Interesting dynojet article

niterydr · 12-15-2006

See below...

MustGoFaster · 12-15-2006

Link broken

niterydr · 12-15-2006

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

MustGoFaster · 12-15-2006

http://www.factorypro.com/magazine/d...hp_reason.html

AJ · 12-15-2006

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.

niterydr · 12-15-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by DSMStyle

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.

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.

**Halon** · 12-15-2006

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

niterydr · 12-15-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by ju-on

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

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

**Halon** · 12-15-2006

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.

niterydr · 12-15-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by ju-on

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.

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.

AJ · 12-15-2006

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.

**Halon** · 12-15-2006

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.

**Goat Blower** · 12-15-2006

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.

turbotalon1g · 12-15-2006

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.

FattyBoomBatty · 12-15-2006

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!

**Halon** · 12-15-2006

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.

FattyBoomBatty · 12-15-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by ju-on

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.

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?

**Halon** · 12-15-2006

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?

xveganxcowboyx · 12-15-2006

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.

turbotalon1g · 12-15-2006

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.