2018 Dyno discussion

Since this ends up covered in EVERY dyno thread It may be easier to move all the talk into one thread so not to mess up the conversations others are having with the talk of over/under rating.

We know that not all dynos are equal.
We know that weather and DA effect numbers.
We know if a dogs farts in the wind in Nebraska can effect numbers in Florida.

That said. Based on my own observations of all the dynos I have found here and YouTube so far THIS is what I PERSONALLY find the most likely case in expaaining the 2018's numbers.

1. SAE allows 1% variance.
2. 465-1% is 460 (the advertised number Ford chose, if Ford is not allowed to advertise the lower end of the SAE ratings please let me know)
3. 465+1% is 470 (closer to what most people are getting when you factor in the proper drivetrain loss of 10-12%)

No one has posted a reliable number hinting that the engine is making over 470 without taking into account the older weather/sea level, ect.

The cars are NOT under rated, they are just Under advertised, and Ford is trying to keep engines in the upper end of their SAE rating allowance.

All dynos have been mostly in the 413.5-423.5whp range which is in line with the 10-12% loss estimate for manual and auto. Some people have been a bit higher, but also in 30-40* weather.

If you have some counter oints, or find a flaw in my math please feel free to point it out, but as I said, looking around this is what I feel is most likley going on.

bluebeastsrt said:

I think the engines are doing exactly what they are supposed to do. And some on here are just losing their minds. 490-500+!!! Really?

Click to expand...

I agree, and to be fair the only one saying that high was told that by LMR that even stated their poor math in his video. I don't blame him for quoting them, but I do blame the shop for the bad math using the old like 17% conversion. Assuming the speaker was an employee at the shop.

His dyno was a little on the high side, but it was also very cold out and hes likely very close to sea level being in NJ. I have a feeling his number would be more in line if they were redone in spring.

TBH I don't really care about how much power the engine is making at the crank, all that matters is how much power you can put to the ground, i.e. WHP and not BHP.

DukeGaGa said:

TBH I don't really care about how much power the engine is making at the crank, all that matters is how much power you can put to the ground, i.e. WHP and not BHP.

Click to expand...

Same, it doesn't really matter IMO. I just get annoyed when people spout off completely inaccurate facts. I'd rather prevent a person from sounding like an idiot in front of a group of people if I can.

Speaking of different numbers

[ame]

[ame]

Both seem to be within the range I speculated. :-)

As long as everyone is using SAE correction the numbers should be similar. That being said we all know manipulating dyno numbers isn't difficult, I am not saying anybody did this, but numbers way outside the norm should raise some eyebrows. Mine made 420.63/389.27 SAE corrected which means the 460 number Ford is using is accurate. My STD corrected numbers were 431.78/399.59. I forget the uncorrected cold northeast numbers but they were slightly higher than that, 435/403 IIRC, but SAE is the best way to compare apples to apples so that is what I post.

UAmach1 said:

I agree, and to be fair the only one saying that high was told that by LMR that even stated their poor math in his video. I don't blame him for quoting them, but I do blame the shop for the bad math using the old like 17% conversion. Assuming the speaker was an employee at the shop.

His dyno was a little on the high side, but it was also very cold out and hes likely very close to sea level being in NJ. I have a feeling his number would be more in line if they were redone in spring.

Click to expand...

I think they would be more in line if they were just redone at another shop. This week.

Also need to go ahead and dispell the whole such and such 1/4 mile mph and such and such weight means such and such horsepower... The 10 spd throws that conventional thinking out the window. The cars that have run so far did not gain approx 3/4-1 second faster ET by the whopping supposed 25 hp increase. Since the A10 keeps the engine much closer to optimum peak power it is a whole new animal.

This ain't yer daddy's powerglide Chevelle. HEHE!

Jay-rod427 said:

Also need to go ahead and dispell the whole such and such 1/4 mile mph and such and such weight means such and such horsepower... The 10 spd throws that conventional thinking out the window. The cars that have run so far did not gain approx 3/4-1 second faster ET by the whopping supposed 25 hp increase. Since the A10 keeps the engine much closer to optimum peak power it is a whole new animal.

This ain't yer daddy's powerglide Chevelle. HEHE!

Click to expand...

I concur. The transmission is doing work. The new tires will show results once the car gets in the hands of seasoned racers. 25HP is generally worth 1/10 of a second on street cars.

Honestly I'm tired of stock dyno's, results are good but now let's see some tuned dyno's numbers. I especially can't wait to see a dyno actually hit the 7400 rpm limiter vs the 6800 due to the speed limiter. Hell let's see a few stock cars with the speed limiter turned off so we cN see true hp numbers. Could be another 5 to 10 hp hiding in that last 600 rpm.

Cardude99 said:

Honestly I'm tired of stock dyno's, results are good but now let's see some tuned dyno's numbers. I especially can't wait to see a dyno actually hit the 7400 rpm limiter vs the 6800 due to the speed limiter. Hell let's see a few stock cars with the speed limiter turned off so we cN see true hp numbers. Could be another 5 to 10 hp hiding in that last 600 rpm.

Click to expand...

Same. I'm eager to see how a car looks when its strapped to a dyno and have Lund left with it for a bit

How about an overlay graph of a 2017 and a 2018?

Would like to see the low end gains.