[Herr-Kuhn]

Good point RH. There is a reason I use the same machine every time I rerun these pulls. I've been given some grief for using Dynojet by some others as of late. The reasons I use Dynojet are as follows:

It's the most common dyno across the country therefore easy to compare to others.

Dynojets, unlike many other dynos do not allow you to set the correction factor, but rather only select between uncorrected, STD or SAE. Many other brands allow the operator to dial in the correction factor of the day. Trust me, I've seen this done time after time.

It's virtually impossible to get a true comparison between tests run on different machines. True story...when we built my brothers TT, I dynoed it on a Dyno Dynamics in 95F heat. The car made 400 WHP and 480 ft-lbs on 8 psi. Later he re-dynoed it with 2 psig more boost on a different dyno and got lower results. When I called the DD operator and asked him why that was he spilled his beans and told me that people were complaining about the numbers that day at the dyno showdown so he had "turned the correction factor up" that day.

I also heard that a supercharged car with a touted 596 HP on Dynacom dyno (when the "dynojet STD correction factor was applied") later was proven to have just north of 500 WHP when layed down on a Dynojet. It would take 4-5 extra psig to make 96 WHP.

One piece about all of this that bothers me is that people go and run their car on a certain machine, then state that "it would be at least 10% higher on a dynojet". If they are so concerned about the dynojet numbers, why not just find a dynojet machine and run the car on it? I thinks it's funny, because before there was competition out there people just used Dynojet and were flying their sheets. There's been a lot of dyno shopping as of late. I refuse to get into that.

Anyway, I'm done comparing numbers becasue there are too many variables at play with the dyno of the day being the largest variable. I believe my numbers are plausible given the setup on the car.