![]() |
|
![]() |
![]()
Post
#1
|
|
Advanced Member ![]() ![]() Group: Advanced Members Posts: 297 Joined: 14-February 04 Member No.: 203 ![]() |
I intended to post this Thursday night but I figured I would put out a little teaser.
My car is going on the dyno Thursday for it's tune with the new setup. I'm geeked! I've been running a base tune that they put in last fall. Car feels very good/strong. Here's a few pics. (IMG:http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v294/Redbird1/engine/e1dc9395.jpg) (IMG:http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v294/Redbird1/engine/08a5ae20.jpg) (IMG:http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v294/Redbird1/engine/b9d73198.jpg) GMHTP had a 383 with ported stock heads put down (uncorrected) 448.5 at the crank. I have AFR190 street port. Not sure if this is better or worse than the ported stocks. Find out Thursday. My hope when I started this was 400 HP at the wheels. Wish me luck. Steve |
|
|
![]() |
![]()
Post
#2
|
|
Need More Afterburner ![]() ![]() Group: Moderators Posts: 809 Joined: 13-March 05 From: Huntsville, AL Member No.: 683 ![]() |
I tend to agree with you. HP = (Tq*RPM)/5252. Well, Tq is measured in Ft. Lbs. so I'd have to say that there's not a whole hell of a lot of leeway for accuracy for the exact HP #'s. However, I do know that the dynojet is an inertial roller dyno and the mustang is an eddy current dyno. I guess the real question is, "which machine measures rwtq more accurately?
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 18th June 2025 - 08:06 PM |