Differences between dyno #'s: Dynojet, Dynapack, Mustang.

[BerkTechnology]

People seem a bit confused about the different types of dyno's and what numbers to expect out of them. So let's clear them up.

There are 3 types of chassis dyno's you'll run into in the USA. Dynojet, Dynapack, & Mustang. They all spit out slightly different HP/TQ numbers when you compare one brand to another (i.e. Dynojet vs Dynapack), but they are all 100% consistent if you stay on the same dyno every time. So if you are tracking your mods as you add them, go to the same shop every time.

95% of the shops in the USA are running one of these three dyno's:

1. Dynojet - most popular in the USA. Considered the "standard" here in the states since most shops utilize them. For our theoretical "car", the Dynojet will read 100 rwhp, & 100 ft/lbs of torque.

With this dyno you drive up to the rollers, they strap the car down, and do a full throttle pass in 3rd or 4th gear. The dyno will calculate the power based on how fast the car will spin the rollers. This is called an inertia based dyno.

For WOT power passes that you can compare to each other on the internet, Dynojet's are perfect. They're everywhere! But most do not have any sort of load simulating capability. Since 2005 more and more Dynojet's sold have their eddy current loading device. So you can ID them, Dynojets are typically red or black.

2. Mustang Dyno's - not as nearly as popular as the Dynojet's, but all performance shops that have Mustang dyno's DO have the capability to simulate load on the car to map ECU's. These are also great dyno's, are very accurate, simulate load very well, and are repeatable every time. They are also inertia based dyno's where you'll drive the car up on the rollers, strap the car down, and make a 3rd or 4th gear pass.

These dyno's will always read ~12% LOWER than a Dynojet, which is our standard here in the states (unless the shop has messed with the gearing settings in the computer). Because of this, lots of the internet folk don't like to use them. They come on the internet, share their results and everyone says "why didn't you make more power with mod XX". So our theoretical car will show 88rwhp on the Mustang dyno.

These dyno's will always be blue.

3. Dynapack - These are the red headed step children here in the states. Not as common as the Dynojet or Dynapack, but these are the standard in Japan. These are fundamentally COMPLETELY different that the inertia type dyno's.

With the Dynapack (my favorite), you remove the rear wheels, attach the hubs of the car to the "pods", and make your pass.

The load is simulated on the car via a hydraulic pump. Because these are effectively inertia-less, they will read HIGHER than the standard Dynojet numbers by 8-10%. That number will vary depending on how "fast" your dyno run lasts (sweep time), but as a rule of thumb, they'll read ~8-10% higher. So with this dyno our car will now read ~109rwhp on average.

The pods are always red, but these are easiest to ID. If they are taking off your wheels, it's a Dynapack!

And understand one thing when it comes to dyno graphs and product claims! Every dyno graph can be cheated by dishonest individuals/companies. All of them. So always take every dyno claim with a grain of salt. If they are cheating their tests, the truth eventually comes out (usually). Be a smart consumer!

Discuss!

[JuggernautTCW]

maybe you can cover some AWD dynos in another post?... like Dyno Dynamics.... very popular as well.

[E82tt6]

Dyno Dynamics will read slightly lower than a Mustang Dyno.

[BerkTechnology]

Originally Posted by JuggernautTCW

maybe you can cover some AWD dynos in another post?... like Dyno Dynamics.... very popular as well.

All of the dyno's above come in AWD as well. They are still the same.

1. Dynojet - two 2wd Dynojet's connected via a "frame"

2. Mustang - two rollers connected by the biggest "timing belt" you've ever seen

3. Dynapack - 4 "pods" instead of 2.

[E82tt6]

I agree Dale. I found 12% to be a "safe" number, however I did almost all of my tuning on Mustang Dynos. I found them to be more consistant and realistic than Dynojets.

No experience with Dyno Dynamics personally, but I understand them to read about 15% lower than a Dynojet.

[JuggernautTCW]

Originally Posted by E82TT6

I agree Dale. I found 12% to be a "safe" number, however I did almost all of my tuning on Mustang Dynos. I found them to be more consistant and realistic than Dynojets.

No experience with Dyno Dynamics personally, but I understand them to read about 15% lower than a Dynojet.

yah i was heartbroken when my car only put down ~230 whp on a dyno dynamics...

[BerkTechnology]

Originally Posted by E82TT6

I agree Dale. I found 12% to be a "safe" number, however I did almost all of my tuning on Mustang Dynos. I found them to be more consistant and realistic than Dynojets.

That's exactly what I said.

"These (Mustang) dyno's will always read ~12% LOWER than a Dynojet"

Stupid vauge pronouns....