Who is making the best Desk Top Dyno type program these days

General engine tech -- Drag Racing to Circle Track

Moderator: Team

2stangs69-91
New Member
New Member
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:23 pm

Who is making the best Desk Top Dyno type program these days

Post by 2stangs69-91 » Sun Nov 04, 2007 3:21 pm

I have the Desk Top dyno 2000 but I am sure there are better ones out there now. thanks

1989TransAm
Guru
Guru
Posts: 9225
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:43 pm
Location: Cypress, California

Post by 1989TransAm » Sun Nov 04, 2007 4:00 pm

I don't know who makes the best dyno program but Dyno2000 has been upgraded to DynoSim. I believe Comp Cams has the rights to it.

Ron E
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2016
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: nc

Post by Ron E » Sun Nov 04, 2007 4:43 pm

I've got several and use them all. Get Pipemax. The short version is, you can spend ten times more and get less.

shawn
Expert
Expert
Posts: 903
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 12:09 pm
Location: Northwest
Contact:

Post by shawn » Sun Nov 04, 2007 5:28 pm

ditto.
shawn

Lightning Struck
New Member
New Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 4:44 pm
Contact:

Post by Lightning Struck » Sun Nov 04, 2007 5:55 pm

Is there a program that's more realistic when it comes to turbocharged applications?

I've used Desktop Dyno 2000 a bit, and boost and it don't get along it seems.

Ed-vancedEngines

Post by Ed-vancedEngines » Sun Nov 04, 2007 6:57 pm

I have desktop dyno 25 and desk top dyno 2000 and to me the 2000 is a joke. I prefer the 25 to it. The 2,00 results are very easy to manipulate and if you add nitrous it will add that same power all the way from start to finish. In other words it does nothing to calculate the additional power curves.

I have one that works very well with car ET and speeeds but is bogus with horsepower called Drag Strip Plus. No longer available, that I like pretty well.

The one now owned and is sold by Speed Talk engineered by Patrick Hale is very good.

viewtopic.php?t=6953

Larry Meaux's Pipe Max is very good, but it is smater than I am.

http://www.maxracesoftware.com

Ed

User avatar
MadBill
Guru
Guru
Posts: 13644
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:41 am
Location: The Great White North

Post by MadBill » Sun Nov 04, 2007 7:41 pm

I have Dyno Shop, DeskTop Dyno and Dyno Sim, mostly 5-8 years old, all of which I think do a credible job of approximating the performance and guiding component choices for a street engine, (much better than your brother-in-law's mechanic pal) but I would not use them for a serious effort.

In the Pro category, I have Allan Lockheed's Engine Expert, which does a very good job of speccing out the engine and providing enough raw data (velocities, accelerations, etc.) to add considerable extra value, but unless there is a more recent version than mine (circa 1996), there is a confusing array of updates and patches which I found hard to keep straight.

My program of choice 90+% of the time is Dynomation. My 10 year old DOS version has a few foibles and shortcomings but I believe many of these have been addressed in the current Windows-based edition, which as it appears from the Audie web site: http://www.audietech.com/ , is combined with an enhanced version of the Dyno Sim program mentioned above.

PipeMax, although primarily designed for optimizing intake and exhaust system dimensions, provides a ton of other useful data and is far easier to use as well as much less expensive than the other 3 pro programs I mention.

I've recently seen RSA'a Patrick Hale's book (see banner at top of page) based on his Engine Pro simulator and it looks like that program too would be an excellent tool for engine building. Since it is based on carefully reverse-engineering formulae to fit the specs of hundreds of the most successful racing engines, one can probably be assured that while it may not produce the last percent or two of potential power (being based on what has been done, not what could be), neither will it steer you far wrong. The pure physics approach of Dynomation has occasionally led into some pretty murky waters, where many builders fear to tread. There would be a lot of value in using both, to 'triangulate' on the optimum from the best of science and experience. (Although as they say: "The man with a watch knows the time. The man with two is never quite sure.") :lol:
Felix, qui potuit rerum cognscere causas.

Happy is he who can discover the cause of things.

User avatar
F1Fever
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1693
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2006 9:17 am
Location: Okla
Contact:

Post by F1Fever » Sun Nov 04, 2007 10:07 pm

all of the programs i've seen so far and even tried to personally write seem to make more power by raising the compression ratio than my experience has shown. any takes on that thought?
I was no longer driving the car consciously. I was driving it by a kind of instinct, only I was in a different dimension.
Filtrex

Rick360
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1051
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2004 9:55 pm
Location: Missouri

Post by Rick360 » Sun Nov 04, 2007 10:42 pm

Being a RSA Engine Pro user for about 10years now, I think it is an excellent guide for racing engines. It provides recommendations for many parameters that you can use to design a race engine such as intake length, min CSA, Max CSA and exhaust. It doesn't use physics calculations, like Madbill said, to simulate the engine cycle. Patrick Hale used thousands of dyno tests from hundreds of racing engines to develop his formulae to predict the performance as well as the recommendations. I felt this is better than the theoretical physics model due to the lack of real understanding of the inner workings of a race engine. MadBill has a good point that the two may work well together.

I first bought it about 10yrs ago and have upgraded several times since. It has been worth the $$ every time.

Every engine I have dynoed has been very close to the RSA Engine Pro predicted HP and TQ. It has guided my porting with positive results also.

Patrick Hale has always been a great help and his personal involvement and assistance was a big part of why I used his software. Don (Speedtalk owner) now owns all of Patrick's RSA software and can be purchased here on ST. What the future holds for improvements and upgrades for these remains to be seen.

Rick

383Malibu
Member
Member
Posts: 173
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:36 am
Location: Akron, OH
Contact:

Post by 383Malibu » Sun Nov 04, 2007 10:44 pm

I've used Performance Trend's Engine Analyzer for about 15 years and Engine Analyzer Pro for about 5 years. Given a good baseline, they both do an excellent job of predicting the impact of component changes. But, like most software, GIGO. PipeMax also accurately predicted the power and torque curves for our last heads up effort (and a lot less expensive) along with providing a ton of other data.
Roger Copeland
R&R Racing

Rick360
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1051
Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2004 9:55 pm
Location: Missouri

Post by Rick360 » Sun Nov 04, 2007 11:07 pm

383Malibu wrote: PipeMax also accurately predicted the power and torque curves for our last heads up effort (and a lot less expensive) along with providing a ton of other data.
I use PipeMax for a second opinion to Engine Pro for sizing headers and ports. It has a lot of other useful information also.

Several have mentioned using this, but how could PipeMax be considered a Dyno Sim? The HP and TQ are set by the VE% entry which you can't know if you are designing the engine. This is NOT what it is for.

Rick

2stangs69-91
New Member
New Member
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:23 pm

Post by 2stangs69-91 » Mon Nov 05, 2007 4:06 am

thank you for all the replies. I had no idea that the programs cost so much money....I might have to hold off for a little while(I need to buy engine parts.)

383Malibu
Member
Member
Posts: 173
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:36 am
Location: Akron, OH
Contact:

Post by 383Malibu » Mon Nov 05, 2007 7:06 am

Rick - PipeMax ver3.6 provides several methods to estimate volumetric efficiency if you don't know it.
Roger Copeland
R&R Racing

Ron E
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2016
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: nc

Post by Ron E » Mon Nov 05, 2007 7:48 am

Rick360 wrote:
383Malibu wrote:
Several have mentioned using this, but how could PipeMax be considered a Dyno Sim? The HP and TQ are set by the VE% entry which you can't know if you are designing the engine. This is NOT what it is for.

Rick
Not being an engine simulation program is actually pointed out by Pipemax. It's main deal is headers. If you're modeling a motor that doesn't yet exist, you'll need an educated guess at a realistic VE input. With that done, it provides a ton of information about what you'll need to reach that VE. So if you have a target power level, you can get a good estimate on what's required to reach the goal. Including flow per crank degrees, recommended CSA's. inlet CFM, etc. I will give you a ton of information on specifics needed to get what you're after.

If your car is sucking up all your loose change, get Pipemax!, you may, or may not get around to adding more programs later. It's that good.

blykins
Guru
Guru
Posts: 2045
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:59 pm
Location: Louisville, KY

EA

Post by blykins » Mon Nov 05, 2007 12:42 pm

I have had some decent results with Engine Analyzer.

It was around 6% off on my 428FE, but nailed the horsepower and torque peak rpms.

It was 3% off on a 350SBC that I assembled and dyno'd this past Friday. It nailed the torque number and both peaks.

I think it does better with smaller displacement engines and milder combinations but I would recommend it.

Like the others say, you get good results from giving it good information to start with.

Post Reply