PBOY23 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2008 mine weighs to much has no bhp and would be all noise on a dyno hahahaha Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matwithe30 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2008 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr E34 11 Report post Posted January 17, 2008 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. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matwithe30 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2008 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morerevsm3 7 Report post Posted January 17, 2008 ~340bhp, now down to 1250kg, 2995cc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Greg111 13 Report post Posted January 17, 2008 (edited) How the hell did you get it to 1250kg??? Edited January 17, 2008 by Greg111 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gus 5 Report post Posted January 17, 2008 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? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morerevsm3 7 Report post Posted January 17, 2008 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrew 30 Report post Posted January 17, 2008 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) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nic325i 0 Report post Posted January 17, 2008 Interesting article questioning whether specific power output (i.e. bhp/litre) actually matters in the slightest. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gus 5 Report post Posted January 17, 2008 (edited) 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrew 30 Report post Posted January 17, 2008 turbo averages 7ltr/100k open road gus - it is better than a 325. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr E34 11 Report post Posted January 21, 2008 (edited) 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrew 30 Report post Posted January 21, 2008 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. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr E34 11 Report post Posted January 21, 2008 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. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Driftit 2069 Report post Posted January 21, 2008 (edited) 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr E34 11 Report post Posted January 23, 2008 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kiwi535 538 Report post Posted January 23, 2008 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) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites