i have no idea. i asked the tuner (who does a lot of work with the v8 supercars over here in australia). he was really impressed with the torque and midrange power, something he hasn't seen before on a turbo car. he had a v8 chevy on the same dyno after mine, it made just over 500ftlb peak torqueStu Hagen said:Ya I could never figure out the conversion on torque, maybe Ben can expain.
That is why it looks like the RPM signal was not set up right for the dyno pull. Maybe they had set it up for a rotary. It would show 2 times the tq actual numbers.Latteboost said:I am assuming at the 5820 is RPM on the x axis. If so something is weird as the hp is much less (327 vs 620) than the torque. No matter what your HP number will always be higher than you torque number (ft-lb) above 5252 RPM.
rusty said:your dyno sheet shows about 245rwhp at the point of peak torque, which is at 3918rpm (give or take a few) which is equal to 328lb/ft or 445nm at that point. thats still real wheel torque not crank torque. the only problem from there is im not too familiar with the dynologs and what results they return. i was anticipating dyno dynamics, which return around 76% of crank power as a rear wheel figure on a manual supra, but im not sure of what dynologs will do. probably closer to a dynojet?
not sure if ive shown you this before but i made a script in php to convert between the various figures, as well as show some additional units etc.
heres a link for your figures;
the correction is based on ambient temperature, humidity and atmospheric pressure and is only 3.80%swearitsstock said:that is a HUGE sae correction
try to do it again... get a good torque reading and no SAE correction