419 replies to this topic

[dude]

here is the table

Attached Files

•  speedster_tabell_mappning_1.jpg   33.19KB   0 downloads

Edited by dude, 24 July 2004 - 10:13 PM.

[Foxy_Jr]

163 bhp at the wheels!

[Foxy_Jr]

Oh, just read the table - its actually 163.2

Do you have a corrected figure?

[dude]

i´ll see in the morning if i can get the barometric airpressure. airtemp was approx 20 degree at this run.

[clipping_point]

And then we all will see soon what the 288° cams will give?? Together with the ported head??? So 163 HP at the wheels is what 180-185 HP at the flywheel, now? (As if anyone knows)

[dude]

oooh i forgot that the ignitioncurve was only mapped at every 1000rpm and then interpolated. this will be finetuned at the next run and he thought that another 5-8hp could be found. the cams are the big issue here and they just dies after 5500-6000rpm.

[clipping_point]

Is it the injection system? Too small?

[Foxy]

Somebody once said:

If you simply estimate that BHP is WHP x1,25 than this table is true, based on the information from actual tuned VX220s. Didn´t post the GT180, seems not to fit in, thus it is untrue...or a breakthrough.

So we could be talking 204bhp !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[dude]

And then we all will see soon what the 288° cams will give?? Together with the ported head???


So 163 HP at the wheels is what 180-185 HP at the flywheel, now? (As if anyone knows)

if i count backwards from the chart in the n/a thread i get 200hp at the flywheel

can´t we just agree that the "calculated power" at the fw is just fantasy

[Foxy]

can´t we just agree that the "calculated power" at the fw is just fantasy

Yes, but we all like a bit of fantasy

[dude]

Is it the injection system? Too small?

the std-cams sucks like nothing i´ve ever tested

there is enough fuel, so that´s not a problem.
the injectortimes was not at the limit yet.

[Foxy]

the std-cams sucks like nothing i´ve ever tested

Why?

:opens can of swedish worms:

[dude]

i just did some calculation with the new cams etc. i got a figure around 200hp@7800rpm at the wheels see if i´m right when it´s done

[dude]

the std-cams sucks like nothing i´ve ever tested 

Why?

:opens can of swedish worms:

too little duration and lift.
it get to be a big flowrestriction too low in the rpm.

[Gedi]

So your getting 200bhp from a completly standard engine ??? I don't understand.

[dude]

So your getting 200bhp from a completly standard engine ???
I don't understand.

well! not really

i get 163.2 wheelhp from a std-engine with exchanged intake,exhaustsystem and fuelinjection (mbe941).

the 200 fwhp is just "calculated power" based on everybody elses powerfigure in the n/a-thread and i wouldn´t bet my legs on those figures

[clipping_point]

It is all HOW you measure it. Anders measure with equipment bolted to the hub, and thus does not loose anything in the contact between the tyre and the RR surface. This method give 10-15 % loss in the gearbox. On a RR on the other hand friction losses in the contact between the tyre and the RR surface, tyre rubber hysteresis give 20-25 % loss. When you measure with a GForce accelerometer (as I do) you have losses in wind, drag etc and maybe just get a 110 HP reading.

[clipping_point]

This is what dudes figures should be compared to. It is a test with the Roto-Test method on a standard Speedster/VX. Shows about 130 HP@wheels, which, with 12 % losses give, 147 HP@flywheel. This means that 163 HP is around 182 HP in this case. Still very impressive from a: Standard engine with Race type exhaust, cat-free Plenum chamber inlet MBE injection system

Attached Files

•  h_star2.gif   39.69KB   0 downloads

[clipping_point]

Like this:

Attached Files

•  rototest.jpg   26.16KB   0 downloads

[dude]

here is a pic from the mappingsession. it gets a little hot when you make a static map with locked rpm.

Attached Files

•  gl_dande_system_speedster2_liten.JPG   161.14KB   0 downloads