The Diesel Garage banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
619 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Got to play a little on the rollers today

#2 run 449 HP and 784 TQ

#2 and 1st shot of NOS 573 HP and 918 TQ

#2 and 2nd shot of NOS 639 HP and 985 TQ

CLAYTON DYNO

GENE
 

·
The Big Meanie
Joined
·
5,220 Posts
:Thumbup: :Thumbup: :Thumbup: :Thumbup: :Thumbup: :Thumbup:



kevin
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
Way to go Gene, looks like you need some air. :HappyMugs

How accurate do you think that dyno was, never heard of a Clayton before.
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
2,612 Posts
nice #'s
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,645 Posts
Weweld said:
Got to play a little on the rollers today

#2 run 449 HP and 784 TQ

#2 and 1st shot of NOS 573 HP and 918 TQ

#2 and 2nd shot of NOS 639 HP and 985 TQ

CLAYTON DYNO

GENE
:confused: Gene, shouldn't the 639 run have had a higher torque number?
Or am I missing something here?

--Scott
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
359 Posts
partsguy662 said:
:confused: Gene, shouldn't the 639 run have had a higher torque number?
Or am I missing something here?

--Scott
I was thinking of the same thing. good numbers Gene.:Thumbup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,870 Posts
partsguy662 said:
:confused: Gene, shouldn't the 639 run have had a higher torque number?
Or am I missing something here?

--Scott
It was obviously that HP at a higher RPM.
Let see if I can get this right.

639(hp) = ?(RPM) x 985(tq) / 5252 =
639 = (X) (.18754) =
X = 639 / .18754 =
X(rpms) = 3407.27

As opposed to the 573hp 918tq run which would be:

573 = (RPM) x 918 / 5252 =
573 = (RPM) (.17479) =
(RPM) = 573 / .17479 =
RPMs = 3278.21

What I mean to illustrate by this is that the only way the 639 run would've had a higher tq number proportionally is if it was at the same or lower rpms proportionally.
Was that the RPMs Gene, or did I make a total booboo somewhere?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,645 Posts
LocoMotion said:
It was obviously that HP at a higher RPM.
Let see if I can get this right.

639(hp) = ?(RPM) x 985(tq) / 5252 =
639 = (X) (.18754) =
X = 639 / .18754 =
X(rpms) = 3407.27

As opposed to the 573hp 918tq run which would be:

573 = (RPM) x 918 / 5252 =
573 = (RPM) (.17479) =
(RPM) = 573 / .17479 =
RPMs = 3278.21

What I mean to illustrate by this is that the only way the 639 run would've had a higher tq number proportionally is if it was at the same or lower rpms proportionally.
Was that the RPMs Gene, or did I make a total booboo somewhere?
yep, that makes sense....(If that is the explanation, that is)
Thanks for writing that out Loco, I didn't get out my formulas to do the calculations....:Thumbup:
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
619 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
LocoMotion said:
It was obviously that HP at a higher RPM.
Let see if I can get this right.

639(hp) = ?(RPM) x 985(tq) / 5252 =
639 = (X) (.18754) =
X = 639 / .18754 =
X(rpms) = 3407.27

As opposed to the 573hp 918tq run which would be:

573 = (RPM) x 918 / 5252 =
573 = (RPM) (.17479) =
(RPM) = 573 / .17479 =
RPMs = 3278.21

What I mean to illustrate by this is that the only way the 639 run would've had a higher tq number proportionally is if it was at the same or lower rpms proportionally.
Was that the RPMs Gene, or did I make a total booboo somewhere?
The RPM's were 3613 on the 639 run and 3604 on the 573 run.

You were close , the reason for the low RPM's is we had the program in for the drag strip which shifts lower to go faster. It sounds strange but it works for us.

GENE
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
2,126 Posts
Sounds strange? Aren't you just staying in the engine's power curver better?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,870 Posts
Gene, given the hp formula, there's no way this can be, please explain.
I'm not questioning you, just trying to learn.
Is it the error margin of the dyno or tach, both?
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
619 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Don't have a scanner here

They just captured 4th gear , as we forgot to get the dyno tune to lock out 5th gear. Not sure how well that works but thats all we could do.

GENE
 

·
Got Torque?
Joined
·
2,577 Posts
LocoMotion said:
Gene, given the hp formula, there's no way this can be, please explain.
I'm not questioning you, just trying to learn.
Is it the error margin of the dyno or tach, both?
Could it be affected by the timing of the nitrous shots? Because from Gene's post, the peak power came at almost exactly the same RPM, which tells me something is off somewhere. The HP to torque formula does not change, but something is weird here. I would have expected north of 1100 ft pounds.

RL
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top