[john marcella]

Originally Posted by mike leech

WTF Magic man how come I don't have a wing?

You still stuck on the wing ding. Old junk , move on.

[LiL Jack]

Originally Posted by cgeise

Red Bull gives you Wings

I thought the same thing.

Damn I don't have a wing either.

[GTO Dan]

Originally Posted by mike leech

WTF Magic man how come I don't have a wing?

Apparently John doesn't love you as much as Bill loves Fulton.

[Tom Vaught]

Originally Posted by Stan Weiss

Tom,
It is easy enough. What do you want it to say?

Stan

Great Example, Stan, THANK YOU, of Dyno Sheet "smoke and mirrors" for the group. Helps make my point perfectly

I want it to say "that Jack made more HP than Fulton", for example.

Using your Bogus Sheet and "fixing" a couple of obvious "mistakes":

You have your BOGUS: "Horsepower Number", your "Uncorrected" Horsepower Number", and the "Correction Factor" Looking "official" there Stan.
But of course if you knew the engine was run in Minnesota you would want to use a Minnesota address vs your computer address.

You also have some acceptable weather conditions: Dyno Air Temp, Dyno Barometric Pressure, and Dyno Vapor Pressure. Looking Good, (All good info to know if you were actually looking at a real dyno sheet.)

So the first actual test to see if the data was bogus by Joe Racer would be to plug the provided 'Dyno Sheet" numbers into this calculator:
https://wahiduddin.net/calc/calc_cf.htm

70, 28.61, .3064 and see what the ACTUAL correction factor would be vs the REPORTED correction factor on the provided BOGUS Dyno Sheet is.

April Fools Joke #1 The calculator says that the actual correction factor should actually be 1.031 (not 1.0672) (:>)

April Fools Joke #2 The Correction factor 1.031 times the Uncorrected HP would be
1058 HP. A convenient 37 Horsepower "error"

April Fools Joke #3 I will post one of my own: Some say that Jack made around 1064 HP so with the "correct" Correction factor (in your BOGUS SHEET times the HP reported, Jack would still make more DYNO HP than Fulton using your example.

So you can "spin" Dyno data anyway you want.
The Track gives the real result.
I really do not care who wins on the actual Race. I just know the actual track result vs the Bogus Dyno Sheet result for example.

So people should not get hung up on some Dyno numbers that anyone could make anything that they want. (Just like you did).

Tom Vaught

Thanks for helping me illustrate my point, Stan.

[twinturrbo406]

Originally Posted by Tom Vaught

Great Example, Stan, THANK YOU, of Dyno Sheet "smoke and mirrors" for the group. Helps make my point perfectly

I want it to say "that Jack made more HP than Fulton", for example.

Using your Bogus Sheet and "fixing" a couple of obvious "mistakes":

You have your BOGUS: "Horsepower Number", your "Uncorrected" Horsepower Number", and the "Correction Factor" Looking "official" there Stan.
But of course if you knew the engine was run in Minnesota you would want to use a Minnesota address vs your computer address.

You also have some acceptable weather conditions: Dyno Air Temp, Dyno Barometric Pressure, and Dyno Vapor Pressure. Looking Good, (All good info to know if you were actually looking at a real dyno sheet.)

So the first actual test to see if the data was bogus by Joe Racer would be to plug the provided 'Dyno Sheet" numbers into this calculator:
https://wahiduddin.net/calc/calc_cf.htm

70, 28.61, .3064 and see what the ACTUAL correction factor would be vs the REPORTED correction factor on the provided BOGUS Dyno Sheet is.

April Fools Joke #1 The calculator says that the actual correction factor should actually be 1.031 (not 1.0672) (:>)

April Fools Joke #2 The Correction factor 1.031 times the Uncorrected HP would be
1058 HP. A convenient 37 Horsepower "error"

April Fools Joke #3 I will post one of my own: Some say that Jack made around 1064 HP so with the "correct" Correction factor (in your BOGUS SHEET times the HP reported, Jack would still make more DYNO HP than Fulton using your example.

So you can "spin" Dyno data anyway you want.
The Track gives the real result.
I really do not care who wins on the actual Race. I just know the actual track result vs the Bogus Dyno Sheet result for example.

So people should not get hung up on some Dyno numbers that anyone could make anything that they want. (Just like you did).

Tom Vaught

Thanks for helping me illustrate my point, Stan.

... and this is patting Dick on the back .. how ?? ...
... I'll say it again, grow up Tom ...

[T Syron]

Originally Posted by Tom Vaught

Great Example, Stan, THANK YOU, of Dyno Sheet "smoke and mirrors" for the group. Helps make my point perfectly

I want it to say "that Jack made more HP than Fulton", for example.

Using your Bogus Sheet and "fixing" a couple of obvious "mistakes":

You have your BOGUS: "Horsepower Number", your "Uncorrected" Horsepower Number", and the "Correction Factor" Looking "official" there Stan.
But of course if you knew the engine was run in Minnesota you would want to use a Minnesota address vs your computer address.

You also have some acceptable weather conditions: Dyno Air Temp, Dyno Barometric Pressure, and Dyno Vapor Pressure. Looking Good, (All good info to know if you were actually looking at a real dyno sheet.)

So the first actual test to see if the data was bogus by Joe Racer would be to plug the provided 'Dyno Sheet" numbers into this calculator:
https://wahiduddin.net/calc/calc_cf.htm

70, 28.61, .3064 and see what the ACTUAL correction factor would be vs the REPORTED correction factor on the provided BOGUS Dyno Sheet is.

April Fools Joke #1 The calculator says that the actual correction factor should actually be 1.031 (not 1.0672) (:>)

April Fools Joke #2 The Correction factor 1.031 times the Uncorrected HP would be
1058 HP. A convenient 37 Horsepower "error"

April Fools Joke #3 I will post one of my own: Some say that Jack made around 1064 HP so with the "correct" Correction factor (in your BOGUS SHEET times the HP reported, Jack would still make more DYNO HP than Fulton using your example.

So you can "spin" Dyno data anyway you want.
The Track gives the real result.
I really do not care who wins on the actual Race. I just know the actual track result vs the Bogus Dyno Sheet result for example.

So people should not get hung up on some Dyno numbers that anyone could make anything that they want. (Just like you did).

Tom Vaught

Thanks for helping me illustrate my point, Stan.

So what you're saying is, Dick is a fake? Because after all it's Dick's engine not Bill's. Dick built it, not Bill. Dick dynoed it, not Bill. Dick will be racing it, not Bill.

I think Dick's reputation speaks for itself.


Tom Syron

[Jeff Kinsler]

Originally Posted by mike leech

WTF Magic man how come I don't have a wing?

LMFAO

[twooldgoats]

Originally Posted by T Syron

....
I think Dick's reputation speaks for itself.


Tom Syron

And so does Tom V's.

Jim

[twinturrbo406]

Originally Posted by john marcella

You still stuck on the wing ding. Old junk , move on.

"BAE Billet, RM BBC, Australian Prostock, 5.0 b/s Hemi"

... all of these are very much " not old junk", quite the opposite actually ...

... where have you been, under a rock ? ...

[john marcella]

Originally Posted by twinturrbo406

"BAE Billet, RM BBC, Australian Prostock, 5.0 b/s Hemi"

... all of these are very much " not old junk", quite the opposite actually ...

... where have you been, under a rock ? ...

You retard, i was talking about Mikes heads, The wing ding is in my old Pontiac heads i did 10 years ago and i have not done it sence then except for my SB2 heads i put it in. 142 cfm per inch



Thinks always come full circle.

[twinturrbo406]

Originally Posted by john marcella

You retard, i was talking about Mikes heads, The wing ding is in my old Pontiac heads i did 10 years ago and i have not done it sence then except for my SB2 heads i put it in. 142 cfm per inch



Thinks always come full circle.

... lmao, well be more clear next time John, it read differently ... but now we're talking, me likey ...

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by Tom Vaught

Great Example, Stan, THANK YOU, of Dyno Sheet "smoke and mirrors" for the group. Helps make my point perfectly

I want it to say "that Jack made more HP than Fulton", for example.

Using your Bogus Sheet and "fixing" a couple of obvious "mistakes":

You have your BOGUS: "Horsepower Number", your "Uncorrected" Horsepower Number", and the "Correction Factor" Looking "official" there Stan.
But of course if you knew the engine was run in Minnesota you would want to use a Minnesota address vs your computer address.

You also have some acceptable weather conditions: Dyno Air Temp, Dyno Barometric Pressure, and Dyno Vapor Pressure. Looking Good, (All good info to know if you were actually looking at a real dyno sheet.)

So the first actual test to see if the data was bogus by Joe Racer would be to plug the provided 'Dyno Sheet" numbers into this calculator:
https://wahiduddin.net/calc/calc_cf.htm

70, 28.61, .3064 and see what the ACTUAL correction factor would be vs the REPORTED correction factor on the provided BOGUS Dyno Sheet is.

April Fools Joke #1 The calculator says that the actual correction factor should actually be 1.031 (not 1.0672) (:>)

April Fools Joke #2 The Correction factor 1.031 times the Uncorrected HP would be
1058 HP. A convenient 37 Horsepower "error"

April Fools Joke #3 I will post one of my own: Some say that Jack made around 1064 HP so with the "correct" Correction factor (in your BOGUS SHEET times the HP reported, Jack would still make more DYNO HP than Fulton using your example.

So you can "spin" Dyno data anyway you want.
The Track gives the real result.
I really do not care who wins on the actual Race. I just know the actual track result vs the Bogus Dyno Sheet result for example.

So people should not get hung up on some Dyno numbers that anyone could make anything that they want. (Just like you did).

Tom Vaught

Thanks for helping me illustrate my point, Stan.

Tom,
The only April Fools Joke I see is your post. Yes there are a couple of obvious "mistakes". The first and most important is you do not know which SAE dyno correction fact to use. So anything you build on an incorrect foundation is wrong.

Stan

[Chris Uratchko]

Originally Posted by john marcella

You still stuck on the wing ding. Old junk , move on.

Wing Dings are cool.

[Chris Uratchko]

The other factor for the correction that weather data won't give you is actual elevation.... which goes into the correction factor, and or DA.

[johnta1]

The other factor for the correction that weather data won't give you is actual elevation....

Should be using absolute barometric pressure, so that should 'give' the elevation along with the other weather data like dew point and temperature?

[Chris Uratchko]

I meant if someone is looking up weather data online for another area of the country, will the data will include elevation?

[johnta1]

Most do, but a lot of the baro pressure data is not correct though, it's usually 'local' baro not absolute.

[Stan Weiss]

While looking up weather data is great for a race track, I am not so sure how well that transfers to the conditions in a dyno cell.

Stan

[BruceWilkie]

If you use same dyno/operator and dyno has been maintained/calibrated it matters little what the actual numbers are... it will show changes... if previous hp numbers have always washed with track performance and correction factors there is no reason they shouldnt continue to do so.

[twooldgoats]

Originally Posted by Chris Uratchko

The other factor for the correction that weather data won't give you is actual elevation.... which goes into the correction factor, and or DA.

This free site will give absolute barometric pressure (at any track) and, therefore, takes into account changes in elevation.

http://airdensityonline.com/

Jim