me vs a fg2 with a k24a2 swap
06-11-2013, 01:29 PM
#13
Registered User
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by s2cho' timestamp='1370922130' post='22600171
The hp difference from fwd and rwd to the wheels is very minimal. Only a slight variation of around 5hp if the crank is the same.
http://www.modified.com/tech/modp-10...s/viewall.html
"In the case of FWD vehicles, the torque path is more direct to the front wheels and the use of efficient helical final drive gears means that drivetrain losses can be as much as 50 percent lower than on RWD and AWD vehicles."
the ~20 for awd, ~15 for rwd and ~9 percent rule for fwd is the standard accepted norm.
IF your friend is making around 220C than he should be right at 200whp.
you being stock at 240C will be right around 195-210
seeing that our cars weigh almost the same and he makes more torque than you, he should have had the jump for sure and you would have played catchup, not the other way around. either, you won by a tiny tiny tiny margin, or he just cant drive.
as for the totally gutted, stripped and acid-dipped 93 SI hatch with a 800 pound weight reduction and a gsr swap, he will own you. 180hp at 1500lbs is a .12 P:W and you are 2800lbs at 240 which is .08. no point in that race. lol
06-11-2013, 01:52 PM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lakeland, Florida
Posts: 1,967
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what does any of that even mean???? seriously. it doesnt make any sense! I think you are very confused man. LOL
06-11-2013, 06:57 PM
#16
Registered User
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by s2cho' timestamp='1370986186' post='22602015
Our cars dont make high hp and the variation is very minimal. The drive train loss from a civic and s2000 is MINIMAL its a .02% difference if the crank is the same
what does any of that even mean???? seriously. it doesnt make any sense! I think you are very confused man. LOL
Ok ill just dumb it down as best as I can.. From using a chp converter to whp the difference is 4 hp if the crank hp is 200 from fwd to rwd. This calculator or converter is not 100% accurate because different cars put down power differently but you get the idea. If the crank is 200hp and a fwd car puts down 4 more hp than a rwd car then that is .02%. You get the .02% by using math!!!! Put 200 times .02 in a caculator and what do you know you get 4!!!! So if you can stay tuned for a little more than a paragraph you should understand and it makes sense, its logic. If not... I got nothing for you.
http://www.mk5cortinaestate.co.uk/calculator4.php
06-11-2013, 07:07 PM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^
You're going against your own logic.
In the first post, you said a 220 crank hp civic would be making 175-180 wheel hp. That's 45-50hp loss, which is even more than the rwd s2000. If what you're saying is correct, then both cars would be losing more or less 20hp in drivetrain loss.
You're going against your own logic.
In the first post, you said a 220 crank hp civic would be making 175-180 wheel hp. That's 45-50hp loss, which is even more than the rwd s2000. If what you're saying is correct, then both cars would be losing more or less 20hp in drivetrain loss.
06-11-2013, 07:15 PM
#19
Registered User
Thread Starter
^
You're going against your own logic.
In the first post, you said a 220 crank hp civic would be making 175-180 wheel hp. That's 45-50hp loss, which is even more than the rwd s2000. If what you're saying is correct, then both cars would be losing more or less 20hp in drivetrain loss.
You're going against your own logic.
In the first post, you said a 220 crank hp civic would be making 175-180 wheel hp. That's 45-50hp loss, which is even more than the rwd s2000. If what you're saying is correct, then both cars would be losing more or less 20hp in drivetrain loss.
Ok I live in CO and air is much thinner here and you will lose another good 10%-15% in real world situations where its over 100 degrees as it is today. Accounting for all of that its not a bad guess to say that its around 180 wheel with heat soak look down two post and I say real world situations. So lets add some numbers up, 10% for being 5280 feet above sea level from 220 is 22hp so your already at 198hp then take account for drive train loss and heat soak. Air is thinner when you go higher in elevation and to add heat soak a guess of 180 is very conservative. Do I have to give you my social too so you stop nip picking and get off my jock?
06-11-2013, 07:20 PM
#20
Registered User
Thread Starter