Interesting dynojet article
 

See below...

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

Link broken

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

Lets try it this way.
page 1
page 2
page 3
page 4
page 5

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

Kind of a cool read. I guess to me I don't care how the inital numbers where calculated as long as some standard was set and followed. In the end comparing what one dyno reads to another isn't as important as the people who know how to use them and sticking with either one dyno or one brand of dyno when getting results for tuning improvements and part upgrades.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

Exactly my point in posting this.
People always ask how the Dyno Dynamics read differently, and I finally found an article to help support the differences.
In the end, it is about changes, not what numbers you have. I like to race cars, not numbers.
I think it is very nice that the Twin Cities has so many different types of dyno's to compare from. I can only imagine what it is like in other parts of the U.S. where a dyno is a road trip away.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

So where's this portable laptop based dyno? That sounds sweet!

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

Yeah that should be cool.
The founder of Dynojet is a brilliant man. He really knows how to market products.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

So since Dynojet was basically seen as the first inertia dyno, and basically setting a standard, why other companies wouldn't just keep with that standard.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

I think it was because the formula for calculating horsepower was based of an overzelous honda V-max and the actually numbers were fudged with to make the powerlevels "fit in". Page 2 on the article has some more info on that, I believe.
(maybe page 3).
The cool thing about dynojets is the repeatability for testing parts.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

I think most of it would have to do with marketing. It would have been hard to a new company to come in and follow the basics of DynoJet to a T and hope to just start selling units. The end user could just go with the already proven DynoJet unit. So something had to be done to open up another segment in the market. I think this played a good part in it, but I'm guess there are probably some other reason such as mathmatical variances due to the work other companies came up with.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

Well i'm sure there are other marketing points besides the numbers. There must be a reason why lse and db went with dyno dynamics. I doubt it was "hey our dynos read on average of 18% less then a dynojet" that sold them. I'm sure there are other reasons. I'm just wondering why everyone went and made their own numbers. I can't think of a good analogy right now, but it just makes things confusing when a standard has basically been set, and then everyone else comes out with there own way, and now no one can really compare.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

Dynojet used a motorcycle to set a standard, and someone a hundred years ago set a standard of how much force 1 horse can produce. Either way it's not a perfect mathematical equation, but it works well and it's repeatable. Personally I think it was dumb for other dyno manufacturers to use a different standard. Dynojet set one that is universally accepted and it works just fine. Although making other dynos read "dynojet numbers" is usually just a few keystrokes away. Having 3-4 different readings to compare from 3-4 different dynos just confuses people that like the numbers. I don't see where any of them is more right than any other, but they all work for their intended purpose, be able to make changes on your setup or tune and gauge the difference.

Funny, that article is a reprint from the same one Hot Rod had about a year ago. A few words and pics were changed, but other than that, the same article.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

I have read the article.
I have to say this, if you use a certain dyno then stick with it and keep track of your changes cause thats what this is mostly about.
But the deal the REAL number is this:
Dynojet's number to the ground is based on some yamaha V-max and a bunch of guys that had to come up with a equation that the grease monkeys would find interesting.
Obviously newer technology allows us to build machines that will output the REAL power without crazy fudge-tastic equations based on a bike.
Hence, the world of more expensive and complex dyno's , Dyno Dynamics.
What you choose is up to you? But when you question who's is better, i ask you this?
Do you like dial-up internet? or DSL?
either way you get the internet, one just costs more and works a little nicer for you.
Either way you get your numbers, and the changes your mods/work has done.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

So, swanny, you're a master of the dark arts - you know how to tune an engine.

What goat blower just said is right, who uses a horse anyway? how about (drumroll please) Kilowatts! :)
Q: This math (assuming 15% difference) tells me that:
_____| dynojet | DynoDynamics
stock | 115hp | 100hp
1mod | 126.5hp | 110hp

Will a car that reads 10 hp higher from 1 mod on a DD read 11.5hp higher on a DJ? or is it more 10 for 10?

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

Neither, I use cable nacka! Apparently I'm a real bad debater because no one ever sees my point. But I don't think that's a good analogy. We're just talking about the standard they equate the numbers, not the additional goodies and new technologies that newer dynos offer. That makes sense? Computers get faster and faster, better and better, but we don't change the way we measure them. 1MB is still 1MB. Imagine if Western Digital had a 1GB hard drive, and Seagate had one as well, and their measurement was based on whatever they felt like, wasn't the same. So you get a Western Digital and on your computer it says it's only 600MB, and the Seagate one registers 1.5GB. Well wouldn't that just suck. Maybe that's not the best analogy, but it's the best I could come up with, and i think better then the dial-up vs. dsl comparison. Improving the technology, definately a good thing. But changing the form of measurement, that just leads to confusion I think. Just my 2 cents.

Or also, sure dial-up is way slower then DSL, but a 56kbps is still 56kbps, they still use the same form of measurment. It'd be nice if the DSL of Dynos (apparently the DD) still used the same measurement so 1hp was still 1hp.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

I see where you're coming from, but in the case of the origional dynojet, it was skewed to boast a higher number to increase sales of one product or another (be it motorcycles or dynos, i dunno).

If you debated to a lot of people would you be a... mass-debater?

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

So his numbers were set, to read the same numbers that were currently in use. Right? Should we make a centimeter 1 pubic hair longer because new technology shows that the way a centimeter was originally created wasn't good enough?

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

You're analogy is a little flawed. 1MB always equals 1MB and so does 1HP. The physical unit of measurement is the same. It's just that the tools to measure were/are flawed. You can buy a computer with a Cheap processor or Intel P4 or any other one. All of them can ba rated at 3Ghz. Their real world, measurable speeds will vary. The type of tasks they can perform at different speeds will vary. The difference is in how we measure, not the unit of measurement.

Of course I do get your point. It is frustrating to have many manufacturers using one standard VS another. Consistency would be nice, but market VS regulation tends to lead to bizarre incompatabilities.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

Yea, i was in a hurry and taking a shit.
So next time i will put a little more thought into it more than i need to hurry up and wipe my ass so i can answer the door.
hey, cowboy the thread is about dyno's not shit analogies, learn to read dickwad.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

There's need to call him a dickwad, and learn to use the fucking shift key.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

Word. I was expanding on his analogy to try to help clear things up. No need to be harsh. It makes me cranky ;)

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

Maybe you've got PMS.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

In my opinion this is why LSE chose the Dyno Dynamics(DD) Lowboy 450 Twin/Twin chassis dyno. We researched different types of dynos for 5 years before making our decision. We looked at all the DynoJet line talked with sales people the hole works, talked with Mustang dyno and looked at the hole line there also, looked into dynopacks but due to the hydraulic system and using water to cool the system, also only showing hp/trq at the hub instead of at the ground, and the problem of using a lift or floor jacks to get a car on/off the dynopack, and the fact that the dynopacks only weighs so much and is not bolted/secured to the ground. We made the final call on the DD after a lot of thought in what would work best for us has a company and provide the customer with the best results.

First it has small rollers and uses eddy current breaks to produce load. This along with an adjustable wheel base and the front/rear beds not connected with a belt will allow the DD to dyno cars that have power splits in the drive train; Porsche, Trail Blazer SS, Audi and/or cars that can not be converted to 2wd, Subaru, just about any auto, 3/S, etc.

Also how much power the dyno will graph and handle was a big factor. When steady state tuning cars the small roller will not smooth out or effect the power out put(that much), the dyno is very sensitive and shows every little change. Also displaying this live is what is needed in most cases so you can see your change right a way. The DD has a pressure sensor that when you spin the roller is pushes or pulls(pending rotational direction or on decel, yes it shows negative hp/trq) using the eddy current break to transfer rotational force down on the pressure sensor. This puts out a number called tractive effort in lbs. That is calculated into lb/ft of torque and then with the engine RPM it figures HP.

The computer is run off DOS so there is no windows to crash or freeze. The dyno also logs air intake temp(for NA cars) and has a 5bar map sensor along with a crazy ass LM11(a little below lab grade) O2 sensor that is all logged for every pull we do on the dyno and can be looked at anytime, and/or graphed live on the screen during the pull. Also the dyno can hold a load right where you want it to, have the engine stay at 3000rpm all day long(or what ever RPM/MPH you want) and tune with accuracy, after using dynojet, dynopacks, and mustang dynos its amazing how well DD does this.

The ramp rate is also nice, this is how fast the dyno will let the car accelerate. When tuning and doing sweep pulls you want to simulate the road as much as possible, so you adjust the ramp rate to let the car go faster or slower threw the gear, and with using ramp up/down you can figure out your drivetrain loss. Dynojet just has the drum that weighs this much, lighter cars its to much load and heavy car/trucks there is to little load, mustang dynos and dynopacks are closer but still vary load/rpm a little which, known from personal experience.

There are limitations to this though, each eddy current break can hold(stop) 600hp and graph 1200hp(sweep pulls) so our twin twin can handle double that per axel. Along with the hp limit their is temp limits because it uses electricity to produce load that is converted into heat. With 2 eddy breaks on each axel the heat is spread out more and the dyno will be less likely to over heat during long tuning sessions(which happen a lot around here). Also the way a car is strapped down on the DD with traction bars is a lot safer and less likely to spin the tires then other chassis dynos(rubber band the car over a big roller) except dynopacks.

I think the last point of LSE choosing the DD would be its nickname the Lowboy its only 18" tall so no lifts or pits are needed just a few ramps and back the car on. That is my take on it, Josh Ryan Pattie, chime in if you would like.

~John
One last thing a dyno is a measuring tool, how it is used and who uses it will have a big effect on HP out put, bring your car to the same place/dyno each time and take notes on how things were done ie atmospheric conditions, strap down method, temp corrections, cooling over the car, exhaust evacuation, etc. Bring it to the same place, run the same way, and your car should make about the same power with out changes to the car(pending mods and repeatability) and show increases/loss in power when mods/changes were made.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

Good post John!

Like he stated we bought our dyno for its versatility, repeatability, tuneability, and any other ...ability I can't think of right now.

Every dyno reads differently. It is about what you use it for that makes the difference. Our is used as a prototype machine. We use it to design and test parts, and to design and test engines. We tune street and race cars with it, and we find it to be very accurate and easy to use, that is why we purchased it.
I can actually see if a change I made to a timing map made a difference LIVE, that is a fact that dynojets can not do.
I can see and graph different conditions by changing the smallest of things (like spark plug gap).
Accuracy is all about who is operating the equipment. We strive to be as accurate as we can, to give honest and real results.

I race cars, I do not race numbers. When the light drops, the bullshit stops.
I use numbers to realize potentials of vehicles and setups. They are nice for comparision sakes, but tend to make people over-confident and down right defensive about things.

I did not want this to turn into a dyno debate, just an interesting article I found on how dynojet came up with its "HP" formula and the wondeful job the creater of dynojet did marketing the product and bringing it to the masses.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

I'm not in anyway saying your dyno is bad. Apparently it is one of the better dynos out there. Never said your dyno was bad. All I'm saying is I wish the numbers of all the dynos were closer, maybe standardized or something, because it does lead to confusion when I show people my chart and they say "damn that's weak" and then I go to explain that these dynos read low, and to do this math to figure out about what it would maybe be compared to theirs. Just kinda confusing. That make sense?

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

Makes perfect sence.
Don't worry, many of the industry leading facilities are switching dyno manufactures...that is another "fact". Dyno Dynamics is getting more and more popular across the US.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

Sorry to mr. V-Cowboy.
Sometimes i have to use my bro's laptop and the left side of his keyboard is fucked up.
I personally don't care about dyno's, its nice not to have to change anything on my car dyno, just drive it on and do it to it.
And i couldn't give a shit about numbers and you could all tell from the
run-ins i have had this past season.
I just tell people i made 239hp on a DD which reads a little lower than a dynojet, i then give them the est./guess dynojet number and proceed to whoop some ass.
Either way to people other than us, we just have a little 4-banger in some unknown car.
Sorry again. Hope i used teh SHift Key enough.

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

So is this an informational thread, or a promotional thread?

Re: Interesting dynojet article
 

This was just showing what a dynojet is and how it calculates Hp/Trq, mass vs acceleration. And people asked why DB and LSE bought the DD dyno's so I posted why we did. And a lot of people still do not know how the 2 new dynos in the area work/operate so I thought I would post it up so people knew how the DD displays/figures out hp/trq.

~John