Dyno results
Senior Member
Joined: 07-23-2008
Posts: 1,148
From: Peoria, AZ
Had dyno today stock no Mods
Max power = 244.67
Max torque = 250.04
Should be about 286.26 at the flywheel, it's a little lein
Having a problem attaching Dyno sheets, will post to my gallery tonight or tomorrow.
Next Mod Stage 1 in a couple weeks then back to the Dyno
Let me know if this is good, bad or the norm for stock
Byron
Max power = 244.67
Max torque = 250.04
Should be about 286.26 at the flywheel, it's a little lein
Having a problem attaching Dyno sheets, will post to my gallery tonight or tomorrow.
Next Mod Stage 1 in a couple weeks then back to the Dyno
Let me know if this is good, bad or the norm for stock
Byron
Senior Member
Joined: 11-18-2008
Posts: 744
From: Oak Harbor, Washington
Senior Member
Joined: 06-29-2008
Posts: 527
From: Suburban Chicago
Had dyno today stock no Mods
Max power = 244.67
Max torque = 250.04
Should be about 286.26 at the flywheel, it's a little lein
Having a problem attaching Dyno sheets, will post to my gallery tonight or tomorrow.
Next Mod Stage 1 in a couple weeks then back to the Dyno
Let me know if this is good, bad or the norm for stock
Byron
Max power = 244.67
Max torque = 250.04
Should be about 286.26 at the flywheel, it's a little lein
Having a problem attaching Dyno sheets, will post to my gallery tonight or tomorrow.
Next Mod Stage 1 in a couple weeks then back to the Dyno
Let me know if this is good, bad or the norm for stock
Byron
The results were 257hp and 281tq so that means I gained a whole 13hp and 31tq with the GM tune. For over $650 bucks I am not impressed. Although, I was told that the mobile dyno was probably reading low because it has no cooling fans. WTF, I hope that the specific dyno was actually wrong for me otherwise I would have saved my money.
SPPD
Senior Member
Joined: 01-19-2008
Posts: 1,658
From: Chicago, IL (Waukegan)
I had mine dyno'd last saturday and I am stock except the GM tune.
The results were 257hp and 281tq so that means I gained a whole 13hp and 31tq with the GM tune. For over $650 bucks I am not impressed. Although, I was told that the mobile dyno was probably reading low because it has no cooling fans. WTF, I hope that the specific dyno was actually wrong for me otherwise I would have saved my money.
SPPD
The results were 257hp and 281tq so that means I gained a whole 13hp and 31tq with the GM tune. For over $650 bucks I am not impressed. Although, I was told that the mobile dyno was probably reading low because it has no cooling fans. WTF, I hope that the specific dyno was actually wrong for me otherwise I would have saved my money.
SPPD
Member
Joined: 10-23-2008
Posts: 69
From: Delafield, WI
I recently had my car dyno'd at Kilpatrick's in Waukesha, WI (near my hometown). The car was dyno'd on a Dynojet model 424x (I'm pretty sure anyway)... needless to say, I'm quite happy :)
Run 1: 301.38whp @ 5700, 338.11wtq @ 3400, A/F: 13.9 @ 23 PSI
Run 2: 299.72whp @ 5650, 341.05wtq @ 3450, A/F: 13.8 @ 23 PSI
Run 3: 298.51whp @ 5700, 339.74wtq @ 3400, A/F: 13.8 @ 23 PSI
I had a little loss due to heat soak (still runnin' the OEM IC yet guys...) but over all very consistant. A/F's are a SMIDGE high, but nothing I'm going to breathe into a paper bag about...
The tune was done by Steve Kenniff at GM Roadster Club. Martin Scott, the owner of the organization, would be able to hook you up. If there's anyone left that hasnt gone with a different tune, this would be the way to go for maximum gains... plus he guarantees his work and will redo/ reflash if you're not happy with it for nothing but the shipping charge.
PM me if you're interested and I'll give you his info.
Run 1: 301.38whp @ 5700, 338.11wtq @ 3400, A/F: 13.9 @ 23 PSI
Run 2: 299.72whp @ 5650, 341.05wtq @ 3450, A/F: 13.8 @ 23 PSI
Run 3: 298.51whp @ 5700, 339.74wtq @ 3400, A/F: 13.8 @ 23 PSI
I had a little loss due to heat soak (still runnin' the OEM IC yet guys...) but over all very consistant. A/F's are a SMIDGE high, but nothing I'm going to breathe into a paper bag about...
The tune was done by Steve Kenniff at GM Roadster Club. Martin Scott, the owner of the organization, would be able to hook you up. If there's anyone left that hasnt gone with a different tune, this would be the way to go for maximum gains... plus he guarantees his work and will redo/ reflash if you're not happy with it for nothing but the shipping charge.
PM me if you're interested and I'll give you his info.
Senior Member
Joined: 07-05-2008
Posts: 5,464
From: Akron Ohio
Generally Dyno results vary depending on the Dyno, The conditions, The Dyno tech running it ETC.
We have some freaks here that run a Mustang dyno as cruise in's. They seem to get big numbers out of car not capable of doing big numbers. We suspect they do this to get people to try their cars. I would expect they scew the numbers.
On the other hand I have seen low numbers from people who just don't know what thye are doing or just have poor equipment in even poorer conditions.
Here is what a GM engineer had to say on the Solstice forum
Regarding performance: I do not think we have run any cars on a chassis dyno. There is a reason for this. The prediction models, given the vehicle parameters and engine torque curve, are quite accurate. Our predictions of stock vehicle performance for both the 2.4l and the 2.0l t were less than 1% off of actual vehicle performance for 1/4 mile and 0-60. The change in performance for the Performance Upgrade was very accurate as well. In fact, it is very possible to get significant variation on a chassis dyno that may not translate properly to a drag strip, so one must treat dyno information with great care. I have expressed this following thought to people I have met where we have had great discussions and seen it repeated from time to time: what really matters for true performance is when the car is driven, not what a dyno says and not what it feels like. 30 dyno hp and 80 dyno ft-lbs do not do you any good if they do not shave off several tenths of a second on the drag strip.
Powertrain does run certified tests on the engines to get the curves. I assume this is where the power/torque ratings come from.
Look at the stock torque plot, then plot the two new points. It looks like the engine continues up the curve on the low end to the 340 ft lb torque, then must roll off earlier to meet the necessary torque at the peak power point.
We have some freaks here that run a Mustang dyno as cruise in's. They seem to get big numbers out of car not capable of doing big numbers. We suspect they do this to get people to try their cars. I would expect they scew the numbers.
On the other hand I have seen low numbers from people who just don't know what thye are doing or just have poor equipment in even poorer conditions.
Here is what a GM engineer had to say on the Solstice forum
Regarding performance: I do not think we have run any cars on a chassis dyno. There is a reason for this. The prediction models, given the vehicle parameters and engine torque curve, are quite accurate. Our predictions of stock vehicle performance for both the 2.4l and the 2.0l t were less than 1% off of actual vehicle performance for 1/4 mile and 0-60. The change in performance for the Performance Upgrade was very accurate as well. In fact, it is very possible to get significant variation on a chassis dyno that may not translate properly to a drag strip, so one must treat dyno information with great care. I have expressed this following thought to people I have met where we have had great discussions and seen it repeated from time to time: what really matters for true performance is when the car is driven, not what a dyno says and not what it feels like. 30 dyno hp and 80 dyno ft-lbs do not do you any good if they do not shave off several tenths of a second on the drag strip.
Powertrain does run certified tests on the engines to get the curves. I assume this is where the power/torque ratings come from.
Look at the stock torque plot, then plot the two new points. It looks like the engine continues up the curve on the low end to the 340 ft lb torque, then must roll off earlier to meet the necessary torque at the peak power point.
Member
Joined: 10-23-2008
Posts: 69
From: Delafield, WI
Generally Dyno results vary depending on the Dyno, The conditions, The Dyno tech running it ETC.
We have some freaks here that run a Mustang dyno as cruise in's. They seem to get big numbers out of car not capable of doing big numbers. We suspect they do this to get people to try their cars. I would expect they scew the numbers.
On the other hand I have seen low numbers from people who just don't know what thye are doing or just have poor equipment in even poorer conditions.
Here is what a GM engineer had to say on the Solstice forum
Regarding performance: I do not think we have run any cars on a chassis dyno. There is a reason for this. The prediction models, given the vehicle parameters and engine torque curve, are quite accurate. Our predictions of stock vehicle performance for both the 2.4l and the 2.0l t were less than 1% off of actual vehicle performance for 1/4 mile and 0-60. The change in performance for the Performance Upgrade was very accurate as well. In fact, it is very possible to get significant variation on a chassis dyno that may not translate properly to a drag strip, so one must treat dyno information with great care. I have expressed this following thought to people I have met where we have had great discussions and seen it repeated from time to time: what really matters for true performance is when the car is driven, not what a dyno says and not what it feels like. 30 dyno hp and 80 dyno ft-lbs do not do you any good if they do not shave off several tenths of a second on the drag strip.
Powertrain does run certified tests on the engines to get the curves. I assume this is where the power/torque ratings come from.
Look at the stock torque plot, then plot the two new points. It looks like the engine continues up the curve on the low end to the 340 ft lb torque, then must roll off earlier to meet the necessary torque at the peak power point.
We have some freaks here that run a Mustang dyno as cruise in's. They seem to get big numbers out of car not capable of doing big numbers. We suspect they do this to get people to try their cars. I would expect they scew the numbers.
On the other hand I have seen low numbers from people who just don't know what thye are doing or just have poor equipment in even poorer conditions.
Here is what a GM engineer had to say on the Solstice forum
Regarding performance: I do not think we have run any cars on a chassis dyno. There is a reason for this. The prediction models, given the vehicle parameters and engine torque curve, are quite accurate. Our predictions of stock vehicle performance for both the 2.4l and the 2.0l t were less than 1% off of actual vehicle performance for 1/4 mile and 0-60. The change in performance for the Performance Upgrade was very accurate as well. In fact, it is very possible to get significant variation on a chassis dyno that may not translate properly to a drag strip, so one must treat dyno information with great care. I have expressed this following thought to people I have met where we have had great discussions and seen it repeated from time to time: what really matters for true performance is when the car is driven, not what a dyno says and not what it feels like. 30 dyno hp and 80 dyno ft-lbs do not do you any good if they do not shave off several tenths of a second on the drag strip.
Powertrain does run certified tests on the engines to get the curves. I assume this is where the power/torque ratings come from.
Look at the stock torque plot, then plot the two new points. It looks like the engine continues up the curve on the low end to the 340 ft lb torque, then must roll off earlier to meet the necessary torque at the peak power point.
I do agree with this information, however, you even said yourself alot of what numbers you see on a dyno have alot to do with equipment, set up, conditions and just general knowledge of the equipment.
Kilpatricks has been dyno tuning cars since the late 80's and the Dynojet 424x is a reputable dyno. The day my runs were made it was low humidity, about 69 degrees in the shop and the car was at FOT. Just a little food for thought I guess...