Modded 2009 ZR1 Video: 581 rwhp & 599 rw tq
#31
01-11-2009, 01:56 AM
530 rwhp is closer to 605 to 610 hp. The low figure could be due to a bit of heat soak in the engine and the computer may be pulling timing to prevent detonation.
Last edited by ORYX; 01-11-2009 at 12:36 PM.
#33
01-11-2009, 07:16 PM
Rule of thumb has it when you find yourself in a hole then quit digging. Your figures are now stating a 60hp loss at the crank because heat soak and timing from a car on the dyno. Haha, positive displacement blower at stock boost will not drop 60 hp because of heatsoak. LOL
It's called a transaxle, IRS and most likely hardened gears that is putting this car's (yes even a manual) drivertrain loss between 15% to 17%.
But I guess that will not fly with you either because someone told you. Haha
Last edited by Almo; 01-11-2009 at 07:18 PM.
#34
01-12-2009, 06:27 PM
Its like 4 grand. I believe Vette Doctors put down 599rwhp with just headers and a tune for like $1900 or so.
#35
01-12-2009, 11:04 PM
Rule of thumb has it when you find yourself in a hole then quit digging. Your figures are now stating a 60hp loss at the crank because heat soak and timing from a car on the dyno. Haha, positive displacement blower at stock boost will not drop 60 hp because of heatsoak. LOL
It's called a transaxle, IRS and most likely hardened gears that is putting this car's (yes even a manual) drivertrain loss between 15% to 17%.
But I guess that will not fly with you either because someone told you. Haha
#36
01-13-2009, 03:26 AM
Learn to read, difference between your figures and the norm at more like 15% to 17% you *** hat!
#37
01-13-2009, 09:06 AM
This is funny stuff.
Hey almo, what's the drive train loss if I run synthetic in the tranny but conventional in the rear? Haha
I always knew the rule of thumb for stick cars was around 15%, and almost 20% for an auto, but I don't know super famous people like ORYX does.
Hey almo, what's the drive train loss if I run synthetic in the tranny but conventional in the rear? Haha
I always knew the rule of thumb for stick cars was around 15%, and almost 20% for an auto, but I don't know super famous people like ORYX does.
#38
01-13-2009, 03:30 PM
This is funny stuff.
Hey almo, what's the drive train loss if I run synthetic in the tranny but conventional in the rear? Haha
I always knew the rule of thumb for stick cars was around 15%, and almost 20% for an auto, but I don't know super famous people like ORYX does.
Hey almo, what's the drive train loss if I run synthetic in the tranny but conventional in the rear? Haha
I always knew the rule of thumb for stick cars was around 15%, and almost 20% for an auto, but I don't know super famous people like ORYX does.
Haha, well that depends... do I have the option of asking a tuner? LOL
#39
01-13-2009, 05:45 PM
Go buy yourself C6 Z06 Kooks headers/American Racing headers and buy a pulley and tune from X source and BAM... more than 600whp.
I've heard around 16% for the corvette transaxle, but I'm no ASE engineer... yet.
I've heard around 16% for the corvette transaxle, but I'm no ASE engineer... yet.
#40
01-13-2009, 10:51 PM
This is funny stuff.
Hey almo, what's the drive train loss if I run synthetic in the tranny but conventional in the rear? Haha
I always knew the rule of thumb for stick cars was around 15%, and almost 20% for an auto, but I don't know super famous people like ORYX does.
Hey almo, what's the drive train loss if I run synthetic in the tranny but conventional in the rear? Haha
I always knew the rule of thumb for stick cars was around 15%, and almost 20% for an auto, but I don't know super famous people like ORYX does.
Last edited by ORYX; 01-13-2009 at 10:54 PM.
#41
01-13-2009, 11:07 PM
If you and your butt-buddy Almo are finished sucking each other off or finished doing your sisters, as is customary in Virginia, you'll notice that I live in Houston. Guess what John Hennessey lives in Houston and has a track about 50 miles outside of Houston in Sealy, Tx. I go out there every once in awhile and race. John is actually a personable guy and sometimes even works the ticket booth at the entrance of his track and I've toured his shop and tuner school as well. He is not some weird celeb. type guy, you Vaginians are making him out to be. Well get back to fisting your ***-guzzling sisters as I see there is no point in trying to reason with you.
Hmmm...that was uncalled for. I thinnk you need a take a time-out and come back when you've learned to debate like an adult.
Bye.
#42
01-13-2009, 11:50 PM
Something everyone needs to keep in mind is that using the % method for figuring out crank HP is extremely inaccurate once you start moving away from a car’s stock HP level. Everyone continues to use the exact same percentage loss that the car had when the motor was stock, but drivetrain losses do not increase commensurately to HP increases. In other words, friction in the drivetrain does not increase correspondingly to power changes in the motor. It physically doesn’t work that way.
For example; we all agree that if a bone stock Z06 makes 440 rwhp (505 crank HP), it’s losing around approximately 12% of its power through the drivetrain, right? Now, let’s say you install a mild blower on the same car and the rwhp is increased to 600 rwhp on the same dyno. This is where most people automatically default to using the original 12% figure to determine the new crank HP. They would say that the car is now making 681 crank HP since 12% of 681 is 81. But again, friction losses in the drivetrain are not commensurate with HP increases in a motor. This way of figuring crank HP gets even more inaccurate when you start using % figures larger than 12% (i.e., 15% or 20%). The larger the % figure, the more innacurate it becomes.
A much more accurate method is to simply figure out the difference between the stock crank HP figure (using SAE ratings) and the stock rwhp number (assumning the same dyno is used before and after mods). In the case of the stock Z06 above, the difference is 65 HP (505-440=65). Thus, that same Z06 with the mild blower making 600 rwhp on the same dyno is making around 665 crank HP.
Now…if that same Z06 made 700 rwhp with more boost, you are now looking at approximately 765 crank HP, instead of 795 like the 12% formula says.
For example; we all agree that if a bone stock Z06 makes 440 rwhp (505 crank HP), it’s losing around approximately 12% of its power through the drivetrain, right? Now, let’s say you install a mild blower on the same car and the rwhp is increased to 600 rwhp on the same dyno. This is where most people automatically default to using the original 12% figure to determine the new crank HP. They would say that the car is now making 681 crank HP since 12% of 681 is 81. But again, friction losses in the drivetrain are not commensurate with HP increases in a motor. This way of figuring crank HP gets even more inaccurate when you start using % figures larger than 12% (i.e., 15% or 20%). The larger the % figure, the more innacurate it becomes.
A much more accurate method is to simply figure out the difference between the stock crank HP figure (using SAE ratings) and the stock rwhp number (assumning the same dyno is used before and after mods). In the case of the stock Z06 above, the difference is 65 HP (505-440=65). Thus, that same Z06 with the mild blower making 600 rwhp on the same dyno is making around 665 crank HP.
Now…if that same Z06 made 700 rwhp with more boost, you are now looking at approximately 765 crank HP, instead of 795 like the 12% formula says.
Last edited by Divexxtreme; 01-14-2009 at 12:30 AM.
#43
01-14-2009, 12:04 AM
Something everyone needs to keep in mind is that using the % method for figuring out crank HP is extremely inaccurate once you start moving away from a car’s stock HP level. Everyone continues to use the exact same percentage loss that the car had when the motor was stock, but drivetrain losses do not increase commensurately to HP increases. In other words, friction in the drivetrain does not increase correspondingly to power changes in the motor. It physically doesn’t work that way.
For example; we all agree that if a bone stock Z06 that makes 440 rwhp (505 crank HP) it’s losing around approximately 12% of its power through the drivetrain, right? Now, let’s say you install a mild blower on the same car and the rwhp is increased to 600 rwhp on the same dyno. This is where most people automatically default to using the original 12% figure to determine the new crank HP. They would say that the car is now making 681 crank HP since 12% of 681 is 81. But again, friction losses in the drivetrain are not commensurate with HP increases in a motor. This way of figuring crank HP gets even more inaccurate when you start using % figures larger than 12% (i.e., 15% or 20%). The largert the % figure, the more innacurate it becomes.
A much more accurate method is to simply figure out the difference between the stock crank HP figure (using SAE ratings) and the stock rwhp number (assumning the same dyno is used before and after mods). In the case of the stock Z06 above, the difference is 65 HP (505-440=65). Thus, that same Z06 with the mild blower making 600 rwhp on the same dyno is making around 665 crank HP.
Now…if that same Z06 made 700 rwhp with more boost, you are now looking at approximately 765 crank HP, instead of 795 like the 12% formula says.
For example; we all agree that if a bone stock Z06 that makes 440 rwhp (505 crank HP) it’s losing around approximately 12% of its power through the drivetrain, right? Now, let’s say you install a mild blower on the same car and the rwhp is increased to 600 rwhp on the same dyno. This is where most people automatically default to using the original 12% figure to determine the new crank HP. They would say that the car is now making 681 crank HP since 12% of 681 is 81. But again, friction losses in the drivetrain are not commensurate with HP increases in a motor. This way of figuring crank HP gets even more inaccurate when you start using % figures larger than 12% (i.e., 15% or 20%). The largert the % figure, the more innacurate it becomes.
A much more accurate method is to simply figure out the difference between the stock crank HP figure (using SAE ratings) and the stock rwhp number (assumning the same dyno is used before and after mods). In the case of the stock Z06 above, the difference is 65 HP (505-440=65). Thus, that same Z06 with the mild blower making 600 rwhp on the same dyno is making around 665 crank HP.
Now…if that same Z06 made 700 rwhp with more boost, you are now looking at approximately 765 crank HP, instead of 795 like the 12% formula says.
so the drivetrain robs a fixed amount of power on a certain setup vs a % of the overall power? interesting.....
#44
01-14-2009, 12:23 AM
Yep. Unless a someone purposely introduced increased friction into the drivetrain commensurate to the overall HP increase, that's really the only possibility.
Last edited by Divexxtreme; 01-14-2009 at 12:28 AM.
#45
01-14-2009, 06:41 AM
Something everyone needs to keep in mind is that using the % method for figuring out crank HP is extremely inaccurate once you start moving away from a car’s stock HP level. Everyone continues to use the exact same percentage loss that the car had when the motor was stock, but drivetrain losses do not increase commensurately to HP increases. In other words, friction in the drivetrain does not increase correspondingly to power changes in the motor. It physically doesn’t work that way.
For example; we all agree that if a bone stock Z06 makes 440 rwhp (505 crank HP), it’s losing around approximately 12% of its power through the drivetrain, right? Now, let’s say you install a mild blower on the same car and the rwhp is increased to 600 rwhp on the same dyno. This is where most people automatically default to using the original 12% figure to determine the new crank HP. They would say that the car is now making 681 crank HP since 12% of 681 is 81. But again, friction losses in the drivetrain are not commensurate with HP increases in a motor. This way of figuring crank HP gets even more inaccurate when you start using % figures larger than 12% (i.e., 15% or 20%). The larger the % figure, the more innacurate it becomes.
A much more accurate method is to simply figure out the difference between the stock crank HP figure (using SAE ratings) and the stock rwhp number (assumning the same dyno is used before and after mods). In the case of the stock Z06 above, the difference is 65 HP (505-440=65). Thus, that same Z06 with the mild blower making 600 rwhp on the same dyno is making around 665 crank HP.
Now…if that same Z06 made 700 rwhp with more boost, you are now looking at approximately 765 crank HP, instead of 795 like the 12% formula says.
For example; we all agree that if a bone stock Z06 makes 440 rwhp (505 crank HP), it’s losing around approximately 12% of its power through the drivetrain, right? Now, let’s say you install a mild blower on the same car and the rwhp is increased to 600 rwhp on the same dyno. This is where most people automatically default to using the original 12% figure to determine the new crank HP. They would say that the car is now making 681 crank HP since 12% of 681 is 81. But again, friction losses in the drivetrain are not commensurate with HP increases in a motor. This way of figuring crank HP gets even more inaccurate when you start using % figures larger than 12% (i.e., 15% or 20%). The larger the % figure, the more innacurate it becomes.
A much more accurate method is to simply figure out the difference between the stock crank HP figure (using SAE ratings) and the stock rwhp number (assumning the same dyno is used before and after mods). In the case of the stock Z06 above, the difference is 65 HP (505-440=65). Thus, that same Z06 with the mild blower making 600 rwhp on the same dyno is making around 665 crank HP.
Now…if that same Z06 made 700 rwhp with more boost, you are now looking at approximately 765 crank HP, instead of 795 like the 12% formula says.
I'm no scholar by any means, but I don't understand how frictional losses won't increase with HP? I don't think it would be a fixed % as HP rises, but the HP lost would still have to rise wouldn't it? Even if the percentage of loss were dropping? With higher horsepower comes higher losses to friction and inertia.
Last edited by 2bscrewed; 01-14-2009 at 06:43 AM.