churches dyna pack vs raceline dyno jet. My results
#21
This is an old, but good read. Dynojets can be just as inaccurate as any other dyno. All dynos rely on trained personnel and up-to-date calibration.
http://www.turbomagazine.com/tech/03...h/viewall.html
With that said, there is a good reason why OEMs use load bearing dynos like Superflow, Dynapack, Mustang, Rototest, and Mainline Dynolog.
Tim
http://www.turbomagazine.com/tech/03...h/viewall.html
With that said, there is a good reason why OEMs use load bearing dynos like Superflow, Dynapack, Mustang, Rototest, and Mainline Dynolog.
Tim
http://www.motoiq.com/magazine_artic...lieve-one.aspx
#22
I would let them have a go at tuning it. Just by looking at the graph it is obvious something is wrong. You're graph should be very smooth especially with the smoothing on 5. It is also possible that Churches was using your wideband to tune with which could be wrong. When we tune we use Innovate widebands because we have found them to be the most accurate. I have found many AEM gauges reading very far off in customers cars before. I've even replaced my own sensors and re-calibrated just to be sure. In our experience AEM is the least reliable of the wideband controllers.
It's really no surprise at all about the power difference though. We use a Superflow and it would read even lower than the Dynojet.
It's really no surprise at all about the power difference though. We use a Superflow and it would read even lower than the Dynojet.
#24
From what I've gathered, the closer the o2 sensor is to the engine, the more accurate of a reading your going to get. Having an end of the pipe sniffer compared to an in-line sniffer, I'm gonna put my money on the latter being more accurate, all else equal. To make things even more complicated, some people consider just one wideband to be insufficient as each cylinder is going to have slightly different AFRs, the wideband 99% of us have just read a mixture of all 4 cylinders, so as far as we know, 2 cylinders could be stoich, one could be super rich and the last dangerously lean, and our o2 sensors would be reading 14.7.
If your truly worried about it, I would just pick up a new wideband, pop it in and see what it says. If it reads 11s, you'll have peace of mind, a new wideband and you can sell your perfectly working old sensor.
If your truly worried about it, I would just pick up a new wideband, pop it in and see what it says. If it reads 11s, you'll have peace of mind, a new wideband and you can sell your perfectly working old sensor.
#26
I would let them have a go at tuning it. Just by looking at the graph it is obvious something is wrong. You're graph should be very smooth especially with the smoothing on 5. It is also possible that Churches was using your wideband to tune with which could be wrong. When we tune we use Innovate widebands because we have found them to be the most accurate. I have found many AEM gauges reading very far off in customers cars before. I've even replaced my own sensors and re-calibrated just to be sure. In our experience AEM is the least reliable of the wideband controllers.
It's really no surprise at all about the power difference though. We use a Superflow and it would read even lower than the Dynojet.
It's really no surprise at all about the power difference though. We use a Superflow and it would read even lower than the Dynojet.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post