Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Chris, post: 471029, member: 400"] In my opinion Dynojets are more accurate from one to another and to real world results. Now there are tons of variables that can make numbers differ, but they seem to be more repeatable from one dynojet to another, as opposed from mustang to mustang. I dont have much info on mustangs, as we have a dynojet. There are 2 popular models of dynojets, 248s and 224s. the 248 was an inertia only dyno with a 48 inch drum. the drum had a good mass to it and calculated hp pretty much exactly how you described, measuring how fast you could spin the drum at different speeds. the 224 replaced the 248 and has a 24 inch drum. it can be used as a intertia dyno, or can have a eddy current load cell. We have a 224xlc, which is an extra width and load celled 224. we can vary the load for trucks that have large turbos that dont want tos pool or wont spool all the way. the dyno corrects its readings for the load placed on it and in my opinion the numbers are quite accurate. the dynojet doesnt care about gear selection. when you have the tach pickup on the front to pick up rpm it will actually calculate gear ratios even if you have a downshift or upshift and run through 2 gears and ask what one you want to chart. now it doesnt know enough to get rid of the actual spike a gear change could have made but the graph still comes out right and its up to the operator to decipher around the shift spike, if there is one. im not sure about a mustang dyno needing to be 1:1. So that being said, and i may be biased, but i prefer the dynojet with a load cell. I know brian at BTS has the same dyno and loves his as well. it is a very useful tuning tool, and diagnostic tool. [/QUOTE]