2012 Hyundai Genesis R-Spec Dyno Test Video - Inside Line

[TJPark01]

[YOUTUBE]mwituhBM3Kg&feature[/YOUTUBE]

 

[MrB0462]

364 HP at the wheels with a 15% power loss = an advertised 428 HP

 

[tonygxp]

364 HP at the wheels with a 15% power loss = an advertised 428 HP

throw it on a mustang load bearing dyno and it aint coming close to that. i hate those pre wieghted resistance dynos. they don't ramp up resistance to account for aerodrag and they don't replicate the wieght of the vehicle. junk. on the mustang dynos you enter the vehicle and it gives you mfr specs for coefficient of drag and curb wieght then the huge electric motor simulates real world for whatever vehicle. but the readouts are always way lower, my guess is this one would've read around 345hp/330tq

but still fun to watch lol

 

[acoga]

throw it on a mustang load bearing dyno and it aint coming close to that. i hate those pre wieghted resistance dynos. they don't ramp up resistance to account for aerodrag and they don't replicate the wieght of the vehicle. junk. on the mustang dynos you enter the vehicle and it gives you mfr specs for coefficient of drag and curb wieght then the huge electric motor simulates real world for whatever vehicle. but the readouts are always way lower, my guess is this one would've read around 345hp/330tq

but still fun to watch lol

I guess if you want to predict track performance then I can see the benefit of what you're saying. But things like aerodynamics have no impact on engine output. All they're measuring in the video is if the output matches up with the manufacturer's claims minus some powertrain loss. Why would a Mustang dyno report a lower HP figure for weight or drag? Can you explain further? I can understand lower actual performance due to vehicle weight and drag, but not lower reported power.

 

[Rey]

It appears that Mustang dynos will almost always read lower than Dynojet dynos. So what? Isn't the real purpose of dynos to compare "apples to apples"?
The Dynojet numbers are quite useful to compare against other Dynojet tests. For instance, my stock 2005 Cadillac CTS-V dynoed at 331 rwhp, and after headers and intake my number (same dyno) was 384 rwhp.
342 rwhp is very respectible, and should produce sub 5 sec. 0-60 times.

 

[MrB0462]

It appears that Mustang dynos will almost always read lower than Dynojet dynos. So what? Isn't the real purpose of dynos to compare "apples to apples"?
The Dynojet numbers are quite useful to compare against other Dynojet tests. For instance, my stock 2005 Cadillac CTS-V dynoed at 331 rwhp, and after headers and intake my number (same dyno) was 384 rwhp.
342 rwhp is very respectible, and should produce sub 5 sec. 0-60 times.

Well said!!