I’d imagine this can be arranged.
504/350tq @21 psi
civic si 2.0L gt3076r 
FYI, my statement is not indicating that I think one reads higher than another, just from a scientific standpoint I’d like to see the difference, if any.
No fair Earl. Thats on a Dynapack!
Oh sorry, personally I think numbers from different dynos are less valid for comparison then 1/4 mile runs from different tracks. I can’t have an opinion? Here I’ll contribute to the thread too, you can even make fun of me for having the lowest numbers, since I’m sure that’ll make you feel good.
264hp/349tq
Why would anyone else go somewhere besides turbo civs dyno ???
a dynapack that now reads lower than a mustang
^^
mustang dyno from my friends all motor b series
dynapack
210 on a mustang
and 205 on dynapack
Because someone’s AWD. lol
399/413 turbo at STM
---------- Post added at 06:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:53 PM ----------
I’d like to get back on Innovative’s to see how the numbers compare to STM
421/412 na ls1
626/600 Supercharged
I like it :tup:
I called Ian and he was supposed to ask Mike about letting me do 1 pull just as a comparison, but he forgot :ham:
sabia, your 655 from the yellow or orange car?
Yellow. sold the orange one to my dad.
Josh needs to make a sweet leaderboard for this one too so it’s easy to read
I’ll work on it. Going to use graphs this time I think.
Should we make people prove their #'s with dyno sheets?
from what im told, my dyno is very close to what would be read on a mustang. I agree with LZ, different race tracks yeild way different results as well. You could nit pick any list till nothings valid but wheres the fun in that. should we accept only SAE numbers as well? because my car made 1050whp uncorrected.:lol:
Good idea. If nothing else its interesting to see the graphs. Heres mine.
This is observed, no correction.
Dan
Saxon 84mm 3076R by saxonbrian2, on Flickr[COLOR=“Silver”]