Whats your bhp per Tonne and bhp per Litre

[PBOY23 0]

mine weighs to much has no bhp and would be all noise on a dyno hahahaha

[matwithe30 0]

mine weighs to much has no bhp and would be all noise on a dyno hahahaha

haha amen and with the gearbox i situation i have now...it would be able to dyno me in reverse only. and that would be a waste. love to see what the mazda is on the dyno though

[mr E34 11]

haha amen and with the gearbox i situation i have now...it would be able to dyno me in reverse only. and that would be a waste. love to see what the mazda is on the dyno though

There wouldn't be a dyno available to handle the rotary pwr! Great smooth engines, had a 72 RX2 coupe & a 73 RX3 coupe.They seem to be worth a bit of money now.

[matwithe30 0]

haha yeah id only driven one previously and it was a bridgey not a pp so its a whole different story. had a fun drive to work. the brass button is a bit of work to get used to haha

[morerevsm3 7]

~340bhp, now down to 1250kg, 2995cc

[Greg111 13]

How the hell did you get it to 1250kg???

Edited January 17, 2008 by Greg111

[Gus 5]

well since we are talking Flywheel figures its mainly speculation....

as for the Turbo, I would put drivetrain loss around 15-20% max...25% is generally accepted for 4WD cars.

so 180kw ATW x 1.2 = 216

and in HP = 289

plus for weight...having weighed my old M325i with bucket seats in, + full body kit + a heavier engine @ 1180kg, I cant imagine the turbo being heavier than that. So maybe more around the 245 hp tonne mark?

Andy, please correct maths if the 180kW is incorrect, did Gavin not get that after tuning?

[morerevsm3 7]

How the hell did you get it to 1250kg???

lack of interior, 2 buckets of sound deadening tar removed...

carbon panel replacing entire sunroof cartridge...

carbon bonnet...

carbon plenum...

home made exhaust is half the weight of original, etc, etc

[Andrew 30]

Andy, please correct maths if the 180kW is incorrect, did Gavin not get that after tuning?

No - 170kW (it still wasn't perfect - we could easily find another 10kW if needed)

[Nic325i 0]

Interesting article questioning whether specific power output (i.e. bhp/litre) actually matters in the slightest.

[Gus 5]

interesting...however i would say they are very different engines anyway (with gearing playing a huge factor)

the turbo does 11l/100k if i remember rightly, on the open road. which is pretty good for that amount of power.

weight makes a huge diff too to fuel economy...i think small/light small cap turbo cars are the way of the future for fuel economy...how cool would a 1000kg car with 180hp 1.3 turbo be??

and i seriously love the z06....the new zr1 is insane as well

+: bigger cap engines tend to have more torque...which is good for fuel economy being able to pull lower revs.

Edited January 17, 2008 by The Gus

[Andrew 30]

turbo averages 7ltr/100k open road gus - it is better than a 325.

[mr E34 11]

well since we are talking Flywheel figures its mainly speculation....

as for the Turbo, I would put drivetrain loss around 15-20% max...25% is generally accepted for 4WD cars.

so 180kw ATW x 1.2 = 216

and in HP = 289

plus for weight...having weighed my old M325i with bucket seats in, + full body kit + a heavier engine @ 1180kg, I cant imagine the turbo being heavier than that. So maybe more around the 245 hp tonne mark?

Andy, please correct maths if the 180kW is incorrect, did Gavin not get that after tuning?

Just another footnote on the subject of bragging rights.(yeah, i know my car doesn't have enough pwr for you guys)

Possible Flywheel Pwr?

Car developed 186.31HP, +15% = 214 @ Flywheel? 186.31HP + 20% = 223 @ Flywheel?

This is the figures from Dynapack hub dyno.

Edited January 21, 2008 by mr E34

[Andrew 30]

Just another footnote on the subject of bragging rights.(yeah, i know my car doesn't have enough pwr for you guys)

Possible Flywheel Pwr?

Car developed 186.31HP, +15% = 214 @ Flywheel? 186.31HP + 20% = 223 @ Flywheel?

This is the figures from Dynapack hub dyno.

If you look at your dyno sheet - it may say SAE corrected. This means it is a flywheel horsepower.

[mr E34 11]

If you look at your dyno sheet - it may say SAE corrected. This means it is a flywheel horsepower.

yes, does say correction method: SAE other sheet with 136.1kw says correction method: DIN

whatever that means.

Must take to Gavin when have time, he said with the wheels on his roller dyno he would expect 8-10kw less, depending on the day.

[Driftit 1968]

235.2hp/tonne but this figure is ATW not flywheel

117.6/litre

Say if I loose 25% through the drivetrain that makes

294hp/tonne

147/litre

But this is on my Nissan 180SX so I guess it doesn't count.

Wonder how many horses got away in my 325 thats done 295,000kms. Will dyno next month.

Oh and I just realised that the 180 weighs less than the standard weight now. Was just going by stock weight. No idea what it weighs now though.

Edited January 21, 2008 by driftit

[mr E34 11]

If you look at your dyno sheet - it may say SAE corrected. This means it is a flywheel horsepower.

Had a look on the net Andrew, when they say corrected that refers to a standard that takes into account temp, air density etc, so the dyno reading is corrected for all those variables.

If anyone is interested in dyno's this site has an easy explanation between HUB DYNO VS ROLLER DYNO.

http://home.earthlink.net/~spchurch/church...sting/id12.html

[kiwi535 538]

yes, does say correction method: SAE other sheet with 136.1kw says correction method: DIN

whatever that means.

Must take to Gavin when have time, he said with the wheels on his roller dyno he would expect 8-10kw less, depending on the day.

thats quite interesting my e 34 was 187 bhp(sae corrected? at 6093 rpm)= 139Kw (dyna pak dyno)