Dynojet V. Mustang?

THE TANK said:
and C-hawk you can turn a 1st gen over 3200 on stock valve springs. I turn mine 3600 pullin.
Click to expand...

c-hawk said:
Tank, I'll look at your graph when i get home next, i don't remember the specifics of it. If your hp was still climbing when we let out of it, i'll dyno it again free of charge if you want us to. I seem to remember your peak numbers being lower in the rpm range though.

Later,

Chris
Click to expand...


Tank,

Just pulled up your runs, peak hp was 274 hp at about 2300rpm. Peak tq was 633 at about 2225rpm. We ran your first pull out to 3400rpm where it was making 188hp/291tq. After that first pull we only spun it to about 3250.

Later,

Chris
 
Last edited:
Well from the looks of that test pull yesterday, he (Tank) managed to get the power up top he had been looking for. I'd like to see what it would do on a load dyno, because those numbers seem a little off considering another 1st gen I know put down 302hp on a Mustang dyno with stock injectors and basically the same pump mods.
 
THE TANK said:
stupid question is a mustang dyno a load dyno? There is a dynojet around here, and they could not get a p-pumped twin turbo to light, 360/680?
Click to expand...

If i recall it did a lil over 400hp. Do you have any idea how big those chragers were or the size of the housings?......Didn't think so
 
Milkys truck did a little over 400. 411 to be exact. And you should look up the records because you wrote on you board 36? and 680 ish. And those are just numbers because on the pullin track they don't mean any thing (milky's truck vs yours)
 
THE TANK said:
Milkys truck did a little over 400. 411 to be exact. And you should look up the records because you wrote on you board 36? and 680 ish. And those are just numbers because on the pullin track they don't mean any thing (milky's truck vs yours)
Click to expand...

Thats probably the smartest thing you've ever said... Yes pullin is about 70% Truck setup and 30% truck power. As you've seen some of the trucks with more power dont always win
 
joefarmer said:
Huh? That's a compliment to JohnP- he ran the large turbos on a dynojet, not me. I only run one large turbo.
Click to expand...
--------------
Brandon:

Thanks for your compliment!;) As usual, I am getting in on this thread a little late, so my apologies for that! My thanks also to my Son, John Jr. for the way he always looks out for me. Thanks buddy!

Brandon, you are right, I do get tired of hearing that the mechanical pumped Cummins 12 valve trucks can't spool an acceleration dyno like the "Dynojet 248C." And as a veteran here, I know you have seen the video before when COMP 461 and myself were going "round after round" on this issue a few months ago. So,......for the benefit of the newer members here, or members that may be uninformed about the potential of a mechanical pumped (P-7100)
Cummins 12 valve truck, here is a link to that video you mentioned:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3403781569936276784&hl=en

We will let these new members decide if a truck like one described above can really spool a Dynojet 248???

--------
John_P
 
oldschoolPSD said:
Seems to me that acceleration dynos have a hard time getting big turbos to light....

Just as a casual observer. I've never seen a mech pump truck put down a strong run on a dynojet either. But I've only ever seen 1 dynojet run diesel trucks.
Click to expand...
---------------
oldschoolPSD:

Click on the video link in my last post and you will see a mechanical pumped truck (96' Dodge CTD 12 valve) that IMHO puts down a pretty good dyno run.

--------
John_P
 
CumminAtYa said:
Okay, John...how much for your truck?:bow:
Click to expand...
-------------------------
You know buddy,......it's funny that you ask that question now. Because around July to August of 2006 I actually had posted my truck "For Sale" on TDR and DTR and was asking $35,000.00 for it!:badidea: I know now I was pretty stupid for doing it, and one guy came REAL close to buying it. Seeing how it runs now and knowing in my heart it always had the potential to do that, I am VERY, VERY glad I did not sell it. I know if I had, I would have been kicking my proverbial a** had I sold it!! I did however sell that JUNK VP-44 Powered 2002 Dodge CTD 24 valve I had and that was one of the best decisions I ever made. But,........while I bought my 2006 Dodge CTD CR to replace the 2002, I have to be honest with you, that I am NOT as happy with the 2006 as I thought I would be. I still feel the CR Dodges have their own set of issues and in time they will get straightened out, but I still like driving my "smokey, old guard, yesterdays technology" Dodge CTD 12 valve better than ANY of the other Dodge CTD Trucks I have owned.:hehe:

But,......thanks for the offer and if I ever change my mind on selling it, I will be sure to let you know!

---------
John_P
 
oldschoolPSD said:
Seems to me that acceleration dynos have a hard time getting big turbos to light....

Just as a casual observer. I've never seen a mech pump truck put down a strong run on a dynojet either. But I've only ever seen 1 dynojet run diesel trucks.
Click to expand...

Maybe you just havent seen any strong mechanical fueled trucks ever dynoed, just cause they smoke alot dosent mean they havealot of power, there's more to tuning a 12v than most think...
 
dzlfarmboy said:
Maybe you just havent seen any strong mechanical fueled trucks ever dynoed, just cause they smoke alot dosent mean they havealot of power, there's more to tuning a 12v than most think...
Click to expand...

Yeah...tell me about it!

Chris
 
dzlfarmboy said:
If i recall it did a lil over 400hp. Do you have any idea how big those chragers were or the size of the housings?......Didn't think so
Click to expand...


You were right and I was wrong he did 417 hp.:welcome:
 
You have got to be kidding!!!

JGK said:
I was once told by a shop owner with a dynojet that mustang approached dynojet to write/provide the software for the mustang. Dynojet refused (of course). So they had to compromise. "Forrest Gump" of dynos is a good analogy for the mustang.

It seems the mustang generally gives numbers skewed to the high side. So they're good for the ego, though not necessarily accurate.

-Jay
Click to expand...

Dynojets are generally 50hp to 100hp different and their numbers are always higher than a Mustang. The Dynojet may well be the correct number,.. not arguing that fact but the Mustang is the "dream buster."
 
To add a few thoughts...

Mustangs can be just as good as any other dyno if the operator does his job correctly.

Dyno Jets while are always slammed for not loading, can and do work very well for diesels. You will not take a 3.5" single and light it on the dyno. It's going to take work just to light it on the street. But with rpm and load, it will light. But many people just because their turbo's didn't light pass it off as "not enough load" when in fact more tuning could remedy the problems.

I have seen huge turbo's light on my dyno and I have seen some very nice fuel only runs. My question would be, if person A can get these big chargers to perform, then why can't person B get a smaller turbo or twins to light as well?

But when the dust settles, what matters is can you use the tool (dyno) to assist with what you are trying to accomplish. Ask Billy Ram how far off his last three dyno runs where. After passes at the track, and doing the math, he guessed his numbers before we ran. Being able to predict your performance outcome, for me anyway, is the best use of a dyno.
 
I know at TI Dyno...he's gotten a few turbo's to light up very well. Some of the pulling trucks we had some issues with the last time. He runs the Mustang Dyno...and I've seen all the different fields that computer asks you to input data for...:bang It would seem to me one little slip of the data, or if the owner doesn't feed them the correct info about the truck, it can cause major havoc. Just my 2 cents.
 
I don't a lot about how the dyno's work but, there's a big difference that I've seen between Dave's dyno and two mustang's I've been on.

Dyno jet.... 703hp

mustang.... 596hp

nothing at all was changed between the two runs. Is this the difference when there's a load ( mustang ) and no load ( dyno jet )

Billy Ram has some kind of mojo going on. Without even knowing track times or what mods I had...he also predicted my hp on the money :)
 
I heard somewhere that if you take the mustangs numbers, and add 20% you'll be close to a Dyno Jet numbers....in your case it would be 715....and I'd have to say yes that would be the difference between the two dyno's.....by the way love the avatar...love seenin' them stacks smoke!!
 
crzycowboy said:
I heard somewhere that if you take the mustangs numbers, and add 20% you'll be close to a Dyno Jet numbers....in your case it would be 715....and I'd have to say yes that would be the difference between the two dyno's.....by the way love the avatar...love seenin' them stacks smoke!!
Click to expand...

Love my GR's too :)
 
triton said:
I don't a lot about how the dyno's work but, there's a big difference that I've seen between Dave's dyno and two mustang's I've been on.

Dyno jet.... 703hp

mustang.... 596hp

nothing at all was changed between the two runs. Is this the difference when there's a load ( mustang ) and no load ( dyno jet )

Billy Ram has some kind of mojo going on. Without even knowing track times or what mods I had...he also predicted my hp on the money :)
Click to expand...

We are buying a Dyno, I have spent countless hours on the phone with the techs, at all the major companies, that make dynos. Dynojet, Dynocom, Dyno Dynamics, Superflow and Mustang. An inertia dyno, like the Dynojet, simply measures accelleration rate, the quicker the speed, from A to B the higher the number. This where an overdrive ratio and the parking brake for a little loading comes in handy. Depending upon the selected start and stop speeds, be it RPM or MPH, the numbers can be higher. We manufacture products, so obviously we want a dyno that can show accurate and repeatable numbers. The real drawback is that an Eddy current dyno, typically shows lower numbers, obviously from a manufacturers standpoint, you want to make the highest numbers possible. I think regardless of the peak potential, we will buy an Eddy current, with huge absorbtion capabilities. I am glad for posts like the one from you Triton, it really brings what we have known for a long time, out into the open. I don't care what anyone says, if you aren't makeing actual boost numbers on a dyno, your peak power is going to be off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top