Well I finally did it. I took my car down to the shop and got it dynoed. I only get three runs in so i made them worth while.

1st run: stock intake system&94oct (98.4whp&99.7wtq)

2nd run: stock intake box removed useless runner near hood&94oct (100.7whp&102.0wtq)

3rd run: AEM Short ram&94oct (102.7whp&101.2wtq)

These were just done this morning. These numbers are from a Mustang Dynometer. These are a conservative dyno machine.

Pretty happy that I at least broke 100whp&100wtq. Now that I have a baseline number I can see the numbers when i'm finally done with my project.
My goal is to get the JSpec Cam&MazdaSpeed cam, Bosal 4-2-1 header and a completly cat-less exhaust system up and running when the snow is all melted.



Thanks to Chris Tapp. Check out the link...he has some crazy-*** project cars.

www.tappauto.com

 

I certainly hope that dyno was very conservative. A 25% drivetrain loss (average loss of hp and torque, stock) on a manual FWD is unacceptable.

 

Automatic or manual transmission?

 

It was with a 5spd transmission. I think that 25% drivetrain loss is average. My friend dynoed his VW Golf 1.8t claimed power 180hp he got 144whp on the exact same dyno. His is a 5spd transmission as well. If you have better dyno numbers or have seen better ones let me know......i think its seems to be a alright amount....I'm taking a guess.

 

15% drivetrain loss on a FWD manual tranny is considered the norm. My '99 dyno'd at 102.8whp and 105.0wtq, from 120hp and 120 lb-ft at the crank. That's 13.2% average. Click here for the dyno scan. This dyno may have been too optimistic but it is well known the FP's get about the same whp (or slightly better) than the FS's. It seems the G15M-R tranny is less efficient than the F25M-R.

FYI, your friend's Golf 1.8T loss 20% on that dyno.

 

What happened to torgue? It' strange to see anything below 110 lb ft on 2.0 liter. I got 104whp/110.6 lb/ft on 87 gas with open air box. OK dyno's cannot be compared by I would expect to have higher torgue figure. Was it dynojet ?

Alex

 

Your dyno came in low because you used 94 octane fuel. Your engine is designed to run on 87 octane fuel. 94 octane is for high-compression engines and won't burn as effeciently in a low compression engine. Try it again with 87.

 

It was a mustang dyno...of course the numbers are low...

Had a guy dyno his S/C Si here on a Mustang Dyno netted 191whp...on an Abacus he netted 230whp.

 

one of these days i'll ahve to get my pro5 dyno'd from your guy....be interesting what i get with my setup