Matt M

But it says sae on the chart. That means the numbers are corrected, which would make them higher than uncorrected if the weather was warm.

Matt M

I'm not saying the numbers are good, bad, average, or anything else. I just don't understand why we so often read about a bunch of reasons why they are actually way higher than what it says on the paper. If the hp should really be 350, then get a dyno making 350 and post that. Or in this case, it's a Dynojet which means you can load the file and print it uncorrected if you want.

Chevycobaltss3

iTrader: (2)

Honestly Matt.. I can give a **** less what the numbers say I wasn't done with car what so ever lol. Which I told him..... which is why I asked for the uncorrected. I did talk to the kid and shop and they did say he made more power. So wether it be true or not depends on them....

Matt M

It was just a couple simple questions.
"If this is "Miami weather" and you posted the corrected hp numbers, wouldn't the uncorrected numbers be lower? What value does it say the correction factor is?"
No need to get upset and start cussing. Remember, you said it is ok to ask questions.

NexTnmE

iTrader: (3)

Dyno numbers are useless. 1/4mile numbers trump all.

Chevycobaltss3

iTrader: (2)

Not cussing at you.. if you knew me you'd s ee what I am talking about.what i do know is the car was dynoed in the mid 80s and ect.... I don't know why the numbers are different but I did notice the chart saying sae smooth from the looks of it.

Matt M

I wasn't try to say the dyno numbers were bad, though. I was just asking about the correction because he was looking at it backwards. As far as 1/4 mile, not many Cobalt owners go to the track, anyway.

Leafydialupking

iTrader: (1)

Ha, the ET is all driver and even the trap is effected by the driver (and weather, and track condition). A dynojet that's corrected with the weather station is the same everywhere.

Chevycobaltss3

iTrader: (2)

Matt.. if I was done with his car and he got that whp id think those were bad numbers lol so its fine. But like frogstofalls dyno, he was done on that setup but was only 23* or 22.5 I beleive. Now he's on 26 and. Same boost.... So I'm hoping he is higher this time with the new tune. He also had a blown clutch to contribute to his dyno :P.

Matt M

I am saying this for the 3rd time- I am not commenting about how high or low the dyno numbers are. They could have been 1200hp and it wouldn't change what I asked. They would still be lower uncorrected. You seem to be stuck on this idea that I am somehow saying the car is making less power than it should, when I am not talking about that at all. I was merely attempting to have a discussion about correction factors because so many people do not understand how they work.

Chevycobaltss3

iTrader: (2)

Actually no I wasn't. You seem to think I am actually still conversating or trying to talk about it.I was stating I understand.... Which is why I said if I was done with his car and his numbers were the above is be kinda worried. (I hate the internet for this exact reason) I understand corrected and uncorrected. Correctional factors like temp, altitude, humidity ect.

Staged07SS

iTrader: (25)

I'm going to clean up/update this thread today a bit, so please end the bickering everyone.

Thanks!

FrossB

iTrader: (6)

Add me to this list.

09 LNF- PT5557, I, CP, H, E, T, IC, 91oct. < Treadstone Stage 4 Turbo Kit


Cobalt SS Turbo Dyno- Precision 5557 - YouTube

407hp/391trq

Staged07SS

iTrader: (25)

Ok....

So I started to add some updated graphs/info to the dyno list.

I began at page 7, because that was the last page BYT posted on.

The following member's dyno information has been added:

hhrfreek
Leafydialupking
zfissette (please PM with your mod list in the correct dyno thread format, and I will add it next to your graph).
MikeyG

I will continue to add graphs from page 7 and on when I get some more time. Please bare with me. I will get everyone who has posted eventually. Thanks!

Frogstofall

iTrader: (1)

I have the TR10.

Matt, I am actually confused on the whole correction thing. I have noticed that when sheets say SAE, the numbers always seem lower than when they say STD. It sounds like you're saying it's the other way around?

Chevycobaltss3

iTrader: (2)

Lol .. well sorry hahahah.. jk jk..

Matt M

No, std correction always results in a higher number than sae correction, but it is the difference between unccorrected hp and corrected hp that confuses people sometimes. When it's cold and/or high barometer, the uncorrected power will read much higher than the corrected power. For example, on the customer car we dyno'd the other day that put down 424whp with sae correction, the uncorrected power was 456whp. To the contrary, in the summer that same setup could put down 415whp and the same sae correction type would bump the number back up to 424. In reality, it doesn't work like that because forced induction cars, particularly turbo cars don't vary their power output as drastically as naturally aspirated cars do from weather changes. In this case, the boost is regulated, so the summer dyno would likely be more in the 430 range uncorrected and 440 corrected. What it typically boils down to is that you are better off dynoing an LNF in poor conditions and using the correction factor to make some of the power for you.

In the case I was commenting on, the poster said that it was hot and the numbers were corrected so the power was actually higher. I pointed out that the uncorrected numbers would be lower in that case, and then he edited his post to say that is was hot and the numbers were uncorrected. This was wrong, too, because the dyno chart clearly says sae on it which means that the numbers were in fact corrected.

I comment on these things once in a while because people often misunderstand it. Time and time again I see people post a dyno chart that already corrected the power numbers to sae or std conditions, and then they say something like, "and it was 85 degrees, too!" as if the number would have been way higher had they dyno'd on a colder day.

Leafydialupking

iTrader: (1)

Matt its a tough trade off. Humidity will effect the car either way, and boosted cars without a vac reference boost control (ala a tuned LSJ or turbo car running with the waste gate vac line disconnected) will still work with corrections. And even with vac referenced, yes they make the same manifold pressure no matter the barometric pressure BUT their volumetric flow rate of air will be different (mass flow rate of air will be the same) and that will put them into a different part of the compressor map.

Matt M

Right, I didn't say that turbo cars are not affected. I just pointed out that they are affected differently, and typically not as much.

Frogstofall

iTrader: (1)

I see what you're saying now. I'll be over that way next week it looks like. Get that dyno nice and warmed up.

jonathan923

iTrader: (2)

alittle confused. is there another 2012 dyno thread? should i post up my updated numbers and vid on here or will there be another thread? thanks!

Matt M

lol, good luck with that. It's cold here. It will probably be in the low 30s at best.

Staged07SS

iTrader: (25)

This is the thread to post in.

BYT used to run it, but since he is not around much I took over.

I will update this thread on a daily basis, but just bare with me.

jonathan923

iTrader: (2)

great thanks man! So here it is:

New Mods:
Full Hahn V kit
80s
18psi HP tuned
3" Full Exhaust
HKS ssq
Numbers 341whp & 335wtq

VIDEO0018.3gp - YouTube

Staged07SS

iTrader: (25)

Updates: 2/15/12

I added jonathan923 (I still need to add your video).

I removed all dyno numbers w/o a graph (I felt bad removing some of the old heads #'s). If you have been removed, and want to be added again, please post a graph & I'll add you back to the list.

Thanks guys! I still have a lot of work ahead of me.