LOL, this thread is sooooooooooo OT. Good thing since the original point of the thread was bullshit anyway.
As a full blooded descendant from Europe (France, Spain, Italy), yes I am white American, I resent that shit. I kicked those stereotypes (Asian and Indian), in almost every engineering class I took...including graduate school. Graduate school was the worse shit. They tried bumming answers from us, to make themselves look good.
LOL, this thread is sooooooooooo OT. Good thing since the original point of the thread was bullshit anyway.
I'm holding back what I do for a living and throwing out the advanced degree card (hint, all of my degrees are in engineering and fields that require advanced mathematics). I've learned how to spot when a measuring tool fails by trend analysis.
I'd rather keep it civil but I'm at the point I don't care what pace says about the dyno. Some people just don't understand.
I'm a Chemical Engineer (B.S.) and Computer Science (M.S. and Ph.D).
I'm doomed to geekdom
No you haven't. You're the only one here with your opinion. If a tach read isn't placed on the car properly, or comes loose that alone can cause the torque figure to miscalculate throwing off the entire run.
All you're doing is quoting equations you don't even understand from wikipedia lol.
I understand them quite well
When others have broken down this dyno run apart and have all chalked it up to an error on the dyno. Get over it, it happens. Even if the dyno showed him making 650hp/655tq, the ratio of the peaks is incorrect.
Ratio of the peaks? As in ratio of peak hp/peak tq?
You're not using any kind of fact, all you are doing is taking a bad/unvalidated number and using it as your constant. I'm glad you're not in any type of engineering field.
Seer are you saying that the math always works out like that for torque and hp? Seems like the math rarely works out like that with the dyno graphs I've seen.
100% of the time. IIRC dynos measure tq and the use the formula to extrapolate hp (or vice-versa).
hp = (tq*rpm)/5252
note that at 5252 rpm hp and tq will ALWAYS be =
ALWAYS... it's physics
I just used the information given from the dyno chart and plugged it into the formula. I assumed the HP@RPM=TQ@RPM all values being equal and given, and we all seem to agree the TQ numbers are off. But hey, we all passed algebra in high school...
it's not far off.. but that dyno is wonkey lol.
I had a run when I plugged in my ghost cam tune, that it shook the tach read off mid run, so for some odd reason it showed me making 415rwhp at 16,000 rpm. So, it couldn't give me an accurate TQ calc.
new thread title:
My #8 goes bye bye and who know's why - OP runs and hides
O RLY?
I'm willing to bet you didn't take any classes on how dynos work based on all the misinformation and double-talk you continue to spew forth.
I am using the only printed numbers on the graph sheet and using the formula to figure the respective hp/tq. You are guessing at a point on a graph with no hard lines.
Me = fact
You = guess
It doesn't show hp without tq. Dynos measure tq.
Really? This is because of an improper tach read. I just see HP, and no torque. Want to know why? The tach read came loose, and did not capture rpm properly to display the torque. So you're wrong again.
As far as programming dynos? No. My Doctoral studies were in Computer Science, specializing in Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence. I would say, what that entails is a lot more complex than an elementary physics calculation a dyno does.
So educate me here; how did the dyno figure the hp if it had no rpm data? Do you know how dynos calculate hp? You can also choose to show only hp or tq, and plot it along the x-axis using mph or rpm. How do you think that dyno plotted the mph?
Shouldn't you be selling people cars and creating loans that turn a $15,000 car into a $700/mo for 84 months type of deal?
Actually as the GM I just make sure I have people doing that
It did register torque, but it showed I spun the engine to 16,000 rpm on a different graph, which made it unusable. Hence that entire graph was flawed.
You keep thinking dynos are perfect, if they receive an improper input they can in fact give you a flawed number.
I agree that the numbers can be flawed, HOWEVER, respective hp/tq are not.
cliff notes anyone?
It did register torque, but it showed I spun the engine to 16,000 rpm on a different graph, which made it unusable. Hence that entire graph was flawed.
You keep thinking dynos are perfect, if they receive an improper input they can in fact give you a flawed number.
Thats where we disagree, they are not respective in this case.
So educate me here; how did the dyno figure the hp if it had no rpm data? Do you know how dynos calculate hp? You can also choose to show only hp or tq, and plot it along the x-axis using mph or rpm. How do you think that dyno plotted the mph? If it showed 16000 rpm wouldn't the mph be much higher?
Proof?
Wow, no.O RLY?
I'm willing to bet you didn't take any classes on how dynos work based on all the misinformation and double-talk you continue to spew forth.
I am using the only printed numbers on the graph sheet and using the formula to figure the respective hp/tq. You are guessing at a point on a graph with no hard lines.
Me = fact
You = guess
It doesn't show hp without tq. Dynos measure tq.
OP's number 8 cylinder goes to cylinder heaven. No one knows why, but he had 3 different tunes in the car. He doesnt know which one does it so he just assumes lund did it. Well after about 40 pages of finger pointing s197GT posts his dyno graph. All s197forum engineers start to examine and do dynograph analysis. pacettr says the s197 engineers are wrong. More finger pointing ensues and s197 engineers are now on a vendetta against pacettr.