View Single Post
      01-03-2008, 12:27 PM   #60
swamp2
Major General
 
swamp2's Avatar
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Posts: 9,586
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtPE View Post
what I'm saying is they raised HP 360/343 ~ 5%, and they raised T ~ 5%
they did not yeild more torque...beyond the associated HP increase...
and I'm guessing they only got that at the top end...peak T increased by only 1.5%...
increased volumetric efficiency...

if they would have raised HP 5%, and torque 10%, then I would be impressed...the only real way to that is with compression (mep) or displacement, both of which remained the same...

do you have the factory csl power graph?
I guess we are both getting to the obvious hp and tq are intricately linked with rpm as well but rpm by rpm change one and the other must change by exactly the same percent. It is pretty easy to reconstruct it and likely end up very close to reality based on the E46 M3 curves.

13: Not exactly correct. The RS4 is 4.163 l which makes it 101 hp/l (rounding up from 100.89). Sure BMW wins hp/l but Audi wins tq/l, 76.1 vs. 73.8 (note my previous tq.l calc for the RS$ used an even 4.20 l). Both are difficult to obtain from an engineering perspective and both are reasonable measures of great engine design. Again I think they are saving some room for the CSL, maybe even a mid life power bump.
swamp2 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote