Jump to content
SAU Community

What Is 'too Much' Power For The Street?  

74 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

I once knew a woman who had a v6 commodore and said it had to much power and traded it for a outlander because it was only a 4 cylinder

i once knew a woman with a v6 commodore, it slid out around a corner in the wet so she took it to get her traction control checked :huh:

34geteetee makes 391rwkw on 28PSI, whereas not only is Scotty's stagea running 4PSI more, but makes 50rwkw less despite running the equivalent turbo and displacement (2.5 6 pot)

Sometimes its not about displacement or cylinders, but more so engine design, the RB2.5 motor is certainly capable of huge numbers with head work and a built motor, but once again irrelevant for street use

didnt say it wasnt possible, just said its not easy...

I don't have a built motor or head work? Actually I don't even have an aftermarket headgasket so u fail to see how they contribute to big numbers?

even bigger numbers with head work and a built motor, your motor will never make as much as a rb26 without the head work and possibly a stroker

even bigger numbers with head work and a built motor, your motor will never make as much as a rb26 without the head work and possibly a stroker

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/topic/426942-lewis-engines-rb25neo-head-vs-there-rb26-head/

It has an extra 100cc advantage, thats it!

34geteetee makes 391rwkw on 28PSI, whereas not only is Scotty's stagea running 4PSI more, but makes 50rwkw less despite running the equivalent turbo and displacement (2.5 6 pot)

Sometimes its not about displacement or cylinders, but more so engine design, the RB2.5 motor is certainly capable of huge numbers with head work and a built motor, but once again irrelevant for street use

Yes my engine is stock, and the stock cams would be holding me back big time at 8k, but the power loss of the auto is the big reason for less output. (not to mention the awd losses) You can really only compare the same cars on the same dyno imo.

Dyno's don't tell the big story, my car has monstrous torque and has given many a Racepace GTR a run down the straight at Sandown, even though it weighs over 400kg more. The V6 trades power for torque similar to V8's I think.

Yes my engine is stock, and the stock cams would be holding me back big time at 8k, but the power loss of the auto is the big reason for less output. (not to mention the awd losses) You can really only compare the same cars on the same dyno imo.

Dyno's don't tell the big story, my car has monstrous torque and has given many a Racepace GTR a run down the straight at Sandown, even though it weighs over 400kg more. The V6 trades power for torque similar to V8's I think.

:yes: a lot more to the story that just a dyno figure...

70cc u mean in the form of a stroker for extra torque. And stock heads the rb26 flows more and has the better 6 throttle body intake, but with porting that's a different story.

^ I don't know any RB25s that make 963awkw like this r34 GTR

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...