Dyno'd the MS3 Today...

[Design]

...and numbers were good.

Baseline:
246 WHP
290 WTQ

MSCAI (third pass):
274 WHP
308 WTQ

http://memimage.cardomain.com/ride_images/1/1259/1341/3145670203_large.jpg

Shawn at Church Automotive dynos his MS3's with two 25 mph shop fans to the upper and lower grills, and the hood CLOSED. This seems to yield more real-world numbers using the ram-air induction. Import Tuner used this approach and netted similar numbers:
2008 Mazdaspeed 3 Baseline Dyno Photo (http://www.importtuner.com/powerpages/impp_0811_2008_mazdaspeed_3/photo_03.html)

Anyways, thought I'd share. (2thumbs)

[mr_mazda329]

Bone stock VS mscai?

[SubieKiller3]

what all do you have for mods?

[LASERBLUE135]

good number, the CAI is definetly working!

[Design]

Bone stock VS mscai?

Yes.

[MAZDA_SPEED]

30whp from a CAI...(uhm)

[Design]

27 actually. I think AEM claims 28?

[mr_mazda329]

Base HP looks about right, but the TQ is off. 25-28 hp gain is normal for CAI. Believable numbers aside from the TQ. Good stuff nonetheless.

[Circle9]

Is that flywheel horsepower? I'm having difficulty believing that is wheel horsepower.

[jon619]

Base HP looks about right, but the TQ is off. 25-28 hp gain is normal for CAI. Believable numbers aside from the TQ. Good stuff nonetheless.

The torque is what throws me. Stock, we have 280 flywheel torque, but you're putting down 290 wheel torque. Maybe your car is a freak? Have you drag raced it and if so, what was your trap speed?

[PureDrive]

290 stock........sorry, no way. Something must be awry.......

[guy_incognito]

Look at the pictures of the dyno. Those numbers and charts are SAE corrected to be flywheel HP and flywheel torque.

So the HP gain is probably about right, but torque does seem low?

[Design]

Yeah I know the numbers seem a bit weird, but Import Tuner pulled 246/280 baseline using a similar testing method. Many shops have historically used an open hood approach where I did not. It's important to note that dynapacks inflate numbers slightly, but they eliminate variables such as wheel slip and other contact issues. It is technically hub wheel power, not flywheel or wheel power.

Peak numbers aside, those gains are very real. The point of this post is to illustrate that $330 nets a good return in performance.

EDIT: If it helps, I will post video showing how the shop fans were used to simulate a more realistic performance environment during dyno testing.

[eg6motion]

Looks like their dyno is inflating the numbers to simulate flywheel HP...thats what your sheets say anyway.

[oaklandopen]

either way, the gains of the intake only are awesome, regardless of how ppl are complaining about the dyno numbers

im trying to get mine very soon but just shopping around to find the best price

[peeaanuut]

just to clarify, yes the numbers are corrected numbers to the flywheel. I was at the same dyno day and pulled this:

http://67.55.37.196/gallery2/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=9792

http://67.55.37.196/gallery2/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=9796

[Design]

Joe, were you the Silver MS3 lowered on MS6 wheels? Weren't you running the Cobb SF and some other tuning? Could be wrong... otherwise that's a very weird readout indeed. My buddy with the S2K that day dynod 244 whp with a reflash, exhaust, and headers. That's about 5% higher than similar readouts on a floor dyno, but not a huge difference.

In any case, here's some clarification from Shawn Church regarding his dynapacks:


1) Our dyno reads exactly the same today as it did 7 years ago when we first bought it. I tested my S2000 on it (stock AP1) the day it arrived and it made 212-213 hp vs. 200-201 on my local Dynojet. There are no correction factors used.

2) The easy way to tell whether anyone is fudging numbers is to use the preformatted screens rather than the comparison window shown. The preformatted screens for "flywheel" (on the older software) power/torque include a box at the bottom for TCF which stands for Transmission Correction Factor. As long as that value is 1.0, what you see on the plot is what was measured at the hubs. We never use the comparison screen as shown because it tends to confuse people as well as be open for manipulation.

3) A Dynapack should always read higher than a roller dyno. Physics dictates it. If you don't believe that, then you must believe that roller dynos are inflated. Considering that in inertia mode, Mustang, Dynojet and Superflow have all been shown to be within 1%, this is unlikely. The cause for higher readings comes down to driveline loss reductions, primarily in wheel/tire inertia and in rolling resistance elimination. See SAE Paper #2002-01-0887 You'll have to pay to download it, but the testing data is outstanding. You'll see that rolling resistance losses alone on a roller dyno can be quite large. In the test case, it was shown that for a 245/50/17 tire the losses were 16 hp at 110 mph. This is a loss that will not be present on a Dynapack. Something to think about

Regardless, it's MUCH more important to focus on net additions rather than peak numbers.

[peeaanuut]

the only true power adder if have is the COBB SRI. No tune or anything. Other mods would be grounding kit and Forge BPV. Other than that no other power related mods. Yes I was on the MS6 wheels.

[mzspd3soffl]

30whp from a CAI...(uhm)

yahh!! my car did the exact same thing. but was 310tq n 277hp Cold air FTW!!!! i had the short ram from cobb and it doesnt feel the same. Surely!(gossip)