Dyno Run for a stock 5-spd + CAI

[Marty]

I did a couple of dyno runs last night, partly for fun, and partly to have some solid facts. My car is almost completely stock. The only two differences are the rear tires are 245's so slightly heavier and my exhaust is ceramic coated. I have 112,400 miles.

All the runs were nearly identical. Best was 98.4 hp and 131.6 torque. Then I removed my intake and put on the cold air intake. I made 104.3 hp and 132.6 torque.

[Only1Balto]

Nice. Good to see some solid numbers from adding the CAI.

[Bitsyncmaster]

Now you've convinced me it's time for that cold air intake.:burnout:

[Marty]

Now you've convinced me it's time for that cold air intake.:burnout:

I think I've convinced myself as well.
I was hoping these numbers would be useful for people.

[Mark D]

Before I read the results I speculated that it would be somewhere in the 90s...

That is a pretty solid increase for the CAI! I felt a slight difference after installing mine, but didn't expect it to be over 5whp

[Bitsyncmaster]

I think I've convinced myself as well.
I was hoping these numbers would be useful for people.

Was your heat valve working? You just gained much more than I would have thought.

[Marty]

Was your heat valve working? You just gained much more than I would have thought.

Yes, it was working. I checked it when I pulled it out. It was in the full 'cold' position.

[Iznodmad]

On the old dmctalk.com website, there was a "how-to" on doing the CAI. Does one exist now or can someone do it again. I'm not talking about purchasing a kit from a vendor, but buying the parts and DIY.

[DeloreanJoshQ]

Did they blow a fan to your rear air intake to simulate wind/vehicle speed? It made a 1-3 HP difference when we tested it on mine....


I notice you used the "Dynojet" brand as oppossed to the "Mustang" brand dyno.

I dynoed mine last week using the Mustang brand when I had the option to do the Dynojet. The reason I chose Mustang was because research showed it reads 12-15% lower than the Dynojet and allegedly is more "real world/realistic" in terms of HP and TQ.
It adds resistance to account for wind, weight, etc.
The Mustang brand cost more to use than Dynojet because there is more involved in the setup physically and software-wise....

Now I am curious what the Dynojet would calculate.....

[Marty]

I only used a Dynojet because that's what my mechanic uses. I don't know anyone with a Mustang dynamometer. I don't know much about dynos so I didn't know the two were different!

It sounds like the Mustang type is more real-world accurate because of wind resistance, but OTOH my hp numbers match up with what everyone says they should be, and to what others have achieved as well which leads me to believe they've tested their cars using a Dynojet too. Bob Brandes hit about 98 back in 1999 ( http://www.dmcnews.com/Resource/horsepower.html )
And I noticed on Tamir's site, he appears to be testing on a Dynojet type as well. I think the Dynojet is still a realistic test tool. If I make changes to the car and test on a Dynojet again the results will still be valid because the roller weight I'm pushing remains constant.

Yes, we did blow a fan along the side into the air intake, but I only gained 0.5 hp.

[FABombjoy]

That Air/Fuel reading is amazingly flat. Was it actually hooked up? If so, it looks like you could get a few more HP if you enrichened just a bit.

[Marty]

The reason I chose Mustang was because research showed it reads 12-15% lower than the Dynojet and allegedly is more "real world/realistic" in terms of HP and TQ.
It adds resistance to account for wind, weight, etc.


You really got me curious so I researched this and found little in favour of the Dynojet. Everyone said Mustangs registered 10% less power using Eddycurrent. I was surprised so I asked my mechanic about this and he said his modern type Dynojet uses Eddycurrent as well, and (obviously) the proper mathmatical equation for measuring power, which is how much force it takes to move a mass (the mass being the rollers).

Some people argued this is where Dynojet fails, because once the roller is moving it has its own inertia. However, if the roller inertia begins to take over, the Dynojet software records the horsepower output as zero. It only measures as long as the roller is being accelerated. All the variables are controlled by the software and regardless of things like wind resistance on the road, engine output never changes.

FWIW, he told me a shop near him is running a Dynojet and it consistently records 10% higher hp numbers! He's had some angry customers suddenly "lose" 10% on his dyno because they tested at the other shop first. They probably use different, outdated software. I'm not saying one type is better, but my mechanic dynos thousands of cars, works for race teams, and firmly believes the Dynojet, with the software he's running gives accurate numbers. But, I don't really know.

[Marty]

That Air/Fuel reading is amazingly flat. Was it actually hooked up? If so, it looks like you could get a few more HP if you enrichened just a bit.

You could be right. I just got it back from DPI and it was running so well I was afraid to mess with it!

[Jeremy Popp]

I dynoed mine last week using the Mustang brand

Results? I'm curious with your DPI exhauast and DMC CA performance cams.

[jfirios]

I would love to see a photo of your cai setup. I am just finishing an engine upgrade for my car too. Have the stage 1 setup which got rid of the hot air intake and just has the one cai from the side. I am planning on removing both quarter pannel glass sections and installing fiberglass inserts with small vent scoops on the ends which will lead right to a dual spectra cone filter assembly that fits right on the 4 in intake at the top of the motor.
What do you all think?

[DeloreanJoshQ]

Results? I'm curious with your DPI exhauast and DMC CA performance cams.

I started a database in the resources section of the forum here:

http://dmctalk.org/showthread.php?1995-Official-Delorean-Dyno-Database-Post-Your-Car-s-Dyno-Results-and-Build-Details-Here!!&p=25596#post25596

All of the details are included....hopefully others will come forward so we can get some good data!