Look what i found on another thread
#1
#2
#3
#4
Those runs look way low. I can barely believe the 99 2v putting down 165hp, that is 47% loss to the wheels from its 310hp rating and only 285tq from a 425rating? Maybe a really tired engine?
It is very hard to believe only 293tq on an EB? Of course all dyno's are different, but wow that is pitiful.
All of the EB dyno charts I have seen show @300-310rwhp and @ 350-360rwtq stock when they can get the turbos to spool. What am I missing here?
Do you have a link to the original thread?
It is very hard to believe only 293tq on an EB? Of course all dyno's are different, but wow that is pitiful.
All of the EB dyno charts I have seen show @300-310rwhp and @ 350-360rwtq stock when they can get the turbos to spool. What am I missing here?
Do you have a link to the original thread?
#5
Here ya go Tim,
https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...uper-duty.html
I think the '99 V-10 is Mike's well used test mule.
https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...uper-duty.html
I think the '99 V-10 is Mike's well used test mule.
#6
#7
Trending Topics
#8
#9
I noticed running my dyno that numbers can change alot if your running an eddie brake to properly lock the torque converter on a heavy vehicle with an auto. The roller is only about 2k lbs (or at least mine is) so running in inertia only mode will keep the converter from locking properly. Same thing with Turbo spooling.
I'm wondering from the graph if the converter was even locked. Another thing is we don't know if or what correction was used for these numbers.
I'm wondering from the graph if the converter was even locked. Another thing is we don't know if or what correction was used for these numbers.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post