You cannot conclusively say the 9A car in this comparison is running "low" with this bunch of vehicles as you can argue they all ran "low". Unless you have seen a vehicle with this same spec of engine on these rolls produce a better number curve then that is the data that is presented. The reality is, relative to the rest of ABF MK2 vehicles, it achieved less torque yes, drove well but still matches that fact at WOT. Ignoring absolutes, if this test were to take place on another brand of rolls, once the dyno procedure is heeded and the process is controlled as in this exercise, I would expect to see the same type of delta even if all the vehicles where reading "high". Your plots has a questionable rpm range for a 16v engine particularly if it has performance cams. That range is more inline with an 8V engine though the plot does look 16v in profile if you imagine a typical 0-7500rpm range compressed. You statement regarding the MK2 9A in this thread would have more validity if all cars where tested on this dyno in your plot. And what initially appears as an operational error would affect all equally. It is for this reason I requested that plots other than what is being discussed on here not to be put up as it introduces a non relevant reference to what is being discussed here. This plot cannot be used to compare what was done here to a specific powertrain as it is not transparent. Hope you understand what I am trying to say.