Rb25det Torque

[Lithium]

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.

Yeah sorry I just got that looking over again.... is some good info here. Mine was 440nm @ hubs, no TCF for trans loss so its effectively whatever the amount of torque the engine is making less whatever it lost going through the tranmission. I'd assume yours is the same as well.

[dangerman4]

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.

bloody victorians....

i assume your talking about my Dyno graph.

Have another look champ..

on the left is KW which is the high two lines which on the left reads 299 kws.

on the right is torque which is the two middle lines which read around 500 nm

cheers

Edited February 4, 2007 by dangerman4

[khunjeng]

bloody victorians....

i assume your talking about my Dyno graph.

Have another look champ..

on the left is KW which is the high two lines which on the left reads 299 kws.

on the right is torque which is the two middle lines which read around 500 nm

cheers

yes I think we know that now...that whats happens when u drink and read. Anyway its all good now.

[salad]

So it seems that chassis dynos are giving rough flywheel torque figures, but including drive train losses. Does that seem a little odd and round about to anyone else?

Any idea why they would do something like this? Giving rear wheel torque figures will give much higher numbers and look more impressive and actually be more accurate as there are no assumptions (except maybe tyre size, but this could be entered)