Saab Link Forums banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,153 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Wesly did a dyno on his 9k aero and stg 3 at sea-level.

The uncorrected numbers are higher than the sae numbers, I love to see that when people get to dyno in really nice dense air :)

298bhp and 365 ft-lbs.

Here is air fuel for reference:

John
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
140 Posts
Thank you john for excellent job on tunning the ecu. I'm very happy with the results looking forward for more power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,468 Posts
Wesly did a dyno on his 9k aero and stg 3 at sea-level.

The uncorrected numbers are higher than the sae numbers, I love to see that when people get to dyno in really nice dense air :)
John, did you happen to ask what the ambient temp was when the dyno run was made?

Anything under 77 degrees will produce higher uncorrected numbers, as the SAE correction "normalizes" to that temp level...

The lower you go, the higher the correction
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,153 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
John, did you happen to ask what the ambient temp was when the dyno run was made?

Anything under 77 degrees will produce higher uncorrected numbers, as the SAE correction "normalizes" to that temp level...

The lower you go, the higher the correction
Sure, I am well aware of how it works, just interesting that he made 10whp more in the uncorrected dyno results than with the Sae results. Its just another confirmation to me how Sae numbers can actually be a better guide when comparing dyno numbers on different days with different weather and density alititude.

I am sure you know what I mean as everyone is always saying don't post the Sae numbers, post the uncorrected numbers. In this case, they are the opposite of what I see with thin air at elevation.

PS. FYI, I have over 5-6 dyno sheets now from stg 1-6 that show Sae dyno numbers in Denver to be almost dead on nuts and in 2 cases, dead on nuts the same in Sae in Denver and Sae at sea-level. It sure makes me think the Sae numbers at elevation are closer than most people think.

Don't want to turn this into a Sae debate, its just what I have seen and felt for years and we all have our opinions about this, I have my data and research and that means more to me than any theoretical data. The only thing I am really interested in is real world dyno sheets from dynojet dynos at both elevation and sea-level with the same tune and the same hw and I have quite a bit of that now and its quite interesting to me and a little surprising.

John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,468 Posts
Sure, I am well aware of how it works, just interesting that he made 10whp more in the uncorrected dyno results than with the Sae results. Its just another confirmation to me how Sae numbers can actually be a better guide when comparing dyno numbers on different days with different weather and density alititude.

I am sure you know what I mean as everyone is always saying don't post the Sae numbers, post the uncorrected numbers. In this case, they are the opposite of what I see with thin air at elevation.

PS. FYI, I have over 5-6 dyno sheets now from stg 1-6 that show Sae dyno numbers in Denver to be almost dead on nuts and in 2 cases, dead on nuts the same in Sae in Denver and Sae at sea-level. It sure makes me think the Sae numbers at elevation are closer than most people think.

Don't want to turn this into a Sae debate, its just what I have seen and felt for years and we all have our opinions about this, I have my data and research and that means more to me than any theoretical data. The only thing I am really interested in is real world dyno sheets from dynojet dynos at both elevation and sea-level with the same tune and the same hw and I have quite a bit of that now and its quite interesting to me and a little surprising.

John
John, the ambient temp was 17 degrees colder than the SAE normalized temp of 77. Of course the uncorrected numbers are higher. Why is that a surprise? Or even interesting?

It's just math.

Of course they're the opposite of what you see at elevation: It was a cold day at sea level.

EDIT: This horse has been beaten to death again and again, here and elsewhere. The only reason people say "you can't use SAE corrected figures" is that they're almost meaningless at altitude for forced induction cars. You know this...yet that never stops you from using them for marketing purposes, except, of course, when the uncorrected numbers are better. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,468 Posts
None of what I said above was intended to detract from you or your tuning, John. You've developed some solid stuff and there are lots of happy people driving around with smiles on their faces.

The whole SAE thing is a particular burr under my saddle -- as you know ;) -- because the numbers can be manipulated pretty wildly, which is what the well-meaning engineers wanted to prevent.

Of course, all they did was fuel thousands of sea level-vs-mountain air pissing matches. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,022 Posts
CA air is better than Mass. air.... :-x
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,153 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
None of what I said above was intended to detract from you or your tuning, John. You've developed some solid stuff and there are lots of happy people driving around with smiles on their faces.

The whole SAE thing is a particular burr under my saddle -- as you know ;) -- because the numbers can be manipulated pretty wildly, which is what the well-meaning engineers wanted to prevent.

Of course, all they did was fuel thousands of sea level-vs-mountain air pissing matches. :)
Yup, its a dead horse, I still think you would find it very interesting to see the Denver Sae dyno results, being identical to sea level Sae results with cars with the same hw and tune. When you see multiple dyno results that are the same, it makes you go- hhhhmmmmmmmm???

I will send you some, pm me your email address,

John
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top