Dyno'd Today

[trussman]

did you use the same dyno that BADAMS9 used...that will explain the high hp number

We r nowhere near each other. I used the same dyno as my previous dyno. Also, when he was asked to provide video and the dyno sheet he never did. I have provided both. Proof doesn't mean jack to some people.

 

[Slitherbeast]

The there is one way your truck made this kind of torque and power and that is Nitrous oxide! there has not been one truck even close to your numbers with those mods! Either fess up to the use of nitrous or donot believe the dyno! it has malfunctioned!!!

 

[raymondwebb]

great pull man #s dont lie be proud!!!

 

[phxpoolguy]

We r nowhere near each other. I used the same dyno as my previous dyno. Also, when he was asked to provide video and the dyno sheet he never did. I have provided both. Proof doesn't mean jack to some people.

Thanks for posting video and a dynograph, but do you really believe your putting down 600 hp with just bolt ons and RP fluids? I dont believe you used spray because the torque would be alot higher, I do believe the dyno operator somehow screwed up. If the numbers are right you should be low 12's easy, good luck.

 

[ARRESTmeRed04]

With an elevation on 30ft above sea level and cold weather it's not that far fetched, if the dyno reads high on average combined with the weather It could happen. I dyno'd my truck when I first got it with nothing but rear cat delete, magnaflow catback, and drop in k&n filter it put down 486hp/525tq. Different dyno with more mods and it only put down 467hp/477tq. Just saying there are more factors than just the sct fluids and t stat.

 

[trussman]

Thanks for posting video and a dynograph, but do you really believe your putting down 600 hp with just bolt ons and RP fluids? I dont believe you used spray because the torque would be alot higher, I do believe the dyno operator somehow screwed up. If the numbers are right you should be low 12's easy, good luck.

It was 500 hp not 600. 609 was the tq. They may be slightly high but not outrageous. I am looking fwd to a good track day to prove the numbers to myself. I know if I post timeslips it won't matter anyways

 

[SANTEEN]

It was 500 hp not 600. 609 was the tq. They may be slightly high but not outrageous. I am looking fwd to a good track day to prove the numbers to myself. I know if I post timeslips it won't matter anyways

The 609 tq, is outrageous.

 

[viperhauler]

The 609 tq, is outrageous.

yep........

if that's the case, you should be running.... LOW 7's if you're a good driver.

post up the slips when you get them... that'll be the tell all...

and if it is the case?... i'm changing all my fluids out the next day...

sounds like a lil cam/headwork to get those numbers, or some juicy juice...

 

[505'sFastestViper.]

good pulls i put down 570 rwhp nat asp ....with lowr comp dont let these clowns discourage you!!! lots of head work sweet cam profile and stock stroke and bore!!!

 

[trussman]

yep........

if that's the case, you should be running.... LOW 7's if you're a good driver.

post up the slips when you get them... that'll be the tell all...

and if it is the case?... i'm changing all my fluids out the next day...

sounds like a lil cam/headwork to get those numbers, or some juicy juice...

You and I both know that 500 rwhp doesn't make a low 11 sec in the 1/4 or low 7's in the 1/8. I do hope to hit mid 12's on my street tires tho.

 

[phxpoolguy]

It was 500 hp not 600. 609 was the tq. They may be slightly high but not outrageous. I am looking fwd to a good track day to prove the numbers to myself. I know if I post timeslips it won't matter anyways

My bad, wrote that wrong, nice numbers if they hold up. Timeslips always matter, nobody can take sarcasm nowadays.

 

[trussman]

My bad, wrote that wrong, nice numbers if they hold up. Timeslips always matter, nobody can take sarcasm nowadays.

Thanks for the input. I hope to produce some decent timeslips in the next month or so IF the track decides to do prep-work, which is rare. It's a waste to try when they open the gates and say have fun. If I have a mid/low 12 I'll be a happy camper :vroam:

 

[phxpoolguy]

Thanks for the input. I hope to produce some decent timeslips in the next month or so IF the track decides to do prep-work, which is rare. It's a waste to try when they open the gates and say have fun. If I have a mid/low 12 I'll be a happy camper :vroam:

Sounds good, good luck and timeslips are ALL that matter, dyno numbers are for garage queens.

 

[trussman]

Unfortunately mine is more of a garage queen these days. I only run it once to twice a year.

 

[phxpoolguy]

I have 99k miles but only a few hundred in the past year, lol.

 

[trussman]

I'm at 66,500. I drive it on sunny saturdays now.

 

[SRT10VENOMOUS]

With an elevation on 30ft above sea level and cold weather it's not that far fetched, if the dyno reads high on average combined with the weather It could happen. I dyno'd my truck when I first got it with nothing but rear cat delete, magnaflow catback, and drop in k&n filter it put down 486hp/525tq. Different dyno with more mods and it only put down 467hp/477tq. Just saying there are more factors than just the sct fluids and t stat.

i agree that it could happen,, when i dynoed mine stock, i got a crazzy high number that was non sae corrected, it showed something similar to yours... i think it was a bit lower like 469 and 500..... im not sure how it showed those numbers but it did.. i thought i was king lol.. and then realized that something was up .. maybe it was that it was below 0 out in late fall and non sae around sea level.., not sure ..and i think it was a dyno jet which always read like 8% higher than a ture mustang dyno... so maybe add all those factors together and you get high readings.. who knows... but it still boils down to incorrect numbers no matter how you look at it... feels good until you realize somethings up and it cant be ture.. lol

 

[trussman]

i agree that it could happen,, when i dynoed mine stock, i got a crazzy high number that was non sae corrected, it showed something similar to yours... i think it was a bit lower like 469 and 500..... im not sure how it showed those numbers but it did.. i thought i was king lol.. and then realized that something was up .. maybe it was that it was below 0 out in late fall and non sae around sea level.., not sure ..and i think it was a dyno jet which always read like 8% higher than a ture mustang dyno... so maybe add all those factors together and you get high readings.. who knows... but it still boils down to incorrect numbers no matter how you look at it... feels good until you realize somethings up and it cant be ture.. lol

What's the corrected part on my dyno sheet mean?

 

[505'sFastestViper.]

corrected makes it all the same hence corrected

 

[trussman]

corrected makes it all the same hence corrected

Thanks. Thought that's what it meant