Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I had my car tuned last week and it made 222rwkw max torque on the dyno sheet was 351.3 Nm so there is a rough idea...

Sounds a bit low? R34 GTT's put out about 360Nm in stock form, and I though when measuring power at the rear wheels torque figures dont really suffer from drivetrain loss? I would have thought at 222rwkw's it would have been putting out much more than that?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/154698-rb25det-torque/#findComment-2877472
Share on other sites

Who knows if my torque readout was correct or not but all that matters to me is that my car is hauling arse...

Your right though, when comparing my figure to others out there it does seem to be a bit low, on my dyno sheet though the graph doesnt show th Nm on the side it is just printed under the power figure..

Edited by WPN-O33
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/154698-rb25det-torque/#findComment-2877809
Share on other sites

Who knows if my torque readout was correct or not but all that matters to me is that my car is hauling arse...

Your right though, when comparing my figure to others out there it does seem to be a bit low, on my dyno sheet though the graph doesnt show th Nm on the side it is just printed under the power figure..

If your cars hauling ass thats all that matter :laugh:

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/154698-rb25det-torque/#findComment-2878013
Share on other sites

At the mid/high 200rwkw area mine makes ~440nm @ hubs when adjusted for final drive at 1bar.

looks like some dodgy figures here.

A few issues to consider, hub or roller etc. 900nm at the wheels is not right mate sorry to say. Toqrue is related to speed and power.

KW = Torque x RPM / 9549

some dynos require you to make some assumptions about the relationship between speed and RPM. If you have a manual transmission it is possible to correlate these pretty well but if you are running an automatic the results will have errors since the convertor slip changes with load and RPM.

Chassis dyno have the issue of tractive effort at the wheels. hub dyno will eliminaites inertia issues and measure torque "at the hub" consistantly (to get Flywheel torque simply divide the figure by the final drive ratio, often a number close to 4.1 for r33s)

The tractive effort is obtained by multiplying the torque by the total ratio of power train and dividing this sum by the rolling radius of the driving tyres.

I'm no guru...but it comes down to the setup..I guess many cbf setting it up properly dunno why. Also remember that peak power is not peak torque so when u calculate it..u get the power at the peak torque rpm.

When 270rwkw my gtst was putting out 440nm

All on a hub dyno.

Guss what...using the above formula...using my dyno sheet....at max torque my power calc. is the same. Amazing.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/154698-rb25det-torque/#findComment-2878159
Share on other sites

I've been very confused about torque readings as they dont seem to make any sense. 440Nm (which is not much at all) translates to a tractive foce of ~1370N. That's not much to move a ~1370kg car.

Power(W) = Torque(Nm) x Revs (rad/s), so I'm not exactly sure where you got your formula from. And the revolutions here is the speed of the wheels, not the engine (you're calculating torque at wheels, not engine)

Or have I been grossly misinformed about chassis dynos? The numbers that are given seem much more like engine torque figures than wheel torque figures. But for the dyno to work that out, it needs the rolling diameter of your tyre, diff ratio, and gear ratio. Even then it's a bit iffy as it's taken into account drivetrain losses, but there are no drivetrain losses at the flywheel.

Most of the people that I have talked to seem to think it's a lot like power and their one figure means everything. But torque changes depending on which gear you're in, eg. in an R32 1st gear has 3.321 times more torque than 4th gear.

If I am the one that's completely wrong, can someone please explain it to me. I'm going by mostly theory based engineering crap.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/154698-rb25det-torque/#findComment-2878393
Share on other sites

I've been very confused about torque readings as they dont seem to make any sense. 440Nm (which is not much at all) translates to a tractive foce of ~1370N. That's not much to move a ~1370kg car.

Power(W) = Torque(Nm) x Revs (rad/s), so I'm not exactly sure where you got your formula from. And the revolutions here is the speed of the wheels, not the engine (you're calculating torque at wheels, not engine)

Or have I been grossly misinformed about chassis dynos? The numbers that are given seem much more like engine torque figures than wheel torque figures. But for the dyno to work that out, it needs the rolling diameter of your tyre, diff ratio, and gear ratio. Even then it's a bit iffy as it's taken into account drivetrain losses, but there are no drivetrain losses at the flywheel.

Most of the people that I have talked to seem to think it's a lot like power and their one figure means everything. But torque changes depending on which gear you're in, eg. in an R32 1st gear has 3.321 times more torque than 4th gear.

If I am the one that's completely wrong, can someone please explain it to me. I'm going by mostly theory based engineering crap.

speed...RPM...blah its all maths and can easily be derived. RPM makes much more sense for ppl who are used to SI units...speed means not much to me on a dyno, but again its just calulated.

Horsepower is a measure of force in newtons/pounds against a distance in meters/feet for a time period of one second. The distance per second of a rotating object would be the circumference of an arbitrary arm connected to the object (=2.p.r) multiplied by the number of revolutions in one minute divided by 60 (seconds in a minute). And thus horsepower equals to: F.r.2.p.RPM/60 = T.2.p.RPM/60 = 550 lb.ft/s or 745.7 Nm/s

Hence the formula in English units for power is:

Power [HP] = T [ft.lb] . RPM / 5252

In SI units power is expressed in Watt = (T [Nm] . 2p . RPM/60) (1kW= Watt/1000)

Power [kW] = T [Nm] . RPM / 9549

Power [HP] = T [Nm] . RPM / 7121

kW x 1.341 = HP

This formula IS NOT MINE...use it and see for urself on ur dyno sheet.

As for the wheels and engine stuff?? lol where do u think RPM comes from? the engine on a chasis or hub dyno? lol Speed in KMPH can easily be calulated mate...its all maths. Dynos with KMPH confuse me personally.

As for the gear etc...your right. Will make a difference and needs to be factored in accodingly.

Btw 440nm on the hubs is a lot IMO stock r33 gtst is about 200 or something...what car are u driving a XR8 ute? Seems to move my car pretty fast...

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/154698-rb25det-torque/#findComment-2878496
Share on other sites

Speed is more easily calculated than RPM of engine as you need to know diff ratio, gear ratio and rolling diameter to calculate RPM. All variables from car to car, where as speed is just measured off the speed of the rollers.

I'm still not seeing where you're getting the equation from. Power = torque x revs, with everything in SI units, i.e. Watts, Nm, and radians/sec.

Anyway, enough of that, lets look at an R32 (just cos I have the specs around). We'll assume the factory power and torque specs of 158kW and 245Nm.

Drive train losses in 4th are about 50-60kW, so we'll take 55kW. That equates to 103rwkW. i.e. 65% of the stock power.

Power is proportional to torque, so we will assume that at the wheels, 65% of the torque has made it there ignoring gear ratios. But 4th gear is 1:1 and diff ratio is 4.3:1 so we have to multiply these in.

Engine torque x percentage of power that makes it to wheels x 4th gear ratio x final gear ratio = Wheel torque.

So, 245 x 0.65 x 1 x 4.3 = 686.8

Therefore we have 686.8Nm at the wheels in dead stock form, much more than what you have in modified form.

I have an old dyno sheet where it shows the tractive effort. I had 169rwkW and 3900N. 3900N translates to 1250Nm. 440Nm translates to a tractive force of around 1370N, not much at all. If you look at other peoples dyno sheets that have tractive effort on them, they will be quite high. From that you can work backwards and get the wheels torque

I have confirmed my numbers with both this method and using the equation I stated at the start to get the same wheel torque figures.

Edited by salad
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/154698-rb25det-torque/#findComment-2878550
Share on other sites

When i used to do dyno tuning, i did wonder about this, especially as there is two settings in the menu for it, (N)newtons and (Nm). Now i can understand how it can figure out the force(N) as tractive effort, as it is simply the torque to the retarder x radius roller. as for Nm, where is this torque at? because torque is measured about an axis, so are we talking axle torque, in which you would have to enter the wheel diameter, which you dont. I think tractive effort in newtons is more important, as the acceleration can be calculated from it. Anyway its the shape of the curve that is the most important thing.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/154698-rb25det-torque/#findComment-2878569
Share on other sites

Either way, the curves will be the same as you're multiplying by a constant, so I guess it's not important, but it's the numbers I've never understood.

I would love to know where the torque is measured, it's been confusing me for ages :miner:>_<

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/154698-rb25det-torque/#findComment-2878574
Share on other sites

A few issues to consider, hub or roller etc. 900nm at the wheels is not right mate sorry to say. Toqrue is related to speed and power.

I'm no guru...but it comes down to the setup..I guess many cbf setting it up properly dunno why. Also remember that peak power is not peak torque so when u calculate it..u get the power at the peak torque rpm.

When 270rwkw my gtst was putting out 440nm

What the f**k? I never said 900nm, I said 440nm - my car is ALSO making 274rwkw @ hubs.... and I know all about the torque thing. There is nothing wrong with my dyno reading, to me it sounds very similar to yours to be honest.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/154698-rb25det-torque/#findComment-2878812
Share on other sites

Speed is more easily calculated than RPM of engine as you need to know diff ratio, gear ratio and rolling diameter to calculate RPM. All variables from car to car, where as speed is just measured off the speed of the rollers.

I'm still not seeing where you're getting the equation from. Power = torque x revs, with everything in SI units, i.e. Watts, Nm, and radians/sec.

Anyway, enough of that, lets look at an R32 (just cos I have the specs around). We'll assume the factory power and torque specs of 158kW and 245Nm.

Drive train losses in 4th are about 50-60kW, so we'll take 55kW. That equates to 103rwkW. i.e. 65% of the stock power.

Power is proportional to torque, so we will assume that at the wheels, 65% of the torque has made it there ignoring gear ratios. But 4th gear is 1:1 and diff ratio is 4.3:1 so we have to multiply these in.

Engine torque x percentage of power that makes it to wheels x 4th gear ratio x final gear ratio = Wheel torque.

So, 245 x 0.65 x 1 x 4.3 = 686.8

Therefore we have 686.8Nm at the wheels in dead stock form, much more than what you have in modified form.

I have an old dyno sheet where it shows the tractive effort. I had 169rwkW and 3900N. 3900N translates to 1250Nm. 440Nm translates to a tractive force of around 1370N, not much at all. If you look at other peoples dyno sheets that have tractive effort on them, they will be quite high. From that you can work backwards and get the wheels torque

I have confirmed my numbers with both this method and using the equation I stated at the start to get the same wheel torque figures.

LOL - I worked out what the deal is...I'm calulating Fly torque...as is calculated by thr power...I think u might have said this before, soz mate.

My formula holds...but to get Torque at the wheels multi by the final drive...in my case I think its 4.1 in 4th so lets say 440*4.1=1800Nm I wont include losses as the KW atw has already factored this in which was used to get the torque...seems a roudabout way to get there...but if u do need to, u can do as u did and use 30% as a guess.

I guess with a roller dyno u need to factor in the rolling radius of the tyres...I think u need to divided by 2.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/154698-rb25det-torque/#findComment-2878858
Share on other sites

What the f**k? I never said 900nm, I said 440nm - my car is ALSO making 274rwkw @ hubs.... and I know all about the torque thing. There is nothing wrong with my dyno reading, to me it sounds very similar to yours to be honest.

mate it wasnt about urs. Read all the posts and u will see its the dyno posted.

Either way...I think urs (and mine) is Calculated fly wheel torque as the long winded posts above explain...lol.

was fun, i learned something. so chill out.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/154698-rb25det-torque/#findComment-2878864
Share on other sites

there is no exact way to get a deadly accurate engine torque reading on a chassis dyno.

there is heaps of torque multiplication happening on the chassis dyno, which is why many owners get excited when their midly tuned rb25 shows over 800nm at the bak wheels. this is coz the crankshaft torque is been multiplied by the gearbox ratio, diff ratio and tyre size.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/154698-rb25det-torque/#findComment-2878906
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Who did you have do the installation? I actually know someone who is VERY familiar with the AVS gear. The main point of contact though would be your installer.   Where are you based in NZ?
    • Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
×
×
  • Create New...