[dvsidboy]

I helped organize a dyno today for another site I help run, great turn out...after much demand I was talked into putting the box up there.

Now I have a AT 2006, BONE STOCK....I have no idea what it should put down.....

We left it in Drive and the guy running the dyno had it start recording when I went into 3rd gear, o/d off and traction control was left on....

I put down a whole 80.6whp and 95.7trq....now to get some mods ready for our big dyno next spring.

here is a pic

[Sir]

dang I wish I still lived in Kuna!!! I would so love to watch this box get built!!!

[killerxromances]

80.6 for a baseline is about right, some dyno slightly higher.. I think the highest i've heard of for an auto was 84.x but yeah. I remember those days...actually, no i dont.

[1LowXB]

a girl i know dynoed her auto and got 76... 2005 though

[preacherboy]

I remember those days...actually, no i dont.

I'm with you killerxromances, I never remembered those days because I never drove an xb without F/I. Of course I've had 2 F/I versions, one crappy custom job and my current greddy.

[killerxromances]

Originally Posted by preacherboy

I'm with you killerxromances, I never remembered those days because I never drove an xb without F/I. Of course I've had 2 F/I versions, one crappy custom job and my current greddy.

I bought mine stock, but in 1 week i had i/e, rims, and some other things. So i really don't remember what its like to drive a stock xb, it must suck though. Infact, looking it up i bought my xb with 200 miles, new. 303 miles according to my notes is when i installed the intake and 310 miles is when i installed the exhaust. So yeah

[rollhard]

Ah sucky. So that means the AT are averaging 10whp less than the MT. I really didnt know the DT loss on the AT was that big of a difference on the XB. Some have less than a 2-5% difference from a MT. Average for MT cars is 89-91whp.

[Stylis]

Thats about the right numbers, time to add on to that bad boy!

[killerxromances]

Originally Posted by rollhard

Ah sucky. So that means the AT are averaging 10whp less than the MT. I really didnt know the DT loss on the AT was that big of a difference on the XB. Some have less than a 2-5% difference from a MT. Average for MT cars is 89-91whp.

I've seen auto's dyno anywhere from 76-84whp, and manuals dyno as low as 86 and as high as 94whp. I think most of the difference between numbers is what dyno is used and what the elevation is. I know that 94whp the guy said he was dyno'd at 400ft above sealevel.

[preacherboy]

I've seen auto's dyno anywhere from 76-84whp, and manuals dyno as low as 86 and as high as 94whp. I think most of the difference between numbers is what dyno is used and what the elevation is. I know that 94whp the guy said he was dyno'd at 400ft above sealevel.

Yea I guess that's why you can't just rely on the whp that the car was dyno'd at. It would be funny if you had 150whp and someone with 130whp ended up faster than you because his hp was done at a high altitude on a very hot day versus your low altitude cool day, lol!

[killerxromances]

Originally Posted by preacherboy

Yea I guess that's why you can't just rely on the whp that the car was dyno'd at. It would be funny if you had 150whp and someone with 130whp ended up faster than you because his hp was done at a high altitude on a very hot day versus your low altitude cool day, lol!

Usually just weather and altitude isn't going to effect the dyno results that much. Unless its 105degrees, humid, and 13,000ft vs. 59degrees, not humid, and 9ft above sealevel. If it effects it that much you're probably looking at the 150whp guy dyno'd on a mustang dyno, and the other guy dyno'd on a dynojet. Usually you can logically debate 3-5whp difference on a dyno. Like my 128whp, it could be 123whp or it could be 132whp for the two extremes, but in real life driving, thats what the results could be given the all the x and y's.

[Simplyscion]

makes me feel better that I only put down 123whp @ 6psi on a 100 degree summer day lol