My first time on the 9sec9 site and
Dec 25, 2009, 12:08 PM
#1
My first time on the 9sec9 site and
Quoted from the 9se9 site
COBB's DYNO is DEAD NUTS ON with XXX MUSTANG DYNO, based on numbers and results.
Update: Same car, same parts, tuned on a well known LOW reading Mustang Dyno and the XXX car made 650 whp. That's less than 1% difference between the 3 Mustang Dynos. The car ran a 9.6 and 156 mph. Still think the Cobb reads ridiculously high. Read below for the rest of the comparison.
We've all heard "You can't compare data from one dyno to another, blah, blah, blah." In that same realm, I was chastised for comparing our FP Black Turbo results on Cobb's Mustang Dyno to our HTA86 results on another Mustang Dyno. We'll, lets take a close look at how close the Cobb Mustang Dyno REALLY is vs another Mustang Dyno and a PT6262 turbo. It won't take any imagination, just an intelligent review of the numbers and the results.
Known: Our car made 656 whp on Cobbs Mustang Dyno at 36 psi.
Known: XXX made 658 whp on their Mustang Dyno at 36-37 psi.
We used the FP BLack turbo, they used the PT-6262.
Both cars are very close in weight, probably within 30-50 lbs, based on quoted figures by XXX. We weighed just under 2700 lbs BEFORE adding a full cage, back seats, stock moustache bar, chute, chute mount, cables for power shutoff, window net, misc extra boost control items. We figure we weigh 2850 with driver now. The XXX car has all the same items, but has no back seat, DRY carbonfiber deck and hood and not sure about the moustache bar. They said it weighs 2885 with driver. The driver weighs 200 lbs, so that puts their car at 2685, we're at close to 2720. The XXX car is probably lighter, but we have a lighter driver (Thanks Tony). That's 35 lbs of total weight difference.
At this point, it should be said that the XXX car is possibly one of the cleanest, nicest builds on ANY race car. This is not about their car, nor our car. This is to show that you CAN compare data between dynos and be ACCURATE about it. Now, back to the comparison.
Specifically, I was called out about comparing different turbos, dyno'd on different days at different shops. Here we go: These two cars are nearly identical in weight. They both made within a couple of horsepower on Mustang Dynos, on different turbos, on different days.
The results don't lie.
We were told that there was no way that the Black made as much power as we had posted. We posted 686 whp @ 40.6 psi. We also posted that it made 656 @ 36 psi. NO WAY. Ha, ha, right!! At the SAME 36-37 psi on the PT 6262, XXX recorded 656 Mustang Dyno WHP and nothing was questioned. The results of that dyno run and tune? ET of 9.75 @ 150.00 mph. We also made 656 whp at 36 psi and recorded an ET of 9.53 @ 148.43 and 149.58 mph. Both cars were run by both drivers getting used to the new setup. Very similar setups, nearly identical results. Now, still think the Cobb Mustang Dyno reads ridiculously high. If it does, so do a lot of other dynos. By the way, there's a big difference between 10.14 @ 136 and 9.53 @ 149 mph. That difference is only made up with big differences in horsepower. There IS a weight difference, but not THAT MUCH. Next time someone says you can't compare...blah, blah, blah. We always said that the numbers were much closer than people realized. Now, the results speak for themselves. By the way, both cars had decent 60's. 1.53 for XXX, 1.56 for us. The power of the FP Black was real, just too much nutswinging for readers to get through the BS.
End result: The Cobb Mustang Dyno is dead on when comparing whp and results vs other Mustang Dyno's. The facts are the facts. It doesn't look like 'ridiculously high dynojet numbers any more, now does it.' Just another ridiculous statement from a slanted viewpoint.
Now I just want to add my 2 cents since it is our shop car they are comparing to theirs. This comparison is worthless and VERY misleading if you don't have all the facts.
First. I want to point out I have no problem with Tom or his crew as they have done nothing wrong to me.
Second. Our car went 9.6@156 with the same HP Tom put down on another mustang dyno. Seems the one Tom used read a bit higher then ours since he only trap 149.
Third. Our cars weigh in at just about the same thing and as Tom says, His makes the same amount of power. How can this be true? Even with Toms high tech AERO parts and a dogbox tranny they are still 7 MPH behind us?
I Just wanted to clear things up.
Thanks and have a merry xmas.
-Em
COBB's DYNO is DEAD NUTS ON with XXX MUSTANG DYNO, based on numbers and results.
Update: Same car, same parts, tuned on a well known LOW reading Mustang Dyno and the XXX car made 650 whp. That's less than 1% difference between the 3 Mustang Dynos. The car ran a 9.6 and 156 mph. Still think the Cobb reads ridiculously high. Read below for the rest of the comparison.
We've all heard "You can't compare data from one dyno to another, blah, blah, blah." In that same realm, I was chastised for comparing our FP Black Turbo results on Cobb's Mustang Dyno to our HTA86 results on another Mustang Dyno. We'll, lets take a close look at how close the Cobb Mustang Dyno REALLY is vs another Mustang Dyno and a PT6262 turbo. It won't take any imagination, just an intelligent review of the numbers and the results.
Known: Our car made 656 whp on Cobbs Mustang Dyno at 36 psi.
Known: XXX made 658 whp on their Mustang Dyno at 36-37 psi.
We used the FP BLack turbo, they used the PT-6262.
Both cars are very close in weight, probably within 30-50 lbs, based on quoted figures by XXX. We weighed just under 2700 lbs BEFORE adding a full cage, back seats, stock moustache bar, chute, chute mount, cables for power shutoff, window net, misc extra boost control items. We figure we weigh 2850 with driver now. The XXX car has all the same items, but has no back seat, DRY carbonfiber deck and hood and not sure about the moustache bar. They said it weighs 2885 with driver. The driver weighs 200 lbs, so that puts their car at 2685, we're at close to 2720. The XXX car is probably lighter, but we have a lighter driver (Thanks Tony). That's 35 lbs of total weight difference.
At this point, it should be said that the XXX car is possibly one of the cleanest, nicest builds on ANY race car. This is not about their car, nor our car. This is to show that you CAN compare data between dynos and be ACCURATE about it. Now, back to the comparison.
Specifically, I was called out about comparing different turbos, dyno'd on different days at different shops. Here we go: These two cars are nearly identical in weight. They both made within a couple of horsepower on Mustang Dynos, on different turbos, on different days.
The results don't lie.
We were told that there was no way that the Black made as much power as we had posted. We posted 686 whp @ 40.6 psi. We also posted that it made 656 @ 36 psi. NO WAY. Ha, ha, right!! At the SAME 36-37 psi on the PT 6262, XXX recorded 656 Mustang Dyno WHP and nothing was questioned. The results of that dyno run and tune? ET of 9.75 @ 150.00 mph. We also made 656 whp at 36 psi and recorded an ET of 9.53 @ 148.43 and 149.58 mph. Both cars were run by both drivers getting used to the new setup. Very similar setups, nearly identical results. Now, still think the Cobb Mustang Dyno reads ridiculously high. If it does, so do a lot of other dynos. By the way, there's a big difference between 10.14 @ 136 and 9.53 @ 149 mph. That difference is only made up with big differences in horsepower. There IS a weight difference, but not THAT MUCH. Next time someone says you can't compare...blah, blah, blah. We always said that the numbers were much closer than people realized. Now, the results speak for themselves. By the way, both cars had decent 60's. 1.53 for XXX, 1.56 for us. The power of the FP Black was real, just too much nutswinging for readers to get through the BS.
End result: The Cobb Mustang Dyno is dead on when comparing whp and results vs other Mustang Dyno's. The facts are the facts. It doesn't look like 'ridiculously high dynojet numbers any more, now does it.' Just another ridiculous statement from a slanted viewpoint.
Now I just want to add my 2 cents since it is our shop car they are comparing to theirs. This comparison is worthless and VERY misleading if you don't have all the facts.
First. I want to point out I have no problem with Tom or his crew as they have done nothing wrong to me.
Second. Our car went 9.6@156 with the same HP Tom put down on another mustang dyno. Seems the one Tom used read a bit higher then ours since he only trap 149.
Third. Our cars weigh in at just about the same thing and as Tom says, His makes the same amount of power. How can this be true? Even with Toms high tech AERO parts and a dogbox tranny they are still 7 MPH behind us?
I Just wanted to clear things up.
Thanks and have a merry xmas.
-Em
Last edited by EmeryatSTM; Dec 25, 2009 at 12:47 PM.
Dec 25, 2009, 03:07 PM
#6
Newbie
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: midsouth, TN
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<<really wished **** like this was an actual issue anywhere near west tn. lmao..
limited auto following ftl
although we have mellon...thats about it when it comes to evo competition
limited auto following ftl
although we have mellon...thats about it when it comes to evo competition
Dec 25, 2009, 05:23 PM
#9
Newbie
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Travis AFB, Cali
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To many things/variables he's trying to tie together to make his point IMO. I'd have to agree that the COBB dyno does seem to be a bit higher. Even the low reading MD's we have here in the Bay area (GST and FFTec) tend to differ by 10-15hp pretty easily.
Dec 26, 2009, 01:28 AM
#13
I think it was clear in his post that he was comparing the runs @ 36 psi of boost, in which you both ran w'in 0.5mph.
They didn't try their car at 41 psi yet so that's why he is not comparing it to your 156mph run.
Merry Christmas
They didn't try their car at 41 psi yet so that's why he is not comparing it to your 156mph run.
Merry Christmas
Dec 26, 2009, 09:07 AM
#15
At the SAME 36-37 psi on the PT 6262, XXX recorded 656 Mustang Dyno WHP and nothing was questioned. The results of that dyno run and tune? ET of 9.75 @ 150.00 mph. We also made 656 whp at 36 psi and recorded an ET of 9.53 @ 148.43 and 149.58 mph. Both cars were run by both drivers getting used to the new setup.[/b]
As it clearly says, the result of the 36psi boost run was 150mph. 156mph must have been achieved at higher boost then
