Heat is definately more of an issue now than it was with the older batteries. Some of the top drivers at Cleveland were running cooling fans in TC. They do work and when you're 2.5oz under weight it's doable.

Great stuff guys... all this stuff is important if you want to lean how to go faster... I really do beleive that more then ever we are operating on the ragged edge of what these stock motors are capable of... I honestly will be amazed if any truely break through developments are made in stock motors themselves... maybe liquid cooling might help... :) would that be legal?

I have to confess... I don't have any idea what kind of motor M7 is... After investigating why my graphs didn't match Mike's DynoViewer graphs... I discoverd that I was compareing two differnt motors with my spreadsheet then I was with Mike's DynoViewer... I wasn't aware that I had two differnt dyno runs that looked as good as M7 does... Compareing M7 to the run I thought it was, leaves me thinking theres a good chance that M7 is indeed a Paradox, simply because the two files are so much alike in terms of RPM and Torque.. However I can not say for sure what kind of motor M7 is... there were no notes assoicated with this motor. I the only clue is that I named this file US001 which means nothing to me... :)

Well it's a good motor what ever it is...

Oh, and it also points out that Mike's DynoViewer is one slick peice of work... If you've got a the Fantom Facts II or a Robitronic dyno I suggest you get his viewer and play around with it...

For you TurboDyno guys... you'll have to ask Mike nicely if he'll try and work on accpeting TurboDyno data with his viewer...

Snuffy,

RM-02 11-09-02 is your best looking motor. I has the best power of all your motors, and it's effciency isn't bad either...

The 'MOTOR TEST' motor has some awsome effciency, but it doesn't put out as much power as RM-02...


THe RPM is so close on those to motors, you don't even have to shift gears to see the differance...

Use Golden's dyno viewer to view these two motors I think you'll see why I like RM-02... Look at the RPM graph... Previously I had thought MOTOR TEST was better because of it's effciency... it still may be a better motor, but these two are likely the best two of the ones I have data for.... all of the Monster motors looked pretty good though... one has REALLY poor effciency though... I don't know why... it looks really strange compared to the others.

I take it back... I can not defend the choice of RM02 over MOTOR TEST.... the effciency differance is just too great, and the power advantge of RM-02 too small. If you look closely there are some places that RM-02 uses 10 amps more power to produce 1 or 2 watts of power...

I do think the study of these two motors is a very interesting situation... If you compare the amp veiw to RPM view with Golden's dynoviewer it is pretty amazing how much differnt things look...

Based on the data, I have to go back to saying MOTOR TEST is the best motor Snuffy has given us data for.

To the Dyno Guru's;

I have my brand new Robitronic Dyno sitting in front of me and would like to ask a question. MUST I solder the power leads on every-time that I want to check a Motor or would it be acceptable to put a Deans plug on the end of the lead. I use a short Deans pigtail on all my motors and it sure would be nice to have a plug in connection too. BTW I am ONLY testing/racing stock motors.

Thanks, Popsracer

I cant think of any reason why not. It cetainly wont hurt anything. try the same motor both ways and see if there is a performance gain/loss. There might be a slight difference but who cares if you do them all the same way every time, its all relative. The connectors might actually be more consistant over the long run...

Mike:
For referance heat is measured in BTU's British Thermal Units. You multiply watts by 3.41 to get BTU's In the example with M8 & M7 yeilds 300 BTU's for M8 and 280 BTU's for M7. Dealng with heat disapation there is not much differance between these two and I would consider the differance irrelavant. However as you pointed out, this is waste heat and needs to be dealt with! If you could expose the motor to the airstream you could make a considerable differance in the losses. You could drop temps by ~30%.
When I run my TC and crank the numbers I get an average of 24.8 amp draw also. This seem to be a good indication of what the avarage value is for TC

Pops: I have done both. My Turbo and Fantom both had aligator clips that I used, I was lazy. I just switched to soldering on the Turbo and the numbers went up. But mayhem hit the nail on the head. Do it the same way every time and it will not matter.

I hate variables... I solder the leads directly to the motor every time when I use my Robitronic dyno. It's really not that hard and I beleive the results will be much more consistant as a result. I litteraly am looking differances as small as 1 watt when I do motor tunning or selection. Small differances in resistance will make noticeable changes in dyno numbers. Why take a chance that your dyno run is flawed because of a bad connection?

I've done tests, I don't remember the exact numbers right now, but if you add about 8 inchs of 12 gauge wire (two 4 inch peices) you will notice the differance in power... I beleive it was in the neighborhood of 3 or 4 watts peak on a stock motor. Now if you do this consistantly with the same lenghth wires and the deans connectors are always in good shape, your results may remain consistant and the variations small enough that it doesn't matter....

If you could move the voltage sensing leads to the motor, then adding wire or reducing wire would have very little effect...

Anyway... it's not that hard to solder the leads to the motor... so I do it all the time. Just keep the solider iron warm and handy.

We need to develop some formulas that allow us to evaluate motors taking into account effciency and output power as two seperate things. Hopefully not get too complex, but at least take into account heat and loss of battery voltage do to current drain on the batterys... Maybe it has to be reasonably complex but I beleive some aproximations could be used in many areas...


A seperate but somewhat realated issue that I've been thinking about for some time now...

How much of a motor's effciency and/or power output is due to RPM and/or Mechanical issues as oposed to Voltage and Current?

For example... a stock motor generaly produces peak power at about 50% of it's maximum RPM. If you apply less then full voltage to the motor when it's rotating at this same point, is the effciency the same? or is effciency more a product of votage and current?

I beleive that realtive RPM is the key element here, but I don't know for sure. Realtive to max RPM... When I view data for the same motor at 7.5v vs. 5 volts the power curve looks like it relates directly to percentage of max RPM... The effciency curve appears to follow this as wellf. This would tend to make gearin independent of Voltage and current... which would be a good thing to know...

I'd say to just run the plugs, because that's how you'll race it. If a motor runs like crap on the dyno and you find that its a bad plug, then you'll be able to see and fix the problem. But if you just solder, you'd never see the problem.

I also like Dyno's idea of connecting the voltage sensing wires to the motor. I think a set of alligator clips on those would work great.

I haven't done any math on this, and I have no idea of what engineering principles are involved, however I question if adding wire and moving the voltage sensing leads would somehow cause the Dyno to opearate beyond it's capablilitys and potentialy cause some problems.... For this reason alone I would advise caution in tryng this sort of thing... I in no way would take any responsiblity for what might happen...

I don't think it should be a problem... I just don't know for sure. All the more reason I'd just stick to soldering directly to the motor... It really isn't that hard...

Mostly I'm just paranoid and like to control any variables as much as possible.

DynoMoHum;

Don't you think that SOLDERING could be a variable.
BTW: I found the problem with the Data read. Was the software.

Thanks, Popsracer.

Sure soldering can be a variable... however the leads on the Robi are about the same thickness as motor connectors, so the heat distribution is very even on both ends, and it is realtively easy to get a good solder joint on these connections... So any decent solder job should be very consistant...

If you can't solder this connection quite easly, you need the practice anyway... they really are about as easy a soldering as anything I know of in RC... I'm serious about this... if your having trouble soldering these, then it would be good for you to learn better technique or get a better iron or something... they are very easy to solder with the right equipment and technique. It's very rare that I have a problem... ussualy it's a very dirty dyno connector or motor connector...

DynoMoHum;

Soldering quality is not a problem for me. Been doing it since I was about 10 yrs old. (seriously) I have a Hakko 927 station. The TOTAL length of wire and DEANS connector is 2" and the same on all of my Motors +/- 1/8".
I was concerned with the wear and tear on the leads and MOSTLY with having enough space on my PC Desk for all of this stuff. I do all of my R/C mechanics out in the garage but the PC is a desktop inside the house.

Thanks again.

Ok... if your keeping within 1/8th of an inch on the lenght of wire... no problem... I wouldn't bother with moving the voltage sensing leads I don't think... I'd do a couple dyno runs on a motor with direct solderd connection and get a benchmark... next I would put the connector and wire on the motor... then compare... keep this for future referance in case you want to try and compare data to someone else...

You may be able to bump up the voltage just a tick on the settings to compensate for the wire length... like maybe .1 volts or something... It just might equal out... :)

I don't own a Robi dyno so I don't really know if this is actually true. This is just my opinion based on my knowledge of electronic principals and what I've picked up on this and other forums.


If your going to use connectors I'd recomend NOT moving the voltage sense wires. Reason being, I believe the sense wires give feedback to the dyno and adjust the voltage to the proper level. If you using connectors with the sense wires directly attached to the motor you will not see the influence of the connector in the data because the dyno will compensate for any losses it produces. You won't be able to detect a bad connector.

I've got a question about how everyone is using all of the dyno data we get.

Here's an example to work from:

Assuming I dyno my motor (GM3 or Monster) on my Fantom and get all that data...

1) I'm running 4-cell oval on a 200 ft run line track.
2) The TQ every week is about 45 laps in 4:02
3) My rear tires are 2.28"

What numbers do you guys look at from the dyno run and what calculations do you use to figure a rollout given what the TQ run usually is ?

This should be of interest to everyone I think.

Thanks!

I take a known good motor that runs well and dyno it and save the data. Once you get a the fastest run possible you are happy with,a djust the track length until it tells you to run exactly the rollout that you ran. Save the parameters and that is your bench mark gearing run UNTIL you make a faster run, then repeat the process for a new benchmark. Eventually it will tell you exactly the rollout to run for any motor on THAT particular track. This is the short version, there is a much greater amount to know but this will get you started in the right direction. Keep doing this process until the dyno can predict the gearing better than you can. Good luck though the process never stops as you keep getting faster as the dyno helps you more and more. Then you can start on the efficiency and powerband tuning... a whole nuther book.

So pure trial and error until you get lucky enough to hit a gear that one of the motors likes and you get that TQ run ???

Basically yes. Some use others stats to fine tune thier dyno. Your fastest run is the best info available until you go faster.I like that better than hypothetical data. Mine spit out the exact rollout good enough for TQ today so track length will stay the same until I go faster. the shorter you can get the track length to while still matching your rollout on a good run tells you your line is good also.The fantom is an awesome tool when used properly. CHeckout the rollout program feature for doing timed practice runs where you can display the laps of up to 3 cars also. Better than a stopwatch.

I've never used the Fantom gearing thingy... so I really can't comment on that. However I'm inclined to beleive you can not reverse engineer rollout by using the length of the track and TQ's lap times. Last week my main reasoning is/was that it is dependent on driving ablity and cars setup. This week I have new data and expeiance that is leading me in another direction. It all revolves around this question...

Is all RPM created equal?


My new experiance tells me it's not. This weekend I raced with a half a dozen guys that are like REALLY fast in oval racing. We were all running 4 cell 19 turn motors. Some where using the handwound adjustable timming ARCOR motors. Others were not. I had an opertunity to dyno two Chameleon motors I had, and about 4 of my competitor's motors. The ARCOR motors appear to be down on power when compared to a Chameleon, the consensus is that this is due to the laydown brushes on the Chameleon motors. However, even though the ARCOR motors seem to be down on power, they were very competitive. Virtualy no differance that I could see in the overall outcome of the race.

The two motors I had were both Chameleons, on the dyno the peak power numbers were just about identical, like easly within 2%. However one has a interesting RPM curve when compared to the other. The one with the interesting RPM curve was hands down the best motor on the track for me. So much so, I was amazed and somewhat confused.

I am begining to think that there is more to RPM then can be seen at first glance. I'm still trying to sort it all out, however I beleive I'm on to something. Perhaps others have known about it for quite sometime, but it's all new to me.

When I see a guy on the track make a motor that appears to be 5% down on power go just as fast if not faster then another guy, it makes me start asking myself lots of questions about how and why...

Film at eleven... :) (graphs and numbers to come, but not sure how soon)

The basic observation involves RPM that has a slope that is not linear. That is the RPM tends to increase more rapidly as it aproachs max RPM.

This same idea futher proves the point that Tfram made a week or so ago... looking at data in relation to AMP input causes bias toward Efficiency. My idea about looking at dyno data corrected for gearing helps defend my newest observations and experiances as well.

(copied from my post in the "Monster" thread, where the same question was asked.)

Goodwrench...

First, I don't own a Fantom, but I "borrow" one when I'm racing oval (there are always several in the pits)...

I assume you always use the built in oval calc routine...

If the "big dogs" are running 45/4:02, I know from experience that I'm 1-2 laps off their pace. (Background: I don't run oval very often any more, and I know my car is "tight" compared to theirs, but that's a necessary compromise due to a lack of track time, etc. -- this combines to keep me "off-pace"...) So I would take the gearing for a 44 lap run (being optimistic, but what the heck)... The other way I do it is to just use the numbers they have setup (45 laps in this case), and then drop one tooth on the pinion, since I know I can't carry the speed in the turns that they do, so I need more punch out of the turns (although it sacrifices raw speed, it's necessary)...

Is this the sort of thing you were looking for?

Dynohum. Absolutely not. You actually touched on the next topic i was about to mention. That is the reason 2 motors with identical numbers on the Fantom, say P2K and a GM3 need to be geared 3 teeth differently to run the same lap/race time.
You must create a separate set of data/parameters in your fantom for each type of motor as track names, say, P2K, GM3,MVP THEN after you spin a motor the first thing you do is save the run under that "track name/data set using the tab key. Then retrieve your run and the correct gearing will appear for that type of motor.Using this technique, the fantom will give totally different rollouts for 2 different style motors that have identical power and RPM numbers. Hope i made myself clear LMK if you need more clarification. Each motor brand/type has its own unique characteristics that no dyno can measure such as flux/leakeage magnet stregth and ability to stay cool.

I've seen this kind of behavior on two of the same type of motors, in this case both are 19 Turn Chameleon motors. I beleive I can illustrate the point very well with graphs, right now I'm having a hard time getting the main graph I want to use to come out right...

Ok, I think I've got my graphing problems mostly sorted out...

First take a look at this graph. Notice the curved shape to the RPM curve of the higher RPM motor here. I beleive this is very significant and may be very telling about what makes this a better motor then the other. The the peak power of the lower RPM motor is not very far off from that of the higher RPM motor and the effciency is much greater on the lower RPM motor... However on the track the Higher RPM motor was much faster. I even had a guy who was previously sponserd by Woods racing doing the on track driving for me in the on track testing phase. (as well as my own driving)

http://www.wiltse.net/images/flip.gif


I'm still working on the rest of the story, with more graphs and data. Further details can be found at the following page.

http://www.wiltse.net/rpm_equality.htm

Hey Guys,

I have been reading this thread the past couple of days to catch up with what was going on before posting any replies (so I don't sound like a moron!). The reason I started reading in the first place is because I am convinced that I need to purchase a dyno if I want to continue to improve my abilities. Plus, I am kind of a gear nut and like to tinker with things. Hey, if I could afford it, I'd race real cars! But for now, I race 4 cell (stock and 19T) and 6 cell (stock) on a flat indoor carpet oval with 10L30's.

Everyone I know that has a dyno has the Fantom, and my LHS swears by them. In fact, his sponsored driver took 4th at Cleveland I believe in stock 1/12th and did well also in the other classes he entered. Not bad for a local guy at a national race! And that is what they tune with. So naturally, I was set on getting a Fantom as well. That being said, I was quite surprised at some of the negative things that I was reading on Big Jim's forum and here on this thread regarding problems with the Fantom dyno. So I started thinking I needed to stay away from Fantom and try and find a Robi or CE TD45, or maybe something else if it even exists. But now that I have read all of the posts, I think I am coming full circle back to getting the Fantom...for a couple of reasons:

1..It appears that the dyno info is all relative and that as long as I learn how the Fantom dyno is working and what it is telling me, I can use it effectively. And while there may be some quirks with the Fantom, all of the available dynos have there own pros and cons.

2..I know others with the same dyno (including my LHS, which is a great guy!) so I have a network of people that can help me use it correctly and give me advice when I need it. Not to mention all of the nice people here on these threads that are so open with their knowledge and opinions.

So, before I go and blow almost $500, does anyone have any strong opinions why I should rethink my plan?

By the way, thanks so much for all of the GREAT information. It has been truly helpful and is very appreciated...GOOD WORK GUYS!

If I haven't already convinced you that the Robitronic dyno is the best dyno available... then do what you want... Personaly, you'd have to pull my Robi from my cold dead fingers before I'll give it up...

Get the Fantom.

WOW!...you guys are good...I never expected such a quick response!

Dyno...I can tell you really like your Robi. And I also read where BJ thinks the Robi is the best flywheel dyno. So believe me when I say that I seriously considered it. I respect your opinion very much based on your apparent knowledge and all of the work you have done with the calculations and all. In fact, your work is what has pretty much convinced me that I will be "ok" with the Fantom. I am sticking with stock and 19T and will not be messing around with any of the more radical mod motors. If I ever get into that (which I doubt) maybe then I'll see the need to get something else. All of that, along with the price and availability of the Robi when compared to the Fantom just points me in that direction. Plus like I said, I have a network of help just a phone call or short drive away. But thanks again for your honest opinion and all of the good work you have been doing!

Goodwrench...Thanks for the advice!

All of the guys at my track have Fantoms -- there must be 15 of them.

It's a great help to be able to walk over to any of them and talk about numbers, results, etc.

You want to start a gernade war, just ask BJ what he thinks of the fantom. Me TurboDyno. Had a fantom and sold it!

I'm not saying the Fantom is better than the others.

It's just that at my track it's the ONLY dyno in use. Nobody uses any of the others.

I'd feel kind of lost if I was the only one with a Robi or CE -- nobody to help me there.

The Robi and CE are great dynos I'm sure -- maybe better than the Fantom. But nobody at my track has one and I really like being able to talk with those guys and compare stuff.

Well said! Dyno is a tool only, track data is the best. I dyno all my motors at home as I have to climb stairs with all my stuff :(

There's no doubt about it that having someone local to help you is a plus... on the other hand... if somoene local has one... why not just use their's??? :)

I never minded going with a dyno that no one else in my area has. It forced me to look at things my own way. Lean for myself what works and what doesn't seem to work. If you've really read most of my posts, I think you'll see that I've changed my ideas about what a good motor looks like on a dyno. I beleive I'm going in a better direction now. My previous work has helped me alot, and I wouldn't be were I'm at today if I had not gone through the process of learnign that I have. One of the things I like the most about the Robi is that I can veiw the data in many differnt ways... This could be my downfall too if I'm not carefull. I'm still having fun however, and if I want to use a Fantom I know a guy that's got one... I also know a guy with a TurboDyno, but I'm still the only Robitronic guy in my area...

I still have reservations about the Fantom... I have a nagging feeling that it's doing something odd. I can't place my finger on it however. Clearly there are many people that use and enjoy their Fantom dynos and go very fast on the track.

Dyno: That is also why I have a TD. Everyone at the track has the fantom. They feel the dyno is gospel. I did a lot of trial and error until I hit a setup that works for me. Like Dyno has said what works for you may not work for others.

Dyno,

Respectfully, there are a few reasons why I can't just use someone else's...

1. I rarely get enough time in one solid block to spend time running to my friend's house. I only get a couple hours at a time here and there. If I am driving 20 to 25 minutes each way, I have wasted half of my time. So convenience is an issue

2. Learning on my own IS a reason I don't want to use theirs. In other words, what I see happening (because it has happened) is that I don't get to tinker with my stuff. I keep hearing..."just put this spring on" or "use this brush...those are junk", "do this", "do that" when I go to their house. I don't get to just try stuff to see if it works. And then study and think about the results. I am just constantly trying to get done and get out of there.

The other benefit for me buying a fantom is that when I race at my LHS track, he will let me (and others) check my motors on his dyno if I need to. So if I am familiar with the workings and operation of the fantom, I can get more out of it without lugging mine to the track.

I was basicly just joking about using other peoples dynos insted of buying one...

I deffinetly understand the value of having one's own dyno.

I also understand that your needs for a dyno might be differnt then mine, and ultimately the choice is yours to make. It seems you've looked at all sides of the issue and are going into it with your eyes wide open... all of this is a good thing.

Becarefull when you go from one Dyno to another... the numbers will not likely be exactly the same. This is true of all dynos, even dynos of the same brand and model...

Dyno,

I did read that among these posts that even the same brand dynos could be calibrated differently and give different results. But thanks for the reminder. And thanks again for all of the info!

I have a fantom. I'm not very happy with it. I sent it in for repair last April. I bought it last December. Right now it's not operational. I had to fix a problem in the RPM circuit and in the process broke of the legs of the output transistors. The manufacturer has been discontinued the part. They're hard to find. Fortunately Al at Wizard is willing to sell me 4 of his.

I'm VERY seriously considering the CS dyno. One of our local guys has one. I really like the fact that it's a small standalone unit that can be used with or without a PC. I've heard they're making some changes to the unit right now so I'm waiting for the new version.

As a fantom owner. I would not recomend a fantom dyno. I will be selling mine when I replace it with something.

Very interesting Snuffy...


I have even bigger reservations about the CS dyno then I do the Fantom... but I have to admit I've never used the CS dyno. My concern about the CS dyno is repeatablity... I just don't see how the numbers would be repeatable, unless you used some sort of external power supply other then a battery pack...

Unless of course they are adding some sort of feedback loop that controls the voltage somehow...

As I say I have never used the CS... only read about it's operation and such... I am skeptical to say the least...

I know the Robi is expensive... but I'm the type of guy that says... I can buy the best now, or buy it later... Or something like that... Basicly I hate to buy one thing, and then decide later I should have just bought the more expensive thing to start with...

Back to this RPM thing.... I am becoming more and more convinced that there is more to RPM then gearing alone can change... It appears that the general shape of RPM is not linear with all motors. I'm not sure that's the best way to describe it... but there is more to RPM then I had originaly been lead to beleive by my own observations and by people who claim to know all there is to know about motors and dynos.

DynoMoHum,

Dyno choices are very limited right now. If you want a "real" dyno there are only 4 options; CE, Fantom, Robi and CS. The thing I like best about the CS is it's small footprint. If I'd known about the CS before I bought the fantom I probably would have bought that in the first place.

I've also heard about a powersource specificly created for the CS dyno. I don't know if it actually exists or not yet.

Right now I'm gathering information about it. Thru you and this forum I believe I know everything I need to know about the other dyno's in order to make an intelligent decision.

Have you actualy seen the Robitronic dyno? From what I can see, the footprint of the CS and the Robi are basicly identical... with the exception being that the Robi has the motor platform as a seperate unit (and it's detachable when not in use). I really like this... I have found that I can pick the motor stand up, replace springs and put it back down and proform another test... The other advangage of Robi's vs CS... the motor is held horizontaly, not verticaly... What was the last RC race car you had wher the motor mounted vertialy???

Actually if the CS didn't have the issue with potiential repeatablity problems I probably woudn't have any complaints about it...

You should talk with Tom (TheBoss) before you actualy purchase a CS dyno... he has used one and didn't like it much at all from what I could tell. I think Tom recently purchased a new Robitronic... after owning(or at least using extensively) all of the dynos named here...

My motors are usually vertical several times during my race. :D

Dynomohum-This is meant just as information to add to the pot. If you test a motor at constant voltage some patterns are made more clear.

If you plot the RPM vs Current graph which Dynomohum has displayed above, but do the test at constant voltage on a CE dyno, then the graph is an exceedingly straight line. RPM decreases with amp draw in a straight line fasion. If you dyno two different stock motors, then, the RPM vs amp draw graphs will be straight lines, but have different slopes. If you apply gearing (which ammounts to a correction to the slope), it is not surprising that you can get the graphs at the rear wheels to come out the same on paper.

If you do the tests on the Robitronic the RPM line is no longer straight. There is a voltage ramp thrown in. Essentially you have a straight line(RPM vs Amp draw) times a straight line (the voltage ramp). The result is a curve (a quadratic), but the curves of two different motors will have a similar shape. I expect that if you apply the exact gearing you can always make these two curves coincide at the rear wheel on paper.

It seems that our current dyno's do a good job of comparing the same type of motors, say 2 P2Ks. But have some difficulty comparing different types, say a GM3 vs a P2k. It might not be a matter of not having the right data analysis technique, but rather the fact that the dyno does not take two important on track properties into account, motor inertia which limits acceleration, and motor heating which limits acceleration.

So the next generation dyno might be like the CE dyno in that torque is measured directly, A hydraulic brake if neccesary for reproducibility, the Voltage Ramp of a Robitronic to better simulate a battery pack plus a speed control built in. Several track profiles to choose from obtained from telemetry data of amp draw and RPM in the car obtained by the builder. The test would last five minutes to test heat effects. The speed control would allow measuring power at part throttle. The motor would accelerate and decelerate like it does on the track when you select a profile. Output would be elapsed time. Well they have it in Formula 1 anyway. And then as soon as someone builds it motors will become brushless and it will be obsolete.

When you think about the price of a dyno compared to other test equipment it really is quite cheap. I have an O-Scope at work that cost over $100k, a good multimeter is about $200, etc etc. It actually brings up the question with me how good can they make a dyno for this price. I investigated making my own and it would have been well over $1500 for a flywheel dyno (the cheaper of the two to make).

Well... it seems to me that any dyno worth it's weight had better give us something that we can use to help predict what type of motor will go faster on the track. Wether it's a P2K, a Monster, a EX-Spec, or even a Putnam Pro 19 turn motor. To some degree I beleive that any of the current dynos (CE, Fantom, Robi, and even the CS) can do this. I do beleive that some of these have more potential then others at doing this.

I may not have yet found the perfect way to view dyno data, but I beleive I am much closer then I was a month ago.

One thing I am 99% sure of... viewing data in relation to amp input is only a very small part of the picture. I also beleive that viewing data this way can be misleading... and in some cases it seems to be down right deceitful.

It seems that it's one of those things that if you focus in on any one thing, you miss the big picture. I'm trying to step back and view things with a broader perspective in mind now. I beleive that adjusting for gearing helps me achive this. Unfortuantely none of the dynos I have used do this directly, forcing me to use other methods of viewing the data.

Mike Golden has been refining his DynoViewer, and it's looking better all the time. He's even added a way to enter CE TurboDyno data now. So currently it can accept Fantom, Robitronic, and TurboDyno data. He's also added the ability to display up to 4 motors at one time. Unfortunately my laptop doesn't display colors very well or something, and I'm having some minor problems as a result... So for now I prefer to use my own Excel spreadsheet... but Mikes DynoViewer really is quite cool.


By the way... The HS19 motor in my last test is a Putnam Pro motor... It's a Chameleon 2 motor that Mike Valentine sent me to do some testing with. I've since sent the motor back to Mike, so I can not do any further testing on it... I do have a fair amount of data that I collected during the time I had it... I'd really like to publicly thank Mike for sending me this motor for testing, it's been an eye opening experiance for me...

Thanks Mike...

Where is the Dynoviewer located for download ???

Dynomohum has been putting it on his web site for me. I'm just finishing up the latest version. I should be up today. There is a link to the older one somewhere in this thread...