Baseline Dynos: Nissan Frontier, Mazda5

We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms

phunky.buddha

phunky.buddha

Mad scientist
Moderator
VIP
Playtime.

Frontier = stock + synthetic oil, 70k miles
Stock factory rating = 261hp @ 5600rpm, 281lbft @ 4000rpm
Assuming 17% driveline loss, I get 275hp crank.

Mazda5 = stock + K&N drop in + larger 215/50-17 tires (stock 205/50-17), 70k miles
Stock rating = 153hp @ 6500rpm, 148lbft @ 4500rpm
Assuming 17% driveline loss, I get 175hp crank.

Pretty healthy engines.

frontier_dyno_m_1.jpg


frontier_baseline.jpg


mz5_dyno_m_1.jpg


mz5_baseline.jpg
 
Nice! i have considered throwing my Xterra on the dyno during one of the many tuning sessions my integra has had. Its all stock besides a Volant CAI, but that VQ40 motor makes some power.
 
Why do MY things always grenade on that dyno, and YOUR things always make good power numbers?




Racist ass dyno...
 
mdpsEG said:
Nice! i have considered throwing my Xterra on the dyno during one of the many tuning sessions my integra has had. Its all stock besides a Volant CAI, but that VQ40 motor makes some power.
Click to expand...

How do you like that Volant? I've decided that a $300 intake would just be a waste of money for me... ;) ;) ;)

civicious said:
Why do MY things always grenade on that dyno, and YOUR things always make good power numbers?

Racist ass dyno...
Click to expand...

E_SolSi said:
:lmao:
Click to expand...

Ssssshhhh... you've figured out our secret! If you want an Asian-plasty, I'll hook you up. Then you can make good power on Phillip's dyno. :D :D :D :D :D
 
I like the volant a lot. the fit and finish under the hood is great, looks like its supposed to be there. As far as power.. who knows, but there was a noticeable difference in throttle response. One of the things I really like about it is that its virtually silent until about 3/4 throttle, so you usually never hear it at all. But when you mash it, it suddenly comes to life. Its loud and mean sounding enough to turn heads lol. Pretty damn similar to what the g35/7 and 350/370 Z sound with an intake on them.
 
Sweet. I just intend to hang a snail or two on mine and use a BOV to augment the sound. :)
 
Why are you computing drivetrain loss as giving you more power? Aren't both those vehicles rated using SAE net power? IE- the power is rated at the crank, not the wheels.

Thus, your factory wheel hp should be less than 275 and 153 respectively. Unless of course, I am mistaken and the rated power is SAE certified. Also, a fwd vehicle with a transverse engine isn't going to have as much drivetrain loss as a rwd vehicle with longitudinal engine.
 
Last edited:
hondarin said:
Why are you computing drivetrain loss as giving you more power? Aren't both those vehicles rated using SAE net power? IE- the power is rated at the crank, not the wheels.

Thus, your factory wheel hp should be less than 275 and 153 respectively. Unless of course, I am mistaken and the rated power is SAE certified. Also, a fwd vehicle with a transverse engine isn't going to have as much drivetrain loss as a rwd vehicle with longitudinal engine.
Click to expand...

The SAE correction factor adjusts the dyno graph for weather conditions back to an SAE standard so that you can compare power measured at different locations (different weather conditions). Without hunting too hard for the actual correction factor information, this is what I dug up (will have to verify later): "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)."

The power is still measured at the wheels. Otherwise, my stock S2000 dyno graph would have measured out around 230-240hp, not just under 200.

And yes, a FWD car will have less driveline loss than a RWD vehicle, but these are just estimated factors anyway. Even using a 12% loss (way less than any car should be), both engines are making more than their factory rating. Considering that my truck is running all this through a 4wd transfer case before making it to the driveshaft, I think its loss is probably closer to 20%. There's no way to know for sure unless I pull the engine out on the same day and chuck it on an engine dyno though. That's not something I'm willing to do.
 
Calesta said:
The SAE correction factor adjusts the dyno graph for weather conditions back to an SAE standard so that you can compare power measured at different locations (different weather conditions). Without hunting too hard for the actual correction factor information, this is what I dug up (will have to verify later): "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)."

The power is still measured at the wheels. Otherwise, my stock S2000 dyno graph would have measured out around 230-240hp, not just under 200.

And yes, a FWD car will have less driveline loss than a RWD vehicle, but these are just estimated factors anyway. Even using a 12% loss (way less than any car should be), both engines are making more than their factory rating. Considering that my truck is running all this through a 4wd transfer case before making it to the driveshaft, I think its loss is probably closer to 20%. There's no way to know for sure unless I pull the engine out on the same day and chuck it on an engine dyno though. That's not something I'm willing to do.
Click to expand...

Since when? I've never heard of any ratings listed from manufacturers being WHP...
 
B16RacerN2NR said:
Since when? I've never heard of any ratings listed from manufacturers being WHP...
Click to expand...

What? You guys are missing something here...

All the car manufacturers list their engine ratings as power at the crank.

Dynojets list their power ratings at the wheels.

SAE "certification" or whatever for manufacturer power ratings is completely different from this SAE correction factor applied to the dyno chart for weather condition correction.

My graphs show power at the wheels, not at the crank.

Not sure what's so difficult here... these can't be the first time you guys have seen dyno charts.
 
Lol dyno n00bs!

then people wonder why a 200hp civic wont make 200whp on the dyno.

Cal is right, auto manufacturers measure hp at the crank not the wheels.
 
Plus SAE dyno corrections are only a few WHP not 12-20% correction.
 
Okay, I did the math, and now I see your 275.

229/.83 = x/1


When I read your original post, it seemed like you were trying to say that the factory rating was at the wheels
 
Last edited:
Mike makea mrissires. You no gonna win ahgooment, joo sirry n00b.
 
Yea, upon further inspection, it wasn't a math issue, it was a communication issue.

Miscommunication is also what caused the Challenger to blow up.

The part we were missing was the inferred "Based on the measured wheel hp and..." right before "assuming 17% drivetrain loss."


Calesta, do you work for Sandia? We had a guy from there do a presentation for our ASME student organization a couple of weeks ago.
 
civicious said:
Mike makea mrissires. You no gonna win ahgooment, joo sirry n00b.
Click to expand...

:lmao:

B16RacerN2NR said:
I was in the same boat as Hondarin...

Got confused... carry on... :)
Click to expand...

:D

hondarin said:
Yea, upon further inspection, it wasn't a math issue, it was a communication issue.

Miscommunication is also what caused the Challenger to blow up.

The part we were missing was the inferred "Based on the measured wheel hp and..." right before "assuming 17% drivetrain loss."


Calesta, do you work for Sandia? We had a guy from there do a presentation for our ASME student organization a couple of weeks ago.
Click to expand...

Nope, I work for the mother company that manages Sandia. :D

You at UT Austin? I've given quite a few presentations to ASME down there- lead recruiter for the UT team too. We might have met before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top