12% in a race car. 4x4 trucks have a much higher drive train loss.

 

Dont know about those two dynos but the dyno dynamics dyno here in town reads pretty stingy compaired to the dynojet. The observed numbers are closer, and the only ones that I pay attention to though. Forced induction should only use 1/2 the correction factor for altitude to be accurate. I think like said above it mostly adds up to opperator error. I know that a 700RWHP observed(uncorrected) on a Dyno Dynamics at 6000' elv runs mid 10's @4950lbs 4WD.

 

There is no issue with the Dynojet operator if you can see the stack is in the same air as the vehicle. There is no adjustment for the end user on a Dynojet period.

 

I think that might be the problem up here in Co with the dyno jet. They try to use the 30% correction factor for NA on FI and the numbers get inflated. Same goes for corrected track numbers even NHRA uses half the the factor. Thats why FI is the way to go at 6000' elv

 

I here you there the correction factors on all of them are a little to friendly when it comes to FI. When its cold here and the correction factor is .97 a 800whp car will read 20-30hp lower then when its 95 out and it corrects to high. This is the time when you know the car is making better power in the good air too.