04 GTO on a Mustang Dyno...

Discussion in 'American Cars' started by 84FordMan, Sep 11, 2004.

  1. 238.4 RWHP and 233.2 ft-lbs. WTF is up with that?
  2. Oh yeah, picture was from Wagner Motorsport in York, PA, it was dyno day for a bunch of clubs.
  3. A ton of power lost. Still goes 0-60 in 5.3
  4. Weird. I doubt it.
  5. That's 177.774849 seems a tad low but nothing bizzare really.
  6. That's 177kw seems a tad low but nothing bizzare really.
  7. What the?
  8. Look away Chris, it's too much for your young eyes to take.
  9. its a little low but not by much really. should be up near 190-200 at the back wheels
  10. Over 30% drivetrain power loss is a lot more than normal. 84fordman, do you know if the car was tested in any other ways to verify that it was performing normally, and not experiencing some kind of problem?
  11. Well, Mustang Dyno for one... but that still seems extremely low.
  12. It's pretty regular on Commodores. Case in point HSV GTS Coupe, 300kw and it pulls up with 220 or so rwkw. In another test it got 230rwkw.
  13. That's still a bit less precentage than the loss here. Oh well, I guess they don't have a very efficient drivetrain.
  14. Would 19" wheels have anything to do with it on a dyno?
  15. Damn...I wanted to get a GTO but now I sure will waite for the new 6.0L
  16. On the dyno or anywhere else.
  17. i thought it was supposed to be producing about the same as a Camaro SS.

  18. This reminds me of when Sport Compact Car put a new Ranger on a dyno. On one dyno is read 170 hp to the wheels, on one it read 134 hp to the wheels, one read 160, and one read 103.5 hp to the wheels. I doubt this means it's making any less than 350 hp.
  19. Dyno conditions, it accounts for a ton of power descrepancy between dynos.

    That or he pulled a Jay and bent his pushrods :p
  20. Doubt what?? How do you doubt what a dyno say? The only thing you should doubt is how they tested it. As in the people
  21. why has just about every dyno of a 6 ive seen been low?
  22. 20% loss is what I see in the manuals. The automatic tranny sucks alot of power, Maxima owners who have the same Jatco 5-spd auto will agree with that. Nearly sucks as much power as my old C6 did.

    Luckily though it is very easily built to 500HP tolerances and mated with an LSD.
  23. i guess so. even ATX SHOs with 100k+ miles will pull a mid 17X if its healthy.
  24. Fellas...it's a Mustang Dyno...not a Dyno Jet...a Mustang dyno is more restrictive on the car than a dyno jet.

    I personally don't dig the Mustang Dyno and really don't know exactly the details as in difference but I know it's big.

    My buddy with the twin turbo Collector's Edition WS6 dynoed his car at like 550hp on a Mustang Dyno, and he was running 9.8's with 136mph trapspeeds...I'm sure if you put 2 and 2 together if 550 was done on a dyno jet you wouldn't be getting 9's. <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/pitlane/emoticons/wink.gif"></A>
  25. A chassis dyno isn`t gospel. Power output can vary 15-20% high or low very easily. The internal sensors (ie optical RPM readers) are not perfect. You also have to consider they run through an algorithm for correction factors....which again are an average. They don`t adjust for such factors as differing induction designs, engine designs, etc. Correction factors are one of the biggest reasons I`ve never really been a big fan of chassis dynos....people get pumped up about them way too much.

    The only thing a chassis dyno is really good for is telling you from one run to another how much your output has changed.....as long as you are on the same dyno each run.

Share This Page