khuebner250
Well-Known Member
I've seen the same all over the interwebs. Anywhere from 250-256@50. I always thought it was 252@50.Yep. Know several guys who have measured it.
Comes out around 255 and change @50
I've seen the same all over the interwebs. Anywhere from 250-256@50. I always thought it was 252@50.Yep. Know several guys who have measured it.
Comes out around 255 and change @50
I've seen the same all over the interwebs. Anywhere from 250-256@50. I always thought it was 252@50.
My 410 seemed to not be bothered by the 1 5/8 hedmans till up in the r's. However...the tti's let it pull to the moon.Impressive. And with dinky headers too!
Great job
Sound about right.Last mp557 cam i degreed in a few months ago...was 258 @ .050......
I also question the double adjustment for elevation...confusing.
but its a dyno sheet...not an ET slip...
Thanks, that's why I asked. Was seeing all kinds of contradictory information on that cam. That dyno graph looks pretty much exactly what I hope to achieve in my build and it sounds like you'll pick up a bit with your final configuration. Now I can start focusing my parts procurement efforts.
I'm looking forward to the trick flow intake for sure. Even though it's a square bore copy of the M1 that I have. It won't have been molested by me, I think I screwed up that intake I have. I don't know why, just a feeling I have.
540 hp is solid. Will make a quick street car.
Where did you have it dyno'ed? Just curious....I grew up in Colorado, and I used to by parts from a small shop called US Performance in Fort Collins back in the late 90's (Scott McBroom owned it)...not sure if he is still in business or not.
Uncorrected! dyno's onsite weather station
5200 foot elevation
91* today
30 inhg
510hp/520tq
I checked his weather station against the national weather service. His said 29.9 and NWS showed 30.0. Here's the page from the NOAA. You would know more than me.I’m sure this will be opening up a can of worms...... but.....
If the dyno is sitting at 5200’ elevation.....the observed barometric pressure at the dyno shop was not 30”........ it would have been more like 24.50-25.00”....... which is a pretty huge difference.
30” could have been the “corrected” barometric pressure........ which is what the pressure would be if you were at sea level.
But that’s not a number that's used for any of the normal SAE corrections.
LOVELAND!!....yeah, sorry (my bad), I've been gone for quite a few years now and I confused Loveland and Ft Collins, lol. I was getting my undergrad @ UNC (Greeley) when I used to frequent that shop.Had it Dyno'd at AMS in FTC. US is in Loveland now but I don't think Scott is affiliated anymore, know sure.
Yes, this is where I was heading above about possibly correcting for altitude twice. The uncorrected BP at that altitude is ~24", ~30" is sea level. (see link below with both uncorrected and corrected at Bandimere).I’m sure this will be opening up a can of worms...... but.....
If the dyno is sitting at 5200’ elevation.....the observed barometric pressure at the dyno shop was not 30”........ it would have been more like 24.50-25.00”....... which is a pretty huge difference.
30” could have been the “corrected” barometric pressure........ which is what the pressure would be if you were at sea level.
But that’s not a number that's used for any of the normal SAE corrections.
“Uncorrected” tq/hp is just that........ raw data.
If the motor made over 500hp, without any correction applied, while being tested at 5200’ elevation in 91* air....... there is going to be a pretty huge correction factor to get back to “std corrected data”(29.92”, 60*, zero humidity).
That being said........ if the math showed the corrected numbers to be 670hp......... I think we all know those numbers wouldn’t be duplicated with the motor tested at a legit facility much closer to actual sea level.
Looks great my man. Being a tool, at least you have a curve to help plot a torque converter and launch RPM. And everything else that goes with it.
I have seen a few guys come up woith that number as well. At least it is in the ballpark.Yep. Know several guys who have measured it.
Comes out around 255 and change @50
This is super interesting. I feel like I'm learning stuff. I'll get back there and see if I can actually input data.The fact that you said you saw something on the dyno that was in the 30” range doesn’t sound promising to me.
None of the common SAE correction factors use “corrected” baro readings.
I can’t think of any reason why you’d have any use for that info on the dyno.
Here’s my guess....... he’s using the corrected baro readings, which is why he said the uncorrected numbers went from 510 to 540.
That would be about the correct amount of correction(4%)for an uncorrected baro of around 30”, 91*, and a little humidity.
The issue is....... the uncorrected baro isn’t 30”........ it’s 24.xx....... so those 540hp numbers are erroneous.
Here’s the baro pressure for Fort Collins over the last few days.
Uncorrected, in Mb. To convert to in/hg divide by 33.864.
Yesterday, from mid-day into evening....... 846mb down to 844mb....... or .....24.98 to 24.92 in/hg.
View attachment 1715358310
You just call me a tool, LoL. JkLooks great my man. Being a tool, at least you have a curve to help plot a torque converter and launch RPM. And everything else that goes with it.
I have seen a few guys come up woith that number as well. At least it is in the ballpark.
I'm looking forward to the trick flow intake for sure. Even though it's a square bore copy of the M1 that I have. It won't have been molested by me, I think I screwed up that intake I have. I don't know why, just a feeling I have.
This is super interesting. I feel like I'm learning stuff. I'll get back there and see if I can actually input data.
When you go over there, ask him to show you what the current baro pressure is in the dyno room.
If it’s anything close to 30”...... you have your answer.
It’s pretty simple really........ there’s going to be 20-25% correction for that dyno shop(for SAE J607), depending on the day.
For example, at that location...... even on what would be considered a “good day”......25.15 baro, 65*, 10% humidity........ the correction factor is still 20%(500hp uncorrected = 600hp corrected).
If he’s coming up with corrected numbers that are in the 3-10% range....... they’re wrong.
Likely because the correction inputs are wrong.
That would be a classic case of GIGO.
Corrections in the 3-7% are what we typically see here on an average day....... and this dyno is only at about 400’ elevation.