Dyno'd the GT3 yesterday.
#16
10-28-2008 | 04:31 AM
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 79
From: Lafayette, Louisiana
Rep Power: 21
The Dyno Jet is 2 pulls I made on a DynoJet here in Lafayette and the other was a run the PO made on a Mustang @ EVO
Last edited by IXXI Turbo; 10-28-2008 at 04:34 AM.
#17
10-28-2008 | 03:07 PM
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 104
From: germany/ bay area
Rep Power: 32
What year 997 cup is that one? I understand they got rid of the variable intake manifold that was on the earlier models for 2007+, which probably hurts torque but helps it flow a little more up top.
As for tweaking for more power, we'll see. Half of typical power optimization is correcting and optimizing the air/fuel ratios of factory programming, however I believe the factory dyno's and custom maps each GT3 motor to optimize the AFRs and there's nothing left here to optimize.
#18
10-28-2008 | 08:30 PM
Banned
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,123
From: Miami,FL
Rep Power: 234
Those are very good rwhp results from a 997 GT3 that is bone stock.
In my area (So. Florida) the across the board rwhp numbers for stock 997 GT3's has been 350 to 365 rwhp.
My 997GT3 has dyno'ed 360 to 363 rwhp bone stock at different occasions.
Now with FVD headers and race exhaust and GIAC software it dyno'ed 392 rwhp.
IXXI Turbo your post about the 996 GT3 is incredible. You show 372 rwhp as stock. The stock power as stated by the factory is 381 bhp. That would appear to suggest a DT loss of 2%?
You could have a freak motor, if so lucky you.
What am I not understanding.
Cheers
Ranger
In my area (So. Florida) the across the board rwhp numbers for stock 997 GT3's has been 350 to 365 rwhp.
My 997GT3 has dyno'ed 360 to 363 rwhp bone stock at different occasions.
Now with FVD headers and race exhaust and GIAC software it dyno'ed 392 rwhp.
IXXI Turbo your post about the 996 GT3 is incredible. You show 372 rwhp as stock. The stock power as stated by the factory is 381 bhp. That would appear to suggest a DT loss of 2%?
You could have a freak motor, if so lucky you.
What am I not understanding.
Cheers
Ranger
#20
10-28-2008 | 08:51 PM
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 104
From: germany/ bay area
Rep Power: 32
I also see that at least the first dyno is uncorrected. I'm not sure what altitude that was taken at, but assuming it's at 100 feet it looks like applying a correction factor might bring it down to ~343 rwhp? That's still very good, but probably more in line with what would be expected from a 996 GT3 on a dynojet...
#21
10-28-2008 | 09:08 PM
Banned
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,123
From: Miami,FL
Rep Power: 234
It must be a very strong car.
Ranger
#24
10-30-2008 | 06:38 AM
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 79
From: Lafayette, Louisiana
Rep Power: 21
I also see that at least the first dyno is uncorrected. I'm not sure what altitude that was taken at, but assuming it's at 100 feet it looks like applying a correction factor might bring it down to ~343 rwhp? That's still very good, but probably more in line with what would be expected from a 996 GT3 on a dynojet...
These runs were made near sea level, (Lafayette Louisiana)
Last edited by IXXI Turbo; 10-30-2008 at 06:43 AM.
#30
11-02-2008 | 02:56 PM
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,205
From: Philadelphia, PA
Rep Power: 204
Ill try, I have to find a scanner (I have the sheets in my car). The dyno looks nearly identical to Luisgt3s dyno except i am 2 hp shy. I did the dyno for charity, so I wasnt really looking at the sheet too much. I was surprised though...