Brian S said:A buddy of mine flew his Mooney M21 from Tulsa to Dallas on 11 gallons of gas with the AF set at like 6.5... Too bad cars can't run that lean
watch said:Why can't someone take the f----n hydro trap out and run it on the dyno?After 5 weeks and nobody has done this yet, WHY? They spend all this time and money on red-neck flowmasters to gain maybe more noise.
TomServo92 said:The 300HP that is quoted by Ford is fly-wheel horsepower (or FWHP). The figures quoted in this thread are rear-wheel horsepower (or RWHP). The reason that RWHP is lower than FWHP is that some power is lost in the transmission and differential before it gets to the wheels. The generally accepted percentage of loss for a manual transmission is 15-18%. If you divide the RWHP by 0.85 you get FWHP for the 15% loss. In this case it's 265/0.85 = 311.8. That's a good bit more than the advertised HP. The numbers I've seen for automatics runs from 20-25% loss.
just some guy said:no offense, but i learned that about 6 years ago.Take a look at my sig and see what my car runs, and you should just assume i have some clue what im talking about....
What i was saying was that, before the car came out EVERYONE said they put down 295-300 at the wheels stock and that ford UNDERrated the fwhp number. Much like chevy did with pretty much every ls1 F-body.
And pretty much all of you are doing the math wrong for converting from fwhp to rwhp so forth...
it is in the form of:
FWHP x 1-(whatever drivetrain loss percentage you want to use, lets say .15)
so...
305 x .85=259.25
what this essentially states is: 100% of the cars power is at the motor, there is a 15% loss, so only 85% of the power reaches the wheels.
And unless you want to get into real technical math, there is NO way to calculate flywheel hp correctly, using that same percentage.
He said they would post the dyno once they got more ink for the printer. 2 days have gone by, it's not that big of a deal. It's also not the only report of 05's making the mid 260's to the wheels with a M5.mach1dsg said:where is the dyno????
i thought this was done by a serious shop????
we know the car already, so like i said, good pics of the car, but come on, we wanted to see a dyno of a 5 speed mustang GT.
A T-5 loses about 12% in fourth gear, which is generally the gear used for dyno pulls. I'd guess the T-3650 might lose a tiny bit more, but not much. Of course other gears, which are "real" gears, will lose more than fourth.tjm73 said:Drivetrian losses are generally 16-20% depending on whether it's a stick or auto...and the type of stick or auto being used. Modern transmissions are more efficient than the older ones generally.
AzSnake said:He said they would post the dyno once they got more ink for the printer. 2 days have gone by, it's not that big of a deal. It's also not the only report of 05's making the mid 260's to the wheels with a M5.
TomServo92 said:You do realize that FWHP X .85 = RWHP and RWHP / .85 = FWHP are same thing? You say we're doing it wrong but you're using the same math. If you know FWHP (which we don't), you use the first formula. If you know RWHP (which we do), you use the second.
351CJ said:Math can be dangerous. The problem is do you divide by .85 or multiply by 1.15, the #'s aren't the same.
Let's say it has 300 HP at the flywheel and there is 15% loss:
15% loss from the flywheel is:
300 x 15% = 45
300 - 45 = 255
300 / .85 = 255 = same result, which is the correct result.
But 300 / 1.15 = 261, NOT correct
So if we work backwards, let's say you measure 255 at the rear wheels.
255 / .85 = 300, correct
But 255 x 1.15 = 293, NOT correct
So, be careful as to how you apply those correction factors.
TomServo92 said:I did the math correctly so I'm not exactly sure what point you're trying to make.
351CJ said:I was explaining why you are correct, because I have seen many people here on StangNet think that dividing by .85 and multiplying by 1.15 are equivalent, when mathematically they are NOT the same.
I figured it was appropriate since one of the lead news stories today was that in the US math testing scores have improved in the last year because the tests have been dumbed down.
AzSnake said:He said they would post the dyno once they got more ink for the printer. 2 days have gone by, it's not that big of a deal. It's also not the only report of 05's making the mid 260's to the wheels with a M5.
HOW AM I BITCHING??? I was defending him stating that they would post when they had an opportunity. You need to read a little better.Stang2k5 said:Here is a link to a good forum with pics of the dam car on the dyno and the graphsnow stop your bitchin
I beleive they rated it at 279 rwhp
http://www.modularmustangs.net/showthread.php?t=8993&page=1&pp=15
Brian S said:A buddy of mine flew his Mooney M21 from Tulsa to Dallas on 11 gallons of gas with the AF set at like 6.5... Too bad cars can't run that lean
AzSnake said:HOW AM I BITCHING??? I was defending him stating that they would post when they had an opportunity. You need to read a little better.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?