Was happy with the figures my good old vec hit, especially when i think what she cost me and what I've spent on her (not a lot!). was just curios how my whp was higher than some but flywheel hp was lower. Does that point towards something on its way out like clutch/gearbox?
CS 2008 The Results
- Thread starter Matt
- Start date
A11VXL
Trader
You will see different losess on different dynos as it depends how the dyno is calibrated to read, ours is calibrated to read at the flywheel and there were 2 standard cars on the road on Saturday one did 146.5 the other 147. You will see different dynos achieving this result in different ways i.e. 6+4 = 10 or 7+3 = 10 the result is still 10.
As a further example of this, my Corsa when standard did 195 on Stephans dyno in Germany, but did 172 at the wheels./ On our dyno the day before it did 194.1 at the fly, however our dyno put it at 156.7 thats loss of 37.4
Another point to consider and further confuse everyone is that the figure shown on our dyno when we are running is the power at the wheels but this is uncorrected to both barometric pressure and air temp.
When ever you talk to various dyno manufacturres about this they all think there way is the correct way. :roll:
However the differance between mine and Stephans dyno and the make of them, confirms that allthough they read the wheel figure differently and the loss's, they both agreed on the calculation to the flywheel .
The point I guess is that it is almost impossible to compare one dyno with another, given that a big differance is also going to be air flow from the fans, not to mention the biggest variable of all the operator
I hope this has helped rather than confuse you further.. :?
Jon
As a further example of this, my Corsa when standard did 195 on Stephans dyno in Germany, but did 172 at the wheels./ On our dyno the day before it did 194.1 at the fly, however our dyno put it at 156.7 thats loss of 37.4
Another point to consider and further confuse everyone is that the figure shown on our dyno when we are running is the power at the wheels but this is uncorrected to both barometric pressure and air temp.
When ever you talk to various dyno manufacturres about this they all think there way is the correct way. :roll:
However the differance between mine and Stephans dyno and the make of them, confirms that allthough they read the wheel figure differently and the loss's, they both agreed on the calculation to the flywheel .
The point I guess is that it is almost impossible to compare one dyno with another, given that a big differance is also going to be air flow from the fans, not to mention the biggest variable of all the operator
I hope this has helped rather than confuse you further.. :?
Jon
Lightning Coupé
Senior Member
So really, you can only compare the values of the cars that ran on the day. Otherwise I could nip round the corner to Awsome GTI and get a dyno plot that says ive got 200bhp or use one I have from three years ago when I had a standard motor and reconed I had 186bhp and stick my name at the top of the list. :roll:
If we are looking to try and make sence of what modifications give what power and torque increases and where in the rev band, which is hopefully one of the outcomes of our RR day, we should only consider the results of those cars that ran on courtneys rollers. Weather these figures are acurate or not (but im sure there pretty close) dosent matter because they are directly comparable.
If we are looking to try and make sence of what modifications give what power and torque increases and where in the rev band, which is hopefully one of the outcomes of our RR day, we should only consider the results of those cars that ran on courtneys rollers. Weather these figures are acurate or not (but im sure there pretty close) dosent matter because they are directly comparable.
We can pretty much assume that A Senna's Car, totally standard Vectra 150, was the benchmark for the day. Standard text book power for a standard car. Everything else can be judged from that one car. I already knew what figure my car was producing because it was run on the rollers 4 times the evening before. My result was 182bhp. This has been a consistant figure at Courtenay.
My car has also been tested at Chipped UK and the figure was around 176bhp. Since then it has had a new 2.5 inch Milltek exhaust system. This would account for the 6bhp increase.
I would say that the figures that we had from Saturday are as near as dammit as you're going to get. The sytem had been undergoing calibration last week and it was perfect.
Let us not forget the 1.8 Vectra that run on Saturday too. This was typical power for the 1.8
:roll:
My car has also been tested at Chipped UK and the figure was around 176bhp. Since then it has had a new 2.5 inch Milltek exhaust system. This would account for the 6bhp increase.
I would say that the figures that we had from Saturday are as near as dammit as you're going to get. The sytem had been undergoing calibration last week and it was perfect.
Let us not forget the 1.8 Vectra that run on Saturday too. This was typical power for the 1.8
:roll:
Sjdickso
Staff
I agrre with Johnny.
Mine ran at chippedUK 2 years ago and got 155.6 and at courtenays this time got 155.8, with just the addition of the remus pipe.
One thing that was odd at chipped UK my torque my main torque was at 4750RPM and was 168 at Courtenay main torque was at 5250 and was 161.
Mine ran at chippedUK 2 years ago and got 155.6 and at courtenays this time got 155.8, with just the addition of the remus pipe.
One thing that was odd at chipped UK my torque my main torque was at 4750RPM and was 168 at Courtenay main torque was at 5250 and was 161.
people also NEVER take into account that their engines wear, which loses power so loads of dynos showing "book" figures on engines that have done 50-100Kmiles is a bit of a laugh really.
you can also have fun by dropping the temperature correction probe into a cup of coffee, watch that power go sky high We did a few tests sticking the probe in an ice cream and then next to the exhaust manifold and the power difference was something like 200bhp between them on a 300bhp Mustang lol
the power tables in TV will be inetersting by middle of the year, esp the way nitrous is kinda stealing the top N/A places
you can also have fun by dropping the temperature correction probe into a cup of coffee, watch that power go sky high
We did a few tests sticking the probe in an ice cream and then next to the exhaust manifold and the power difference was something like 200bhp between them on a 300bhp Mustang lolthe power tables in TV will be inetersting by middle of the year, esp the way nitrous is kinda stealing the top N/A places
vocky
Staff
I think the courtenay rolling road figures were all fine, it's just that every dyno will produce a different set of flywheel figures for the same car.
It's best to use the flywheel hp as a rough figure for an engines power.
wheel hp is a better way of showing what an engine is producing, this figure doesn't vary as much between rolling roads.
It's best to use the flywheel hp as a rough figure for an engines power.
wheel hp is a better way of showing what an engine is producing, this figure doesn't vary as much between rolling roads.
JohnnyN said:
I'm pritty happy with my result as it gave me a benchmark for power showo.. , I can now start putting my bits on what I got for it.
But I was just looking at the RR table and my car seems to be chucking out a fair amount of torque at 158 Lbft as others are reaching nearly 165 Bhp before reaching this notsure.gif
and mines pritty standard apart from remus centre section.