Too much hp-talk, let's talk real life numbers!
10-18-2005, 05:57 AM
#91
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 445
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by schnellfahrer
Thomas, please tell me where the hell you found a stretch to do this test without fear of 6months in prison and 2 years as a pedestrian.
The "road" stupidity. I guess we could hook up at gardermoen, the old airfield sometime. We should be able to do some legal runs over there, but not now. We need to wait at least 6 months from now. Gotta love winter time, right??I did some runs the other day, and the rear tires started slipping in 4th at 150kpr! Pretty scaring. (cold outside!!)
Time to put the arrow in the garage
10-18-2005, 06:18 AM
#92
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 445
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by special tool
"No way Siv is 55kg. More like 39kg"
Dude - buy her a sandwhich!!!!
Dude - buy her a sandwhich!!!!
Just kidding! She`s healthy as hell!
The little woman streching 160cm above the shoes is flooring the throttle in my car at most of the tracks over here! She almost need a pillow to sit on! Siv @ Kinnekulle
(old clip, car not equiped with the VR stuff ++)
10-18-2005, 06:51 AM
#94
Pro
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 617
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TurboTommy
Yes, Tomas; exactly
I could go on and illustrate, from a mathematical and physics standpoint, that ST's dyno figures are impossible to achieve given his configuration and probable airflow; but I don't feel like going up against a whole herd of sheep.
I could go on and illustrate, from a mathematical and physics standpoint, that ST's dyno figures are impossible to achieve given his configuration and probable airflow; but I don't feel like going up against a whole herd of sheep.
10-18-2005, 06:55 AM
#95
UAE Rennlist Ambassador
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by Tomas L
I do think Tommy has a point here. The main purpose of dyno sheets is to get bragging rights among friends, rivals and on webforums....
What at least I want, is for my car to accelerate as fast as possible and then this is a better test than a chassis dyno. I agree that there is a problem with comparing the values due to different test conditions and more or less accurate measuring methods. Still the figures gives us useful information.
I'm not sure that I agree that the dyno is better due to being "proven scientific instrument with a calibrated weatherstation". First of all, it would be much better if the dyno were calibrated and the weatherstation not than the other way around which seems more common. I have a problem with dyno figures since not even their advocates seem to believe in them, there have been to many statements like this: "I made 666 rwhp on x-brand dyno and therefore I would have at least 777 rwhp on an z-brand dyno.
And since rwhp numbers are a selling point I don't think any dyno owner is upset if his dyno shows a little optimistic values.
Tomas
What at least I want, is for my car to accelerate as fast as possible and then this is a better test than a chassis dyno. I agree that there is a problem with comparing the values due to different test conditions and more or less accurate measuring methods. Still the figures gives us useful information.
I'm not sure that I agree that the dyno is better due to being "proven scientific instrument with a calibrated weatherstation". First of all, it would be much better if the dyno were calibrated and the weatherstation not than the other way around which seems more common. I have a problem with dyno figures since not even their advocates seem to believe in them, there have been to many statements like this: "I made 666 rwhp on x-brand dyno and therefore I would have at least 777 rwhp on an z-brand dyno.
And since rwhp numbers are a selling point I don't think any dyno owner is upset if his dyno shows a little optimistic values.
Tomas
10-18-2005, 02:47 PM
#101
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by TurboTommy
Yes, Tomas; exactly
I could go on and illustrate, from a mathematical and physics standpoint, that ST's dyno figures are impossible to achieve given his configuration and probable airflow; but I don't feel like going up against a whole herd of sheep.
I could go on and illustrate, from a mathematical and physics standpoint, that ST's dyno figures are impossible to achieve given his configuration and probable airflow; but I don't feel like going up against a whole herd of sheep.
10-18-2005, 03:37 PM
#103
Pro
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Boden, Sweden
Posts: 603
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by theedge
You or Skunk, either way id like to hear...
2,5L engine
boost 1.72 bar
6000 rpm
533 rwhp
If we assume 11% driveline loss then we get 600 hp at the flywheel.
We can also assume an AFR at around 12.2:1
Then we have the following parameters to play with:
BSFC, Normally between 0.5 for a well tuned high compression 16v engine at high 12 AFR, and 0.6 for a less optimised low compression engine. A turbo engine should be between 0.55 and 0.6 due to the low compression ratio and the fact that we have to run a little richer AFR.
VE, Maybe 75% for a standard engine and a little over 100% for a well tuned racing engine.
Temperature after the intercooler. 20° indicating a 100% effective IC.
To reach 600 hp at the above stated circumstances we need a BSFC of 0.5 lb/(hp*h), a VE at 112% and a temperature of 20°C after the intercooler.
In other words, to achive this power level you need the efficiency of a highly tuned high compression naturally aspirated engine, better volumetric efficiency than a racing engine and a 100% effective IC.
I may have done some calculation errors or messed things up otherwise. It's up to each individual to draw his own conclusions from this.
Tomas
10-18-2005, 03:38 PM
#104
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Corleone
Did a new run at sunday two days ago. Temp was 48 F compared to 68 at my 7,3 seconds run.
New time: 7,1 seconds
Im happy
New time: 7,1 seconds
Im happy
10-18-2005, 03:38 PM
#105
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by Corleone
Did a new run at sunday two days ago. Temp was 48 F compared to 68 at my 7,3 seconds run.
New time: 7,1 seconds
Im happy
New time: 7,1 seconds
Im happy