Whats the most possible HP you can add?
#7
Shift_faster
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 1,965
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good topic. However, to get accurate answers you will need to have people who have taken baseline dynos and also after mod dynos (even then it is dependent on weather, regular dyno variances, etc.)
The reason is because you can't "add" the hp that each mod "might" give you on its own. A person who has all the mods together can give you a total increase over the baseline.
The perfect example is the ProCats. On a NA car it nets around 18-20 hp, while on an SC'd car it gives you about 7-10 hp. So you can't just cherry pick the 65 hp the CT SC gives you plus the 20 hp that the ProCats would give you. It doesn't work that way.
Either way good topic
The reason is because you can't "add" the hp that each mod "might" give you on its own. A person who has all the mods together can give you a total increase over the baseline.
The perfect example is the ProCats. On a NA car it nets around 18-20 hp, while on an SC'd car it gives you about 7-10 hp. So you can't just cherry pick the 65 hp the CT SC gives you plus the 20 hp that the ProCats would give you. It doesn't work that way.
Either way good topic
![Wink](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/smilies/wink.gif)
Trending Topics
#9
Senior Moderator
dont forget the water/meth kit!!!!!
#11
![Smile](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif)
leedogg,
First of all, we don't race dynos or dyno charts. We call that bench racing. You can add tons of power or as much as your wallet can afford. As I've found out, you can make more power than the chassis is capable of handling. Then you start bending and twisting things. I've seen a 500 RWHP 1995 T-Bird wrinkle the roof and rub the rear tires on the fender from the IRS flexing and twisting the bushings.
Againstallodds1,
I'm concerned about your dyno numbers. First, if the torque converter was NOT locked up then your numbers are bogus. Second what type of dyno was it? Dynojet, Mustang dyno (Eddy Current) or other? Third, what correction factor did they use?
This is important and I'll explain why. A Dynojet uses large drums in the ground that are spun by the inertia from the wheels of the vehicle. The faster the vehicle accelerates the drums based on time and engine rpm...the more power the dyno shows. This is wrong.
If you take a RWD car with an automatic transmission that has a cast iron flexplate, 12" torque converter, steel driveshaft, heavy cast aluminum rims and tires and 2.73:1 axle ratio. Then dyno the car 3 times and record the average RWHP & RWTQ.
Then swap in an aluminum flexplate, 9" torque converter, Metal Matrix Composite driveshaft, light weight rims and tires and 3:73:1 axle ratio. Dyno the car again and record the average of the 3 pulls. You'll find the car has made more power and more torque according to the Dynojet. Did it? NO!
All those parts reduce mass and/or accelerate the driveline faster so the dynojet thinks the car is making more power. Would the car accelerate faster on the street? YES!
A Mustang Dyno does not act like this, it places load on the vehicles driveline. Provided you input the proper weight of the vehicle, the numbers will be more accurate then a Dynojet (which is typically higher).
Either way take the numbers with a grain of salt.
A-Train
First of all, we don't race dynos or dyno charts. We call that bench racing. You can add tons of power or as much as your wallet can afford. As I've found out, you can make more power than the chassis is capable of handling. Then you start bending and twisting things. I've seen a 500 RWHP 1995 T-Bird wrinkle the roof and rub the rear tires on the fender from the IRS flexing and twisting the bushings.
Againstallodds1,
I'm concerned about your dyno numbers. First, if the torque converter was NOT locked up then your numbers are bogus. Second what type of dyno was it? Dynojet, Mustang dyno (Eddy Current) or other? Third, what correction factor did they use?
This is important and I'll explain why. A Dynojet uses large drums in the ground that are spun by the inertia from the wheels of the vehicle. The faster the vehicle accelerates the drums based on time and engine rpm...the more power the dyno shows. This is wrong.
If you take a RWD car with an automatic transmission that has a cast iron flexplate, 12" torque converter, steel driveshaft, heavy cast aluminum rims and tires and 2.73:1 axle ratio. Then dyno the car 3 times and record the average RWHP & RWTQ.
Then swap in an aluminum flexplate, 9" torque converter, Metal Matrix Composite driveshaft, light weight rims and tires and 3:73:1 axle ratio. Dyno the car again and record the average of the 3 pulls. You'll find the car has made more power and more torque according to the Dynojet. Did it? NO!
All those parts reduce mass and/or accelerate the driveline faster so the dynojet thinks the car is making more power. Would the car accelerate faster on the street? YES!
A Mustang Dyno does not act like this, it places load on the vehicles driveline. Provided you input the proper weight of the vehicle, the numbers will be more accurate then a Dynojet (which is typically higher).
Either way take the numbers with a grain of salt.
A-Train
#12
Ryan Christopher
Originally Posted by Atrain
leedogg,
First of all, we don't race dynos or dyno charts. We call that bench racing. You can add tons of power or as much as your wallet can afford. As I've found out, you can make more power than the chassis is capable of handling. Then you start bending and twisting things. I've seen a 500 RWHP 1995 T-Bird wrinkle the roof and rub the rear tires on the fender from the IRS flexing and twisting the bushings.
Againstallodds1,
I'm concerned about your dyno numbers. First, if the torque converter was NOT locked up then your numbers are bogus. Second what type of dyno was it? Dynojet, Mustang dyno (Eddy Current) or other? Third, what correction factor did they use?
This is important and I'll explain why. A Dynojet uses large drums in the ground that are spun by the inertia from the wheels of the vehicle. The faster the vehicle accelerates the drums based on time and engine rpm...the more power the dyno shows. This is wrong.
If you take a RWD car with an automatic transmission that has a cast iron flexplate, 12" torque converter, steel driveshaft, heavy cast aluminum rims and tires and 2.73:1 axle ratio. Then dyno the car 3 times and record the average RWHP & RWTQ.
Then swap in an aluminum flexplate, 9" torque converter, Metal Matrix Composite driveshaft, light weight rims and tires and 3:73:1 axle ratio. Dyno the car again and record the average of the 3 pulls. You'll find the car has made more power and more torque according to the Dynojet. Did it? NO!
All those parts reduce mass and/or accelerate the driveline faster so the dynojet thinks the car is making more power. Would the car accelerate faster on the street? YES!
A Mustang Dyno does not act like this, it places load on the vehicles driveline. Provided you input the proper weight of the vehicle, the numbers will be more accurate then a Dynojet (which is typically higher).
Either way take the numbers with a grain of salt.
A-Train
First of all, we don't race dynos or dyno charts. We call that bench racing. You can add tons of power or as much as your wallet can afford. As I've found out, you can make more power than the chassis is capable of handling. Then you start bending and twisting things. I've seen a 500 RWHP 1995 T-Bird wrinkle the roof and rub the rear tires on the fender from the IRS flexing and twisting the bushings.
Againstallodds1,
I'm concerned about your dyno numbers. First, if the torque converter was NOT locked up then your numbers are bogus. Second what type of dyno was it? Dynojet, Mustang dyno (Eddy Current) or other? Third, what correction factor did they use?
This is important and I'll explain why. A Dynojet uses large drums in the ground that are spun by the inertia from the wheels of the vehicle. The faster the vehicle accelerates the drums based on time and engine rpm...the more power the dyno shows. This is wrong.
If you take a RWD car with an automatic transmission that has a cast iron flexplate, 12" torque converter, steel driveshaft, heavy cast aluminum rims and tires and 2.73:1 axle ratio. Then dyno the car 3 times and record the average RWHP & RWTQ.
Then swap in an aluminum flexplate, 9" torque converter, Metal Matrix Composite driveshaft, light weight rims and tires and 3:73:1 axle ratio. Dyno the car again and record the average of the 3 pulls. You'll find the car has made more power and more torque according to the Dynojet. Did it? NO!
All those parts reduce mass and/or accelerate the driveline faster so the dynojet thinks the car is making more power. Would the car accelerate faster on the street? YES!
A Mustang Dyno does not act like this, it places load on the vehicles driveline. Provided you input the proper weight of the vehicle, the numbers will be more accurate then a Dynojet (which is typically higher).
Either way take the numbers with a grain of salt.
A-Train
The real test is the track, the dyno should only be used for tuning and benchmarking. It is nice to at least see on paper that the mod you did to the car made a difference. The engine is going to produce the same amount of power regardless of the gear you are in, the difference is the gear ratio.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
emailnatec
5G TLX Tires, Wheels & Suspension
29
09-28-2018 04:27 PM
soupi
2G TSX Audio, Bluetooth, Electronics & Navigation
14
11-15-2015 11:15 AM