300rwhp..
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,835
Likes: 0
From: Vienna, Georgia
Originally Posted by Superchips_Distributor
our longtube headers
Last edited by chester8420; Jun 28, 2006 at 02:08 PM.
Moderator &
Senior Member
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 31,440
Likes: 4
From: The Bluegrass State
Originally Posted by Superchips_Distributor
... heck, with nothing more than our Stage 1 kit, the moderator here made 268/325 on his 4x4 King Ranch! 
You're talking to a guy that is BEYOND thrilled with the numbers generated by a Stage 1 kit...Who knows, maybe that King Ranch that was mentioned in the quoted portion of this post will achieve that 300 RWHP some day.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 575
Likes: 0
From: Oronoco, MN
Hi Mike,
Nobody said the correction factor makes things exactly equal, but since the vast, vast majority of people who get dyno results are using a Dynojet model and sae corrected numbers then if you want to compare fairly to the rest of the world thats what you use. Is it perfect? Not even close. Is running e.t.'s at different tracks around the country and comparing them to other people's numbers fair? No way, but a lot further off than comparing corrected dyno numbers. However, in each case its what available, and so its what we use.
His numbers were 3 off, thats good, didn't say they would be off a certain amount just took a guess at 255. Like I posted before though, I pulled up one of my own runs from my old 5.4 equipped Mustang and the difference between std and sae was 12 hp and similar torque. Thats why I asked if he had the run file to pull up and get actual numbers.
If some manufacturers are using differing correction factors thats no good for any of us, but still doesn't add any more inaccuracy from one Dynojet dyno to another unless the end user can change the correction formula. Hopefully that isn't the case.
Based on that I'll raise my guess of 275-280rwhp for his truck (sae corrected) with pulleys and e-fans to 280-285rwhp......still a long ways from the 300 he thinks it would be at....
Nobody said the correction factor makes things exactly equal, but since the vast, vast majority of people who get dyno results are using a Dynojet model and sae corrected numbers then if you want to compare fairly to the rest of the world thats what you use. Is it perfect? Not even close. Is running e.t.'s at different tracks around the country and comparing them to other people's numbers fair? No way, but a lot further off than comparing corrected dyno numbers. However, in each case its what available, and so its what we use.
His numbers were 3 off, thats good, didn't say they would be off a certain amount just took a guess at 255. Like I posted before though, I pulled up one of my own runs from my old 5.4 equipped Mustang and the difference between std and sae was 12 hp and similar torque. Thats why I asked if he had the run file to pull up and get actual numbers.
If some manufacturers are using differing correction factors thats no good for any of us, but still doesn't add any more inaccuracy from one Dynojet dyno to another unless the end user can change the correction formula. Hopefully that isn't the case.
Originally Posted by Superchips_Distributor
However, I would say to figure on our Stage 2 kit using the 3.25" version of the AF1 plus our longtube headers & high-flow cats will pretty much do the trick, or get it very close - it would really depend on just how much power it made stock. We're had a truck deliver as much as 312 RWHP (and yes, SAE - STD was 317 BTW) in that configuration, for an increase of a bit under 100 RWHP over stock in that particular 5.4 3V truck (it was 219 stock).
Based on that I'll raise my guess of 275-280rwhp for his truck (sae corrected) with pulleys and e-fans to 280-285rwhp......still a long ways from the 300 he thinks it would be at....