Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

A combination of set figure (offset) and percentage (factor).

For a manual I estimate: flywheel(kw) = 20kw + (rwkw x 1.15)

Derived from stock figures. It's estimating it takes ~20kw to spin a gearbox at high rpm, plus you lose a percentage (15%) of gains as friction.

Seems to work well for a lot of cars, and is a hell of a lot better than straight up 25% loss claims!

ie. Stock GTST 140rwkw > 181kw flywheel

My current 230rwkw > 285kw flywheel

A random 300rwkw > 365kw flywheel

2011 Ford GS 256rwkw > 314kw flywheel, even seems to work for new automatics ;)

as people have said, it can't be a set figure. not just because of how hard the gears are meshing together. you have to remember that the more power it has the faster it is going to accelerate. the faster something accelerates the higher the forces acting against it. so while it might not be exactly a percentage it won't be a fixed figure either. there might be an exact figure of how much power it takes to turn a gearbox, drive shaft, diff, wheels, etc at a set speed, but when it comes to accelerating all that then it won't be a set number that applies to all power levels.

A combination of set figure (offset) and percentage (factor).

For a manual I estimate: flywheel(kw) = 20kw + (rwkw x 1.15)

Derived from stock figures. It's estimating it takes ~20kw to spin a gearbox at high rpm, plus you lose a percentage (15%) of gains as friction.

Seems to work well for a lot of cars, and is a hell of a lot better than straight up 25% loss claims!

ie. Stock GTST 140rwkw > 181kw flywheel

My current 230rwkw > 285kw flywheel

A random 300rwkw > 365kw flywheel

2011 Ford GS 256rwkw > 314kw flywheel, even seems to work for new automatics ;)

That looks pretty good,cant we all agree to this

But still Id think a 2000hp would quite easily lose 3-400 through driveline which is still close to 20% but once again the style of driveline would make a huge difference ,for instance a regular sedan with tailshafts compared to a car that has the engine/gearbox bolted directly to the diff..

It might show it on the dyno but there is absolutely no way it is actually losing 400hp, do you have any idea how much heat that would create? it would be enough heat to literally melt the gears if that was the case.

I think a large amount of it is how inertial dynos calculate their figures and they don't actually 'lose' the majority power that we see on a dyno, they just read less due to the way it is being measured, there are losses due to the extra weight being spun up, but they are not completely lost this way.

Edited by Rolls
  • 2 weeks later...

A combination of set figure (offset) and percentage (factor).

For a manual I estimate: flywheel(kw) = 20kw + (rwkw x 1.15)

Derived from stock figures. It's estimating it takes ~20kw to spin a gearbox at high rpm, plus you lose a percentage (15%) of gains as friction.

Seems to work well for a lot of cars, and is a hell of a lot better than straight up 25% loss claims!

ie. Stock GTST 140rwkw > 181kw flywheel

My current 230rwkw > 285kw flywheel

A random 300rwkw > 365kw flywheel

2011 Ford GS 256rwkw > 314kw flywheel, even seems to work for new automatics ;)

That is basically the figures I have been using as well. I've always used 15% for manual, 20% for auto, then some % for age. ie, because the skyline is now 15 years old, you loose more power (compression loss, tune loss, just small bits here and there). Rebuilt/modded changes it though and brings it more closely down to the 15%, as does purely having more power (ie so the 20kw base means nothing).

I can't remember what the figures were on a rotary that was engine dyno built and then drivetrain (ie rear wheel) dyno'd, but certainly it couldn't have been even 15% otherwise the gearbox would have fried.

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

    • The rain is the best time to push to the edge of the grip limit. Water lubrication reduces the consumption of rubber without reducing the fun. I take pleasure in driving around the outside of numpties in Audis, WRXs, BRZs, etc, because they get all worried in the wet. They warm up faster than the engine oil does.
    • When they're dead cold, and in the wet, they're not very fun. RE003 are alright, they do harden very quickly and turn into literally $50 Pace tyres.
    • Yeah, I thought that Reedy's video was quite good because he compared old and new (as in, well used and quite new) AD09s, with what is generally considered to be the fast Yokohama in this category (ie, sporty road/track tyres) and a tyre that people might be able to use to extend the comparo out into the space of more expensive European tyres, being the Cup 2. No-one would ever agree that the Cup 2 is a poor tyre - many would suggest that it is close to the very top of the category. And, for them all to come out so close to each other, and for the cheaper tyre in the test to do so well against the others, in some cases being even faster, shows that (good, non-linglong) tyres are reaching a plateau in terms of how good they can get, and they're all sitting on that same plateau. Anyway, on the AD08R, AD09, RS4 that I've had on the car in recent years, I've never had a problem in the cold and wet. SA gets down to 0-10°C in winter. Not so often, but it was only 4°C when I got in the car this morning. Once the tyres are warm (ie, after about 2km), you can start to lay into them. I've never aquaplaned or suffered serious off-corner understeer or anything like that in the wet, that I would not have expected to happen with a more normal tyre. I had some RE003s, and they were shit in the dry, shit in the wet, shit everywhere. I would rate the RS4 and AD0x as being more trustworthy in the wet, once the rubber is warm. Bridgestone should be ashamed of the RE003.
    • This is why I gave the disclaimer about how I drive in the wet which I feel is pretty important. I have heard people think RS4's are horrible in the rain, but I have this feeling they must be driving (or attempting to drive) anywhere close to the grip limit. I legitimately drive at the speed limit/below speed the limit 100% of the time in the rain. More than happy to just commute along at 50kmh behind a train of cars in 5th gear etc. I do agree with you with regards to the temp and the 'quality' of the tyre Dose. Most UHP tyres aren't even up to temperature on the road anyway, even when going mad initial D canyon carving. It would be interesting to see a not-up-to-temp UHP tyre compared against a mere... normal...HP tyre at these temperatures. I don't think you're (or me in this case) is actually picking up grip with an RS4/AD09 on the road relative to something like a RE003 because the RS4/AD09 is not up to temp and the RE003 is closer to it's optimal operating window.
    • Either the bearing has been installed backwards OR the gearbox input shaft bearing is loosey goosey.   When in doubt, just put in a Samsonas in.
×
×
  • Create New...