Prev: What are the mph settings for speed cameras?
Next: This guy was hammering it - even by my standards!
From: Adrian on 30 Sep 2009 03:30 Conor <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >> If it's from a dyno, I'm presuming it's a back-calculation to the >> flywheel from a wheel figure. What's the wheel figure? > AFAIR, it was 110 or thereabouts. Right. That's one hell of a lot of frig-factor included, then.
From: Conor on 30 Sep 2009 07:06 In article <7igfo2F2vlm00U1(a)mid.individual.net>, Adrian says... > > Conor <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were > saying: > > >> If it's from a dyno, I'm presuming it's a back-calculation to the > >> flywheel from a wheel figure. What's the wheel figure? > > > AFAIR, it was 110 or thereabouts. > > Right. That's one hell of a lot of frig-factor included, then. Say what? -- Conor www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.
From: Douglas Payne on 30 Sep 2009 07:14 Conor wrote: > In article <7igfo2F2vlm00U1(a)mid.individual.net>, Adrian says... >> Conor <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were >> saying: >> >>>> If it's from a dyno, I'm presuming it's a back-calculation to the >>>> flywheel from a wheel figure. What's the wheel figure? >>> AFAIR, it was 110 or thereabouts. >> Right. That's one hell of a lot of frig-factor included, then. > > Say what? I think he's implying that 20bhp is a lot of transmission loss. A swift bout of bistromathics says that's about 15%. Given that none of the numbers anyone's banding about are very precise, it doesn't sound too unreasonable to me. I'm sure I've seen people quoting much more optomistic figures after a visit to a rolling road on here. -- Douglas
From: Conor on 30 Sep 2009 08:54 In article <7igsrqF2r90o3U1(a)mid.individual.net>, Douglas Payne says... > A swift bout of bistromathics says that's about 15%. Given that none of > the numbers anyone's banding about are very precise, it doesn't sound > too unreasonable to me. > Indeed which is why, in the absence of taking the engine out and running it on a dyno, I figured it wasn't too far from reality. > I'm sure I've seen people quoting much more optomistic figures after a > visit to a rolling road on here. Quite possibly but not for a 25 year old well worn gearbox driving a 25 year old well worn live axle. -- Conor www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.
From: boltar2003 on 30 Sep 2009 10:24
On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 13:56:48 +0100 Conor <conor(a)gmx.co.uk> wrote: >> > BTW, you don't need the DCOE's nor the Cosworth rods to do 155BHP >> > although you do need the 2.1 litre uprating and changing to the Weber >> > 38DGAS carb as the 32/36DGV tops out at around 135BHP. Neither do you >> > need the Aldon dizzy. >> >> Cossie rods were there, so I fitted 'em. Properly set up Aldon dizzy is >> more accurate than using the old Bosch or Motorcraft job - having the >> sparks at the right time is pretty important when you're trying to get >> more power from an engine. > >No argument there. I think I'd go Megajolt though and get a proper >mapping done. Can someone explain why anyone would spend time and money trying to hot rod some antiquated POS when after all that effort they *still* end up with an engine that can barely match a diesel mondeo? Why not start out with a car with a decent engine instead of trying to polish a turd? B2003 |