My First RR

[Coops]

I heard Nick had a dyno day on yesterday... me and Marshall were gonna pop up for a look and I wish I had now just to see your car Coops.

You happy with those figures?

Mick

yes mate i am, as said the chip i have is for 15psi and the engine can handle that also, was a shame i couldnt run it at max boost to see what its capable of under the current map, but the figures are close to what i epxected anyway at 12psi

also nick only actually took it to 6500rpm (limiter is 7500rpm)then backed off, he wasn't keen on maxing his dyno as its good to 220atw supposedly but he doesnt often get close to that, which i fully understand and accepted beforehand.

will have it done again soon i think, go for full boost for the map and bollox to the clutch

[Jamie.]

I dont really know much about the mechanics of tuning cars but from what I have seen generally the torque on most turbos isnt too far from the actual bhp which is why i was suprised it was at the level it is.

I mean yeah its still going to be very quick like,

[MicKPM]

Yeah get in before the summer though cos we usually run an RSC dyno day at Nick's in the summer and we always cook the damn thing or break the cooling pump.

What clutch are you running BTW?

[stan]

Coops:

Torque isnt subject to losses..only power is. The torque measured will be flywheel torque. Since its only influenced by gear ratio, the dyno calculates overall transmission ratio by comparing the to speeds and finding the ratio of them. This is the factor used to get back to fly torque.

Aye its the same roller set I have...thats about it. The absorber, data-logging hardware and dyno software are all latest versions. The absorber i have will hold 800lb.ft torque and 900bhp

[Coops]

that cant be right tho craig mate, if it is then all that work i've done has basically got me **** all? and its definaly pulling significantly better than before

[jay s]

torque would seem ok to me, mine made 143bhp atw and 124lb/ft on the same rollers and thats with my mods cams,remap,manifold. yours is almost 50lb/ft more which is shit loads and thats on low boost u say :D

[Coops]

but 170 is wank mate for a turbo that made 172 on 3 less psi and high compression low boost engine?

[jay s]

and what rollers did they do that on, bb's rollers?

[stan]

Ok..im going to check on whether torque is affected by transmission losses. Im 99% certain it isnt, and only power is due to it being the RATE of work done, as opposed to actual work....but like i say i'll confirm or disproove this.

HOWEVER..if you think about it from another angle:

a gearbox is simply a torque multiplier. All it does is use internal ratios to increase torque from an engine to make it usable at the wheels (hence why low ratios accelerate quicker..and why your more likely to wheelspin in first than in 5th).
so say your 4th gear ratio is 1:1.2, and your final drive ratio is 3.5:1, the overall transmission ratio is 4.2:1 (3.5x1.2).
This mans the torque developed by the flywheel is multiplied by 4.2 to obtain torque at the wheels......

.....i.e if yours was making 170lb.ft at the wheels, it would be making 170/4.2=40.5lbft at the fly! which obviously isnt right!

(just so you know, the software measures WHEEL rpm, AND ENGINE rpm...from this it calculates and overall ratio, to calculate back to flywheel torque from what is ACTUALLY measured by the load cell)

[Coops]

i think your right mate, which means am now less than happy, okay bb probably bullshit the result to give more torque but still if the nana's rr are correct and true a f7r on standard inlet and compression makes more torque than mine, so my engine is a waste of nuts and bolts basically

think i'll go to another rr for a comparison, and to allow a full run at full boost and to the limiter

to be continued.................