View Single Post
Old 04-30-2019, 02:48 PM   #139 (permalink)
Senna-F1
Enthusiast Member
 
Senna-F1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Cary, NC
Age: 54
Posts: 425
Drives: 370SC,EliseSC,MR2T
Rep Power: 50
Senna-F1 has a reputation beyond reputeSenna-F1 has a reputation beyond reputeSenna-F1 has a reputation beyond reputeSenna-F1 has a reputation beyond reputeSenna-F1 has a reputation beyond reputeSenna-F1 has a reputation beyond reputeSenna-F1 has a reputation beyond reputeSenna-F1 has a reputation beyond reputeSenna-F1 has a reputation beyond reputeSenna-F1 has a reputation beyond reputeSenna-F1 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bullitt5897 View Post
You guys keep asking for dyno numbers from all these guys like they owe you something... RJM posted the dyno numbers day 1.
Are you talking about these dyno numbers?

This graph is messed up. The obvious issue is with the spikes in TQ. Who wants that? The troubling part is that in the early TQ spikes you can see that the HP curve does not match up with the spike. It should! TQ jumped from 400 to 472 and back to 400 all within a span of just 250 RPM! it was THIS 472 ft/lbs that RJM chose as the Max torque for the pull.

Funny that in the last set of TQ spikes, RJM did chose to have the HP spike as well. Must be so that they could then list the max HP as 533.

It’s obvious one of the lines is being manipulated some and then taking what appears to be serious issues with the kit/tune/dyno, and reporting those as the final max numbers.

Given what I’ve said and considering our last go around with your highly exaggerated claims of power increase from RJM Products and my comments, the ones you repeatedly asked me to delete, it’s understandable that you saying “RJM posted the dyno numbers” isn’t going to satisfy most of us. This isn’t Facebook where things RJM doesn’t like suddenly disappear.
Attached Images
File Type: jpeg 309EBDB5-5B12-4478-BF4A-F5EA81D29611.jpeg (161.3 KB, 42 views)
Senna-F1 is offline