Typical dyno numbers for stock 6.6 w/Allison?

[McRat]

Dynojet rwhp corrected?

Just curious. Trying to determine what normal auto driveline loss is.

[thechevyhdman]

Stock Number on my truck were as followed, But I cant remember if I had Banks/AFE setup. Not like either make big power compared to stock. Hp 249.8 torque 432.2
Hope it helps
Bill

[matt-max]

mine made 238 stock w/ low miles

[MAV]

My dually ran 258 rwhp and 477 lbft at the 02 Rendevous on BD Power's dyno. Bone stock except an Amsoil air filter.

[Kennedy]

Speaking of dyno's, numbers and such:

http://www.mustangdyne.com/Articles/CHP0603-article-01.htm

[RWTD]

Originally posted by kennedy:
Speaking of dyno's, numbers and such:

http://www.mustangdyne.com/Articles/CHP0603-article-01.htm Excellent article, John! This is one of the biggest reasons DiabloSport went with the Superflow AutoDyn (http://www.superflow.com/autodyn/default.htm) versus going with the ole Dynojet, as the dual eddy-current power absorber is a necessity when fine tuning a vehicle for optimum gains.

Sincerely,

James

[matt-max]

the eddy-current type dyno has become very popular with motorcycle engine builders and tuners in the past few years.

it allows new motors to be broken-in on the dyno with varied loads and speeds and also allows bikes with computer efi systems to optimize air, fuel and timing at every throttle opening position and rpm.

[McRat]

Originally posted by kennedy:
Speaking of dyno's, numbers and such:

http://www.mustangdyne.com/Articles/CHP0603-article-01.htm Good link.

Yes a dyno with the ability to adjust load is better, but Dynojets are more common. So I specified dynojet numbers to compare apples to apples.

[mtomac]

this is my favorite part of the article


the bottom line: dyno numbers are for show, and track times are for the dough! This has been a topic of controversy with many people guessing how much power the top diesel sled pullers and dragracers really have. The common concencess is a Dynojet cannot load a heavily modified diesel motor pushing lots of boost. The Mustang can load the motor but traction on the rollers is an issue. Since the dyno can't really "show" what the motor has most of the "big dogs" don't even bother dynoing their trucks. They do their tuning on the track and let everyone else play around on the dyno. The "big dogs" let their on track performance do the talking and keep everyone else guessing how much power they really have.

[sdaver]

dont have a sled will the wifes suburban do? :D

[mtomac]

if it weighs over 40,000#

[McRat]

A dyno is mearly a tuning tool that costs more than a vacuum gauge.

Performance isn't just HP anyways. A dyno can help you maximum engine output, but only a good total set-up will get the maximum track results.

BTW - The car they were testing in that article was WAY lean on the FA ratio. Bet it was getting knock on the dyno. Should have had 02's in the .87-.91 range. At .80 and less, the engine barely runs.

[Kennedy]

Originally posted by Micheal Tomac:
this is my favorite part of the article

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />the bottom line: dyno numbers are for show, and track times are for the dough! This has been a topic of controversy with many people guessing how much power the top diesel sled pullers and dragracers really have. The common concencess is a Dynojet cannot load a heavily modified diesel motor pushing lots of boost. The Mustang can load the motor but traction on the rollers is an issue. Since the dyno can't really "show" what the motor has most of the "big dogs" don't even bother dynoing their trucks. They do their tuning on the track and let everyone else play around on the dyno. The "big dogs" let their on track performance do the talking and keep everyone else guessing how much power they really have. </font>[/QUOTE]If you say so...

Traction is an issue, but it can be much easier and more consistent to pull a load on the dyno, and keep the load steady.

I've been doing a lot of research this way, and have found that dyno's have come a long way as to traction and holding power. It's kinda hard to do a modification at the track...

[GMCTRUCK]

The Mustang or Superflow are the ticket for turbo diesels. The Dynojet doesn't give the engine a chance to build boost and show what it's got. Actually just finished the block work on our local diesel expert's dyno building. Got to check out a naked Superflow setup sitting in the ground before the covers got put on. Pretty impressive setup including a beautiful stand that can show all paramaters of whats going on. Dyno room even has huge ductwork and a fan that's gonna force 45mph at the front of the vehicles. To answer the original question, I've seen stock Duramax/Allisons put down anywhere from 230-250hp. Same dyno same day.

[ 09-08-2003, 08:19 PM: Message edited by: GMCTRUCK ]

[CPMac632]

GMC Truck I thought you big numbers in your sig came from a DJ, are you saying that you have more than that?

[RWTD]

Originally posted by McRat:
BTW - The car they were testing in that article was WAY lean on the FA ratio. Bet it was getting knock on the dyno. Should have had 02's in the .87-.91 range. At .80 and less, the engine barely runs. O2 voltages are useless during PE (Power Enrichment) mode, and for that test mean nothing. The true test is an actual real wideband measurement, which is what I do on any vehicle that I tune. I've tested N/A vehicles showing .940 but running 13.1 to 12.9 afr (air fuel ratio) straight across, and even seen some showing .850 yet running rich (high 11's to low 12's) across.

The vehicle in question (2000 Camaro LS1) had some form of tuning or aftermarket parts on it, as 95+ % of 99-00 6-speed LS1's dyno around 285 to 295 rwhp stock. I don't think that vehicle ever experienced knock, as there was not one spike-dip in any of the graphs they showed, and that would have been very apparent in the graphing if there was any such knock.

Kind Regards...

[McRat]

Originally posted by RunninWithTheDevil:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by McRat:
BTW - The car they were testing in that article was WAY lean on the FA ratio. Bet it was getting knock on the dyno. Should have had 02's in the .87-.91 range. At .80 and less, the engine barely runs. O2 voltages are useless during PE (Power Enrichment) mode, and for that test mean nothing. The true test is an actual real wideband measurement, which is what I do on any vehicle that I tune. I've tested N/A vehicles showing .940 but running 13.1 to 12.9 afr (air fuel ratio) straight across, and even seen some showing .850 yet running rich (high 11's to low 12's) across.

The vehicle in question (2000 Camaro LS1) had some form of tuning or aftermarket parts on it, as 95+ % of 99-00 6-speed LS1's dyno around 285 to 295 rwhp stock. I don't think that vehicle ever experienced knock, as there was not one spike-dip in any of the graphs they showed, and that would have been very apparent in the graphing if there was any such knock.

Kind Regards... </font>[/QUOTE]Yes, even the dynojet numbers are higher than stock. My 00 SS was a Wednesday car and pushed 311-312hp on 2 different dynojets while still stock, which is unusual but not unknown. I've seen over 100 stock LS1's dyno on 4 different dynojets. On his 02's, I'd guess he has a GMAF or HPP Power Programming on the motor which will often yield the lean numbers. KR doesn't always cause dips. I always get ~3 deg peak KR on a dyno, yet not at the track, and my curves are smooth. Wideband is better, but is not available at the track, so I use AutoTap. I've got about 20 meg of Atap logs on various LS1/LS6 cars, and you CAN tune WOT (open loop) with 02's.

Sorry about the ramble.

[GMCTRUCK]

Originally posted by CPMac632:
GMC Truck I thought you big numbers in your sig came from a DJ, are you saying that you have more than that? My numbers are from a DJ and in my case I couldn't get much boost because of the fact that the DJ is not set up for turbo diesel engines and we couldn't load the dyno to build boost. For comparison Allison trucks running the 125 hot juice were putting 360-375 rwhp and 730-750 lb-ft on the Dynojet while we were there.

[ 09-09-2003, 06:40 PM: Message edited by: GMCTRUCK ]

[sdaver]

so kennedy whens the mustang gonna be there......looks like a rednecks coming to loyal :D :D dave

[Kennedy]

It's been rough trying to keep up with day to day stuff, AND do the demolition of old/get bids etc. Maverick just happened to be passing through at the right time, and got roped into a couple of days of demolition. Thank goodness for reach lifts as on Saturday we tore down the old garage. Knocked it down with the lift, and ground it up with the dozer. Loaded it on the fire with the bucket on the reach lift. You KNOW you had a big fire when you last load at 10 pm and at 4am there's still flames! :eek: Thank goodness for old barn foundations as burn arenas!


I looked at the Super Flow, but it looks like they can only add around 400HP via PAU load whereas the Mustang can load 605HP. I'm thinking of going to a bit larger PAU to get more like 700-750HP max hold back. Dunno how big a fan a guy needs to install to get 45 mph wind, but I sure don't want to be in that dyno room when it turns on! As for a manual vs. auto, the DJ doesn't care what kind of tranny you have. If the TCC is locked on an auto, it's pretty darn close to a manual...

[Burner]

John.....Do you sleep? :eek:
Always on. Thanks :D


Burner--------&gt; :D