Dyno numbers for stock 3.0, 3.2, 3.6

[GaryR]

I'm playing with weights trying to see where my and a couple other's cars fit into the NASA GTS formulation. I haven't had a chance to Dyno mine so I wonder if anyone has run theirs recently. A friend just did his 3.2 (chipped/headers/open exhaust) and got 210HP/185 TQ . How does that compare to stock?

[Buckterrier]

Gary, stock 3.6 with 3.2 heat exchangers M&K sport exhaust from a 95' 993:
255RWHP/249TQ
Dyno'd at Auto Associates in Canton, Ct.

Boy those Alton Fuchs are nice aren't they??

[GaryR]

Originally Posted by Buckterrier

Gary, stock 3.6 with 3.2 heat exchangers M&K sport exhaust from a 95' 993:
255RWHP/249TQ
Dyno'd at Auto Associates in Canton, Ct.

Boy those Alton Fuchs are nice aren't they??

Thanks Mark, and yeah I am really enjoying the hell out of mine.....

[joetiii]

82 3.0 SC, PMO 40s, SSI, = 179 RWHP 183 ft lbs

[Roc Doc]

One thing to keep in mind that not all dyno's will return the same results all else equal. A competent operator, identical conditions and the same dyno should give a good comparison, but altitude, humidity, ambient temps all play into the equation.

[GaryR]

Originally Posted by Roc Doc

One thing to keep in mind that not all dyno's will return the same results all else equal. A competent operator, identical conditions and the same dyno should give a good comparison, but altitude, humidity, ambient temps all play into the equation.

Understood. I am just trying to figure out how certain cars can run in certain classes. An example would be Buckterriers stock 3.6 at 255/249. To run in NASA GTS2 against me it would have to weigh 3700LB to my 2650 (both including driver) with my SC at 180/180 (guesstimate of my HP/TQ). I'm not sure but I think there are 964's in GTS2.... I must be wrong because there is no way anyone would ballast their car up that much. NASA does require all use the same brand dyno, a Dynojet I believe, but obviously not the same shop.. Or maybe his engine is out of a 993, which would explain the increase over the stated 245 FWHP early 3.6's had?

I wasn't clear but I would like numbers from stock cars, i.e SC's from 78-83 (non-euro), Euro SC's, 84-89 3.2 Carerra's, 90-94 964's, and 95-98 993's for a general comparison.

Thanks!

[Roc Doc]

Hmmm, the unfair advantage? Dyno shops in Denver???

Seriously, I don't know how they're accounting for all the varaiables. Maybe NASA has a data base that they're using???

[Buckterrier]

Originally Posted by GaryR

Understood. I am just trying to figure out how certain cars can run in certain classes. An example would be Buckterriers stock 3.6 at 255/249. To run in NASA GTS2 against me it would have to weigh 3700LB to my 2650 (both including driver) with my SC at 180/180 (guesstimate of my HP/TQ). I'm not sure but I think there are 964's in GTS2.... I must be wrong because there is no way anyone would ballast their car up that much. NASA does require all use the same brand dyno, a Dynojet I believe, but obviously not the same shop.. Or maybe his engine is out of a 993, which would explain the increase over the stated 245 FWHP early 3.6's had?

I wasn't clear but I would like numbers from stock cars, i.e SC's from 78-83 (non-euro), Euro SC's, 84-89 3.2 Carerra's, 90-94 964's, and 95-98 993's for a general comparison.

Thanks!

It is from a 1995 993 Gary. And stock as far as I know. Scott was suprised also at the numbers. He said he generally gets 240-245 from these engines.

[911st]

Lots of dyno plots at ww.911chips.com.

My 3.2 w cat delete and chip at 215-217 rwhp.

Sounds like the keys to being competitive is going to be the motor with the widest power band, best gears, & weight to tire size.

[mmn710]

88 3.2 with: cat delete, muffler delete, K&N drop in, Steve Wong chip.....

228whp and 200tq

Dyno and WHP tread

[rberry951]

After spending 30something hours on the dyno, same car, same dyno, varying atmospheric conditions I saw peak numbers ranging from 198-238RWHP on a dyna-pak.

A dyno is a tuning tool, numbers will vary, this is a proven fact. Every day I would do a baseline on a stock tune and work from there. Gains measured from that baseline, that day, and had absolutely no bearing or correlation on the numbers from the other days.

That's just how it is.

[Steve W]

The numbers will depend on which brand of dyno you use. After dyno tuning hundreds of 911s on machines such as Mustangs, Dyna-packs, Dyno Dynamics, Superflow, Land&Sea, Dynojets, the most consistent numbers come from Dynojets, close enough that the same car dyno'd on one in Los Angeles will be within 3-4 hp SAE corrected of one in South Carolina. There's no operator alterable factors that can fudge, either accidentally or intentionally the HP and torque numbers, why many racing organizations use Dynojet numbers to classify cars. Given the same state of tune and chip program, I typically get hp and torque curves within 1-2 hp of each other between runs, even on different days. A 40 hp spread from a dyno is horrible resolution!!

The 210 rwhp numbers you quote sounds like a Dynojet number for a 3.2 and if so, is not bad for headers and an open exhaust on pump gas - 217-221 would be better. Well tuned 3.6s with headers and a racing exhaust typically come in between 250-263 rwhp SAE on a Dynojet. Divide the above rwhp numbers by 0.89 or 0.88 to get the approximate engine HP as Porsche would rate it.

[Bill Verburg]

Originally Posted by Steve W

The numbers will depend on which brand of dyno you use. After dyno tuning hundreds of 911s on machines such as Mustangs, Dyna-packs, Dyno Dynamics, Superflow, Land&Sea, Dynojets, the most consistent numbers come from Dynojets, close enough that the same car dyno'd on one in Los Angeles will be within 3-4 hp SAE corrected of one in South Carolina. There's no operator alterable factors that can fudge, either accidentally or intentionally the HP and torque numbers, why many racing organizations use Dynojet numbers to classify cars. Given the same state of tune and chip program, I typically get hp and torque curves within 1-2 hp of each other between runs, even on different days. A 40 hp spread from a dyno is horrible resolution!!

The 210 rwhp numbers you quote sounds like a Dynojet number for a 3.2 and if so, is not bad for headers and an open exhaust on pump gas - 217-221 would be better. Well tuned 3.6s with headers and a racing exhaust typically come in between 250-263 rwhp SAE on a Dynojet. Divide the above rwhp numbers by 0.89 or 0.88 to get the approximate engine HP as Porsche would rate it.

Steve does the Dynojet not require the operator to input gear ratios and tire sizes? It's been my experience that is one place that greatly affects the results, intentionally or not.

[911st]

Bill, I belive it computes it based on rpm and roller speed.

[GaryR]

Here is one for a 3.2, Steve Wong chip (about 8 years ago AFAIK), B&B headers, open exhaust. Weird drop around 5K, what could cause that?

[Steve W]

Originally Posted by Bill Verburg

Steve does the Dynojet not require the operator to input gear ratios and tire sizes? It's been my experience that is one place that greatly affects the results, intentionally or not.

No, there is no input for that, or any other inputs for that matter. We've also tried running cars in fourth vs. third and there's almost no difference in the power and torque curves - within 3-4 hp which is within the tolerance changes that occur as the engine heats up from run to run or exhaust fumes accumulate around the cell area if it is not well ventilated.

Originally Posted by GaryR

Here is one for a 3.2, Steve Wong chip (about 8 years ago AFAIK), B&B headers, open exhaust. Weird drop around 5K, what could cause that?

Not sure on that drop, but it could be from an sudden AFR change right at 5200 - would have to see the AFR chart to determine that. However the drop is so abrupt, and continues quite smoothly, it appears almost as if the full throttle microswitch is not activating, or possibly on edge so that right at 5200, the shift in the engine under load is just enough for the linkage to change the engagement of it, having the tune go to part throttle.

[rberry951]

Originally Posted by Steve W

The numbers will depend on which brand of dyno you use. After dyno tuning hundreds of 911s on machines such as Mustangs, Dyna-packs, Dyno Dynamics, Superflow, Land&Sea, Dynojets, the most consistent numbers come from Dynojets, close enough that the same car dyno'd on one in Los Angeles will be within 3-4 hp SAE corrected of one in South Carolina. There's no operator alterable factors that can fudge, either accidentally or intentionally the HP and torque numbers, why many racing organizations use Dynojet numbers to classify cars. Given the same state of tune and chip program, I typically get hp and torque curves within 1-2 hp of each other between runs, even on different days. A 40 hp spread from a dyno is horrible resolution!!

My point was indeed that dyno numbers will vary. I like when people that I cannot access directly do runs on dynojets so they can send me the runfile, then with the WinPep software I can scale the hp/tq/afr curves in a resolution that shows me the detail in any format, or even in speed, and/or time. All useful TUNING information. When I stated 30something hours on the dynapack, I was only referring to my own 911. I've been tuning cars on streets and dynos for many years now.

I chose the dyna-pack because it takes the wheels out of the equation, and they actually tend to give the most realistic and consistent numbers of any of the other makes I've ever dealt with. I can cause any roller based machine to change output by changing the tire pressure. An operator or anyone else can also use the winpep software to display the run in many ways, and manipulate many variables. Dynojets tend to read higher than other dynos, just as Mustand dynos do. In fact, the Mustang dyno has a 'dynojet' setting to emulate a dynojet, and it will indeed yield a higher output number.

While a good dyno will indeed do proper SAE correction if told to, that doesn't negate the fact that the car does not produce the same power and have the same volumetric efficiency on a 45 degree low humidity day as it does in 90 degrees with 80% humidity. I don't think anyone will argue that.

Regards,
Russell

[unclebilly]

a 964 with driver could well weigh close to 3700 lbs. my 90 c4 targa weighs 3300 lbs without driver.

[VFR750]

In 2005 my stock 1982 US 3.0 measured:

155 WHP --> 180 hp at the crank (assuming 14% driveline loss) .

The window sticker says 172 hp.

164 ft-lb at the wheel = 191 ft-lbs at the crank.

[dean]

Originally Posted by rberry951

my point was indeed that dyno numbers will vary. Dynojets tend to read higher than other dynos,

+1