Okay, I'm guilty of just looking at the numbers. I do know the difference, though, and honestly it's a good thing for me to know, and keep in mind when I'm looking at the numbers the tuners are putting out. Should have paid more attention.

Again, awesome numbers, Chris - good luck getting that monster running hard again.


Thomas

 

I registered when I finaly got a lightning been here since 2000 I couldent take it anymore and my uncle let me drive his for a couple hours. bought 1 withing 6 months

 

Cooking the numbers might be called "marketing,." Or it might also be called "bullsh*t."

Yes, both SAE and STD are correction factors. SAE is recognized as the more realistic of the two. STD is used when one wants the numbers to be artificially high.

"SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers), USA. Power is corrected to reference conditions of 29.23 InHg (99 kPa) of dry air and 77 F (25°C). This SAE standard requires a correction for friction torque. Friction torque can be determined by measurements on special motoring dynamometers (which is only practical in research environments) or can be estimated. When estimates must be used, the SAE standard uses a default Mechanical Efficiency (ME) value of 85%. This is approximately correct at peak torque but not at other engine operating speeds. Some dynamometer systems use the SAE correction factor for atmospheric conditions but do not take mechanical efficiency into consideration at all (i.e. they assume a ME of 100%).

STD or STP. Another power correction standard determined by the SAE. This standard has been stable for a long time and is widely used in the performance industry. Power is corrected to reference conditions of 29.92 InHg (103.3 kPa) of dry air and 60 F (15.5°C). Because the reference conditions include higher pressure and cooler air than the SAE standard, these corrected power numbers will always be about 4 % higher than the SAE power numbers. Friction torque is handled in the same way as in the SAE standard."

 

Marketing. Bull*****. Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference.

I was just pointing out that STD numbers are not actual numbers. SAE is the correction factor most commonly accepted.

 

Since the relationship is mathematical, what you
really need to know is what the basis for the quoted
number is. If everyone used SAE, it would be easy.

Unfortunately, that isn't gonna happen as long as
they can get by quoting the 4% higher numbers.

Let's not even get into the DynoJet corrections (inflations)

That's why some high HP dyno trucks get whupped up
on at the track. Put your faith in the results, guys....

My take on dynos is that they are only good to compare
changes to your truck to analyze the new parts ... and
optimize the tune.

 

Its the E.Ts that count anyway (or for the 1 % ers - Lap times).

E.T.s talk and Dynos walk.

VINNIE

 

 

"That's why some high HP dyno trucks get whupped up
on at the track. Put your faith in the results, guys....

My take on dynos is that they are only good to compare
changes to your truck to analyze the new parts ... and
optimize the tune."

SVT_KY: I agree, whenever we dyno a vehicle in our shop i always tell the customer i'm not concerned in making huge #'s what i am concerned with is tuning the vehicle *safely*to its fullest potential..Whatever #'s we wind up with is what we wind up with,I myself have seen people say thier making huge #'s on a dyno only to go to the track and be very disappointed.
Another thing we @ JLP do not use STD #'s as a *Marketing tactic*..As many can see we have not only been showing big #'s on the dyno but we do back it up on the track too. Charlies truck has run a best of 10.5 the best of any customer that i know of not spraying. and when he did that he wasn't making the #'s he did this past sat.and he wasn't using a 100 shot of NO2. so if he runs a 10.5 or better then that will mean the dyno#'s are pretty accurate..As far as i'm concerned this is just sal's way of taking a shot at somebodyelse's success just to make himself feel/look better or something. Just like his sig. look how he refuses to remove the worlds fastest gen 2 from his sig. this is just the way he is. Dale 02 took me out of the #1 spot for awhile and i congradulated him for it. and he well deserved it! As soon as we beat his time he without no controversy removed his quickest gen 2 sig. Thats just doing whats proper. I'll be doing a sig. here shortly and i will gladly remove it from my sig. when someone beats my et and mph.. and i will take my hat off to them for a job well done,because i know they worked tremendously hard to achieve that goal and they truley deserve it!

Chris: this is no way in any shape or form trying to take away from your great #'s they are just that, truley great and congrats..With those #'s you should run mid to low 10's, and i wish you the best....

(If my name wasn't dragged into this thread i would not have responded) JL

 

See........I dont' wanna say it.......but I told you so

 

Another great JL response. Doesn't have anything intellegent to reply with, so just turns it into a rip fest on unrelated issues.

So why don't you tell us why you posted STD numbers Johnny?

 

Gotta raise the flag on this one, Johnny.

The difference between STD and SAE numbers is that STD corrects to unrealistic, ideal atmospheric conditions and SAE corrects to more realistic conditions.

You can "back up" either on the track equally well.

SAE has been accepted as the standard correction. DynoJet has been accepted as the de facto dyno (even though there are better dynos). Ergo, SAE-corrected DynoJet numbers have become the defacto standard. Other than to post artificially high numbers, I cannot see the justification for using STD.

 

But he does have a valid point about the sig -- what's up wid dat?

 

Just before I bail, congrats on the numbers Chris, rip those heads off and lay the smack down.

 

 

Hey nutzchris........you reading this ****. What did I tell ya buddy??? HUH??? HUH???? ....to me!!!