mustang vs. dynojet?

getnitbo

getnitbo

DO YOU NEED MY ASSISTANCE
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
47
gona try a mustang dyno out and was wondering how they compare to a dynojet. are the numbers higher or lower? do alot of people like them? any imput appreciated.
 
Mustang or Dynojet

The Dynojet boys aren't gonna like this one!!

Mark Chappel and ATS have the same Mustang,.. with 52" rollers. This thing has got to be for Semi's! You'll run in direct drive and that makes it from about 55mph to 75mph. The best way to describe it is to pull your bumper up against an interstate bridge peer and then floor it,... it's not going anywhere and neither are you. Loading you/your truck is an understatement.

The question was will the Mustang be higher or lower,... it will be lower. From what I've seen it is 100+hp lower.
 
Ive never run on a mustang, but would liike too. The Dynojet ive run on seem to be fooled by all the torque we produce, and give the higher numbers.
 
I am far from a rocket scientist (did i even spell that right:hehe:), but big tq doesn't fool a dynojet. I don't see how it could.

Dynojets are extremely simple. The rollers are a given weight. There is an optical pickup that monitors how fast the rollers are spinning. Plain and simple, the faster the rollers are accelerating, the more force there is being applied to them. Dynojets measure HP, and if you have an RPM reading they calculate TQ from HP and RPM.

A dynojet doesn't care how much the vehicle spinning the rollers weighs, and it doesn't ask for any input from the operator (which can affect the outcome). It only cares how fast the rollers accelerate... the power that makes it to the wheels.

In my opinion (which i admit may be a little biased), a dynojet is the best, most consistent measuring stick if you want to compare your truck's power to another. I have been on 3 different dynojets with 3 different operators using the same truck/same setup and all 3 dynos were within 5hp. Mustangs are all over the place depending on the operator etc.

With all that said, there are some neat things a guy can do with a load dyno that you can't do with a inertia dyno. And also, if there is a truck that doesn't light the chargers well, it is easier to get it spooled on a load dyno than an inertia dyno. A big pulling truck would be wasting time and money to try to run on a dynojet.

At the end of the day, this is a Ford vs Chevy vs Dodge question. I don't think there will ever be a consensus.

Chris
 
One thing that I think is a nod in their favor is the fact that Dynojets seem to be much more common in the diesel world. I'd rather dyno on one for that reason alone.
 
displacedtexan said:
Come on, don't go confusing us with facts!LOL

Thanks for the link.
Click to expand...

LOL sorry about that. And you're most welcome for the link. The biggest problem I see with a Mustang Dyno, is NO ONE knows how to operate it correctly. Even the guys who WRITE the programs argue about it. TI Dyno has been going round and round with these guys about his dyno. First they tell him to do it a certain way, so he does, when he calls and says he's getting same results, they say "well you did something wrong". :doh: He finaly has spoken with someone there who has some knowledge of how it works, and has given him some other ways to dyno cars, and now he is getting better results. And they are consistant results. I don't know much about the dynojet dyno's, I've never been around one, just the hear say I've heard. I'm sure like everything in life there are pro's and con's to these two types of dyno's, and until someone can figure out the exact formula to get the truest number, we will always have these discussions.
 
Dynojets IMO are the best measuring stick for comparison of these diesel trucks across the country from state to state and from 50ft Elv to 4000ft Elv using UNCORRECTED #'s. Their just consistant, and there's not really any input variable to change the #'s like on other styles of dynos. So it's more of an Apples to Apples dyno to give people a better Idea of what power products are making in this industry. Now for a Pullin truck with huge chargers, yeah a load type dyno would be a better tuning tool since they are so hard to get lit well on a dynojet.

Brett
 
Here's the way i see it...

All 1/4mile tracks are supposed to be 1320' long and flat. Yes, there will always be variations in weather conditions, track prep, etc. but the tracks are all relatively the same. So if a given truck runs a 13.00 and 103mph at track#1 and then goes to a different track with similar conditions and no changes to the truck, it is likely going to run very close to that 13.00 and 103mph at track#2 as well.

Just like a 1/4mi track is a 1/4mi track, a dynojet 248 is a dynojet 248. Make a number on one 248, and you will make the same number on a different 248.

If operator inputs etc, can affect a dyno number, those results are no more comparable to each other then racing on two different tracks, when one is 1320' long and the other is 1220' long.

After all, the only value to a dyno number is to see if you have more or less power after a modification, or more or less power then your buddy, etc. If the numbers aren't consistant, they are useless.

.02
 
getnitbo said:
gona try a mustang dyno out and was wondering how they compare to a dynojet. are the numbers higher or lower? do alot of people like them? any imput appreciated.
Click to expand...

A Mustang 1750 which has 50" rollers not 52" is a nice machine. I have nearly indentical numbers in the testing we have done with one. Remember, a DJ 248 has 48" rollers.

I have also done comparisons with Dyno Dynamics, SuperFlow, and a few others. Bottom line is I have compared almost identicle to those machines. I have also compared almost identical to every other DJ 248 I have tested with. In other words, the claims of a DJ reading higher is bogus, unless the others were high too.

But get on whatever is close for you and enjoy the experience and see what you can learn from it other than the HP and TQ numbers.
 
DavidTD said:
A Mustang 1750 which has 50" rollers not 52" is a nice machine. I have nearly indentical numbers in the testing we have done with one. Remember, a DJ 248 has 48" rollers.

I have also done comparisons with Dyno Dynamics, SuperFlow, and a few others. Bottom line is I have compared almost identicle to those machines. I have also compared almost identical to every other DJ 248 I have tested with. In other words, the claims of a DJ reading higher is bogus, unless the others were high too.

But get on whatever is close for you and enjoy the experience and see what you can learn from it other than the HP and TQ numbers.
Click to expand...

dave, how about a MD 1100 single drum? I cannot touch a 248 unless I cross the line. So I have no comparison.
 
are the numbers on a mustang close to a dynojet? heard the torque reading on the mustang was higher than a dynojet
 
OT-OF-Here said:
Everyone likes the higher numbers.
Click to expand...

It's not about higher numbers, its about being able to dyno in one state at a certian elevation, and then another guy dynoing in a different location with a different elevation and the numbers being very comparable as for being Apples to Apples conditions. Their just a more fair way to measure everyone's truck across the country and to have as close as possible conditions as you can get. Like no input variables.
 
Hmmmm!

dzlfarmboy said:
It's not about higher numbers, its about being able to dyno in one state at a certian elevation, and then another guy dynoing in a different location with a different elevation and the numbers being very comparable as for being Apples to Apples conditions. Their just a more fair way to measure everyone's truck across the country and to have as close as possible conditions as you can get. Like no input variables.
Click to expand...

That was my attempt at a little humor bro.

It might be noted that the following have Mustang Dyno's (unless I've been misinformed).

Banks
Schied
TST
ATS
EDGE


and I'm sure other notables,.. only to say there may be a few folks out there that actually know how to use the Mustang dyno in contrast to some others statements in this thread.

It's much like getting good info from a computer,.. junk in and junk out. If they plug in the wrong parameter then they'll probably get an incorrect answer.

Being from Missouri I only believe what I see and I've been on both and I'd have to see your Dynojet sitting on TST's lot and see a truck run on both that the numbers come up comparable. If I had more $$$ I'd bet a serious pot load that it won't. Just my opinion based on what I've seen personally.

As far accuracy,... I think the names I inputted above indicate that people that are into serious quality made a choice for some reason to go with Mustang. This isn't to say the DJ isn't a good product,.. it says it's different and generally speaking the numbers run lower. All things being relative then it is still a worth while venture for people to check their status of power and increases resulting from new mods etc. As someone said above,.. the real test is the 1/4 mile. Everything else is just posturing.
 
Being from Missouri I only believe what I see and I've been on both and I'd have to see your Dynojet sitting on TST's lot and see a truck run on both that the numbers come up comparable. If I had more $$$ I'd bet a serious pot load that it won't. Just my opinion based on what I've seen personally.
Click to expand...

Been there, dyno'd that. The TST dyno read 668hp on Matt's truck and wouldn't spool the s300/s400 twins setup. The Danville loading Dynojet not only loaded the twins, it ran them to 733hp which was comparable to the same combination of parts on a different truck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top