# First Time at the Dyno!



## rextheracer (Jul 3, 2008)

Heres the chart, the only thing I have is a K&N CAI, and a change from mobil one to royal purple that morning









arty:


----------



## Rukee (Feb 8, 2007)

Very respectable and consistent! :cheers


----------



## Nate (Mar 17, 2010)

not bad at all!


----------



## Gotagoat (Jan 6, 2006)

Given that most of the posts I've seen regarding stock dyno runs show about 336 rwhp, it would appear the K&N intake is giving you about 15 to 20 rwhp. If so, that's pretty strong.


----------



## rextheracer (Jul 3, 2008)

Gotagoat said:


> Given that most of the posts I've seen regarding stock dyno runs show about 336 rwhp, it would appear the K&N intake is giving you about 15 to 20 rwhp. If so, that's pretty strong.


yes I was very surprised/pleased! I have a video coming soon as well, but it was a great day!


----------



## KyleGT05usmc (Feb 28, 2009)

Very nice. Makes me anxious to get mine dyno tuned!


----------



## 6QTS11OZ (Mar 27, 2005)

Gotagoat said:


> Given that most of the posts I've seen regarding stock dyno runs show about 336 rwhp, it would appear the K&N intake is giving you about 15 to 20 rwhp. If so, that's pretty strong.


His dyno was done in *"STD"* not *"SAE"* therefore his numbers are higher.


----------



## Gotagoat (Jan 6, 2006)

So how would that convert?


----------



## Huckleberry06 (Feb 19, 2010)

nice. but what is the difference between STD and SAE. cant be that much huh?


----------



## 6QTS11OZ (Mar 27, 2005)

Gotagoat said:


> So how would that convert?





Huckleberry06 said:


> nice. but what is the difference between STD and SAE. cant be that much huh?


Check out this thread;

SAE Vs. STD Comparison Thread - LS1TECH

Here is a post from Katech Tuning;



> "Here's the correction factors:
> 
> SAE:
> "SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers), USA. Power is corrected to reference conditions of 29.23 InHg (99 kPa) of dry air and 77 F (25°C). This SAE standard requires a correction for friction torque.
> ...


----------



## Rukee (Feb 8, 2007)

Oh-that's tricky!!
So an aftermarket company can "claim" some HP# when in fact it's just the conversion that makes THEM look better. 
The hype of the press!! :cheers


----------



## Gotagoat (Jan 6, 2006)

Very interesting. So if I'm calculating this correctly (math isn't a stong point), the SAE dyno would have had it at 341 rwhp - adding about five rwhp to bone stock. Am I figuring it properly?


----------



## rextheracer (Jul 3, 2008)

aw, well thats odd. Ive never seen anything on different formats of dyno charts/formulas..


----------



## Huckleberry06 (Feb 19, 2010)

rextheracer said:


> aw, well thats odd. Ive never seen anything on different formats of dyno charts/formulas..


yea first time i heard of that too. i knew all dynos were a little diff but not diff constants. learn something new everyday


----------



## KyleGT05usmc (Feb 28, 2009)

dude you just took a huge dump on rex's head lol...


----------



## 6QTS11OZ (Mar 27, 2005)

KyleGT05usmc said:


> dude you just took a huge dump on rex's head lol...


LOL! I didn't mean to doo doo on rex's dome. I just didn't want anyone else to get caught up in his numbers and then expect to see the same numbers when they don't understand the dyno sheet. As long as Rex continues to have his dynos done in STD then he'll be able to keep track of his gains. Hopefully his tuner doesn't switch to SAE as scare the crap out of him when he see lower numbers than his previous run.


----------



## B-ville Goat (Oct 5, 2008)

My gross # was 362, SAE was 353, so not a huge difference, but some.


----------



## dustyminpin (Jun 19, 2006)

I didn't know there was a difference between SAE and STD either. I just pulled out my dyno sheet from a couple weeks ago and it says SAE Smoothing: 5. What does the Smoothing 5 mean? Also, it was done on a dynojet and I've heard that they put out different numbers then a mustang dyno and to not get caught up in the actual numbers themselves, and pay more attention to what your gains are. Sound about right? My SAE was 455.76 hp, 415.41 trq, but I don't see any STD numbers on it anywhere...


----------



## 6QTS11OZ (Mar 27, 2005)

dustyminpin said:


> I didn't know there was a difference between SAE and STD either. I just pulled out my dyno sheet from a couple weeks ago and it says SAE Smoothing: 5. What does the Smoothing 5 mean? Also, it was done on a dynojet and I've heard that they put out different numbers then a mustang dyno and to not get caught up in the actual numbers themselves, and pay more attention to what your gains are. Sound about right? My SAE was 455.76 hp, 415.41 trq, *but I don't see any STD numbers on it anywhere*...


And you won't. The tuner has to use one or the other.


----------



## ALKYGTO (Mar 29, 2010)

Dyno's are tuning tools. It is best to use the same dyno for all your runs when trying to assess gains from any mods.

There are a lot of variable's involved when dynoing, including the operator. Also some "less than scrupulous" dyno owner/operators are notorious for "high" numbers to please thier clients so they can claim big #'s.

IMO the most important #'s are the air/fuel ratio and the #'s under the curve. Everybody wants the big top end # but there is a ton of information for the owner that can be gleened from a dyno sheet.

BTW, when looking over your sheet, make sure torque and horsepower cross at 5250 rpm. I have seen some that don't.

All dyno's will read slightly different but Mustang dyno's read roughly 5 - 10% less. Dynojet 248C is the industry standard. :cheers


----------



## 6QTS11OZ (Mar 27, 2005)

ALKYGTO said:


> Dyno's are tuning tools. It is best to use the same dyno for all your runs when trying to assess gains from any mods.
> 
> There are a lot of variable's involved when dynoing, including the operator. Also some "less than scrupulous" dyno owner/operators are notorious for "high" numbers to please thier clients so they can claim big #'s.
> 
> ...


:agree


----------

