CX,
I don't think that DJ hides the problems at all. That DJet plot clearly needs tuning...You're right that's its not as obvious as the DPack... scrunch that Djet rpm scale up like the DPack and it will look more exagerated like your favorite DPack does....
It isn't the same run they're close, the red run showed a lot smoother on the dynojet, it always does, period, have you ever actually used a dynapack ? If you haven't how do you know how well its doing ?
i've got super smooth lines on a dynojet that show problems on dynapacks, its the difference for an inertia dyno vs not, its just basic physics, it does not scrunch up the same, way more repeatable too, much easier to steady state and most dj's don't even have steady state capabilities either.
The reason the Djet is the gold standard is because the software is available for customers to work with (they can take the DRF home after the run), the DJet is much more abundant (cheaper), and it seems to be more consistant across the country (afterall it's just rolling ballast)... From what I've seen/read on the web (and exhaustive threads on this forum), many DPacks show higher numbers than the 'ol rolling road DJet... I guess you have a DPack you use that breaks that trend???... So it's ambiguous at best... who cares unless you're trying to compare power...
mostly incorrect, the dynojet is popular because its cheap and widely available. the dynapack also has viewer software you can take your runs home and view them on your pc. we tried to explain to you in a different thread why the dynapack shows like it doesm but i'm guessing it'll never get through.
There is no trend, you're the one that mostly pushes the info that the dynapak always shows higher, it just doesn't do that at all, its an entirely different type of dyno, i don't know how else to explain this to you , there is no reading higher, its a different measurement, and depending on which dynapack and software revision you're using as well as a dozen other things including how the operator sets up the dyno software calibration. I use three different dynapacks regularly, two read low, one reads slightly higher.
i think the reason you call the dynojet a gold standard, is likely because thats what you have available to you and what lots of other people use, doesn't make it good though, just popular and most importantly CHEAP.
i have been to a lot of dynos, mustangs, dynojets, dynapacks and they're all different, one of the reason you see big differences between some dynapacks is because they're revised the software and hardware a lot so people have different machines, again why i always say only compare runs on the same dyno with baselines, not from dyno to dyno and pointless between different manufacturers.
i posted both the dynojet and the dynapack sheets, they're similar power wise.
[/quote]
Good power on Will's car there... Glad all the work payed off... That IC is the key on the setup as it's going to be working its tail off with a 2.4" pulley on a M62. HOT... add enough radiators, and it will work...
i dunno who will is, The temps weren't bad at all, we're making excellent power on the a2a's too.
