Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I think you can estimate engine HP from rwhp fairly easily

If a stock r33 has 187kw @ the engine and roughly 140rwkw

then that's a 25% drivetrain loss (25% of 187kw is 47kw)

assuming the same drivetrain loss, if you have 240rwhp then you would have approx 320hp at the engine.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/273211-hp-question/#findComment-4637026
Share on other sites

Only way you can get engine horsepower on a dyno sheet is if the engine has been out of the car and put on a engine dyno (highly unlikely).

Not necessarily. Some dynos let you calculate flywheel power, which is about as accurate as the rear wheel power.

The dynos will continue to measure after the driver lifts off (I'd assume they have to put the car in neutral). The speed at which the rear wheels spin down gives the dyno an idea of the drivetrain loss, which it can then use to calculate the flywheel power.

It's not a common practice in Australia, but I know quite a few UK dyno operators will do this.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/273211-hp-question/#findComment-4637062
Share on other sites

not trying to get into a debate, but i highly doubt standard r33s are still making 140rw kw being 15 years old or so! i threw mine on the dyno to see... it made 160hp@wheels and developed anout 6 1/2 psi... completely standard motor/exhaust/clutch. but thats off topic :) lol

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/273211-hp-question/#findComment-4638160
Share on other sites

Not necessarily. Some dynos let you calculate flywheel power, which is about as accurate as the rear wheel power.

The dynos will continue to measure after the driver lifts off (I'd assume they have to put the car in neutral). The speed at which the rear wheels spin down gives the dyno an idea of the drivetrain loss, which it can then use to calculate the flywheel power.

It's not a common practice in Australia, but I know quite a few UK dyno operators will do this.

Hmm very interesting, never heard of that before. I'm going to do some reading on that, cheers man.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/273211-hp-question/#findComment-4638274
Share on other sites

If you are refering to my above comment, all i was saying was that these cars are gettign old and in stock form i highly doubt they would still make the same power they were claimed to have from the factory new. Back on topic, the 240hp would be At the wheels, yes!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/273211-hp-question/#findComment-4638296
Share on other sites

I think you can estimate engine HP from rwhp fairly easily

If a stock r33 has 187kw @ the engine and roughly 140rwkw

then that's a 25% drivetrain loss (25% of 187kw is 47kw)

assuming the same drivetrain loss, if you have 240rwhp then you would have approx 320hp at the engine.

Try 180hp @ flywheel (unless, of course, you actually make hp through the drivetrain)
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/273211-hp-question/#findComment-4638817
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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...