|
|
10-10-2013, 08:08 AM | #243 |
Major General
3427
Rep 6,769
Posts
Drives: 2016 BMW i8
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Monarch Beach
iTrader: (1)
Garage List 2012 BMW e92 M3 [0.00]
2021 BMW X5M [10.00] 2015 Porsche 991 Tu ... [10.00] 2015 Porsche 991 GT3 [10.00] |
^ ^ ^ that HP/TQ curve looks awesome for an AWD Audi ! That thing must launch off the line like a rocket. And is just a beast at all points in the RPM range...don't even need to downshift to get going.
__________________
Current BMWs: 2022 X5 40i, 2016 X5 50i
2015 Porsche 991 Turbo S 1979 Porsche 911 Turbo a couple others IG: longboarder949; YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCT1...eoFBszPIK0gf9w |
Appreciate
0
|
10-10-2013, 09:16 AM | #244 | |
Captain
23
Rep 638
Posts |
Quote:
Cant debate points without more information, but what i will say, is look at the giant dip in TQ past 5k rpm. Earlier TQ would be nice, but thats a huge loss.That a PD s/c cant flow well up top for the rpm the cars have |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-11-2013, 12:30 AM | #245 | |
Second Lieutenant
70
Rep 287
Posts |
Quote:
120ft/lbs over stock at redline is not a "loss". That is patently a "gain". The TVS1740 kit employs the same SC as the Harrop E92 M3 kit, and same integrated intercooler design.
__________________
Drives: 2010 E70 X5M Carbonschwarz Loved and lost: 07 E92 M3 Silverstone II / 96 E36 M3 Evo Estoril Blue / 07 E84 Z4 M Coupe Interlagos Blue |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-11-2013, 09:32 AM | #246 | |
Captain
23
Rep 638
Posts |
Quote:
Does it say how much boost the STG3 is using? If its over 9 psi, its also not a good argument considering OEM strength of the S65. As I said before, i prefer not to talk about a completely different motor arguing for the actual supercharger because it doesnt translate well for the S65. Thats unfair to those of you still expecting big things from it. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-11-2013, 10:08 AM | #247 | |
Second Lieutenant
70
Rep 287
Posts |
Quote:
Here's another audi 4.2 positive displacement kit with no loss of torque compared to stock: I also read that the audi 4.2 is: 1. over square bore and stroke: 84.5 by 92.8 millimetres 2. compression ratio: 12.5 I understand that this impacts the mechanical efficiency of the engine and indeed creates different torque characteristics to the over square and lower compression s65.
__________________
Drives: 2010 E70 X5M Carbonschwarz Loved and lost: 07 E92 M3 Silverstone II / 96 E36 M3 Evo Estoril Blue / 07 E84 Z4 M Coupe Interlagos Blue |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-11-2013, 11:06 AM | #248 |
Captain
23
Rep 638
Posts |
Im not arguing a loss of Tq compared to stock, that would be ridiculous. Im talking about over the benefits of mating the centri s/c to a high revving motor.
Now bringing in a completely different built motor into the equation couldn't be further from an articulate debate |
Appreciate
0
|
10-12-2013, 12:07 AM | #252 | |
Second Lieutenant
70
Rep 287
Posts |
Quote:
The substantial torque degradation you speak off is a characteristic of the audi 4.2 not positive displacement superchargers.
__________________
Drives: 2010 E70 X5M Carbonschwarz Loved and lost: 07 E92 M3 Silverstone II / 96 E36 M3 Evo Estoril Blue / 07 E84 Z4 M Coupe Interlagos Blue |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-12-2013, 12:20 AM | #253 |
Second Lieutenant
70
Rep 287
Posts |
That's awesome.
500hp at the wheels and 400 ft lbs peak torque at 4000rpm. Can't wait.
__________________
Drives: 2010 E70 X5M Carbonschwarz Loved and lost: 07 E92 M3 Silverstone II / 96 E36 M3 Evo Estoril Blue / 07 E84 Z4 M Coupe Interlagos Blue |
Appreciate
0
|
10-12-2013, 09:46 PM | #254 | |
Private First Class
9
Rep 161
Posts |
Quote:
15% drivetrain correction would be about 425rwhp and 340 rwtq at 4K RPM. -Nick
__________________
2010 Melbourne Red E92 M3 / DCT / 220M / CF Roof / Premium / Assist / BT / PDC.
Evolve Stage 1 Tune / GTS DCT Flash / Servo Tune / OEM Exhaust Mod / BMC Drop In / H&R Sports Springs / BMS 15/12mm Spacers / CF Grilles / CF Gills / CF Hood Vents / Painted Reflectors / Extended Paddles / BMS ARC AE's / Cyba Scoops / 20% Tint |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-13-2013, 11:49 AM | #255 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
427
Rep 1,947
Posts |
Quote:
I've got a lot of experience with Dynapack and know them and Dynojets extremely well. I've even run 5-6 same cars on Dynapacks and Dynojets just to see how the dyno's compared. For the most part, Dynapack and Dynojet give nearly identical results. In my tests, we had the results within 2-5 whp of each other. For crankshaft correction, I typically use 12% drivetrain loss for Dynapack. So just going by the numbers posted above, the translation from whp to chp would be: 500whp = 568chp, and 400wtq = 455ctq. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-13-2013, 12:22 PM | #256 | ||
Brigadier General
913
Rep 3,456
Posts
Drives: Harrop E90 M3
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Colorado Springs
|
Quote:
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
10-13-2013, 04:18 PM | #258 |
Private First Class
9
Rep 161
Posts |
Ok. I did a bit of researching between Kilowatt, Newton Meter and the numbers Harrop posted in the Stage 1 ad.
Seems Harrop did post the numbers in RWHP instead of crank as I was suspecting. Here's how I determined this: - 3000 RPM delivers 460nm which equals 339rwtq. Harrop states 330nm stock, which is 243 rwtq. Most M3 put down round 250rwtq so this adds up - 5000 RPM delivers 540nm which equals 398rwtq. Harrop states 340nm stock, which is 250 rwtq. Once again, the stock nm stated reflects what a M3 puts down in rwtq. - 7000 RPM delivers 373kw which equals 500rwhp. Harrop states 255nm stock, which is 341 rwhp. The stock kw stated reflects what a M3 puts down in rwhp. Convert those numbers to crank hp and you'll have: 3000 RPM- 400 Crank TQ 5000 RPM- 440 Crank TQ 7000 RPM- 614 Crank HP What I don't understand. Is why they stated in the ad that the powertrain correction hadn't been corrected. I guess what they meant by saying that is that they haven't included the CHP numbers. Either way like another guy said, a dynograph would have cleared up the confusion. After finally confirming the numbers. This kit looks pretty damn good. If they come out with a Stage 2 kit by the end of this year or early next year, that will be the kit I jump on. -Nick
__________________
2010 Melbourne Red E92 M3 / DCT / 220M / CF Roof / Premium / Assist / BT / PDC.
Evolve Stage 1 Tune / GTS DCT Flash / Servo Tune / OEM Exhaust Mod / BMC Drop In / H&R Sports Springs / BMS 15/12mm Spacers / CF Grilles / CF Gills / CF Hood Vents / Painted Reflectors / Extended Paddles / BMS ARC AE's / Cyba Scoops / 20% Tint |
Appreciate
0
|
10-13-2013, 07:56 PM | #259 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
427
Rep 1,947
Posts |
Quote:
So let's see if I can reverse all of this and get closer to the real numbers. 3000 RPM: 460nm = 339wtq, 194whp = 145kW 5000 RPM: 540nm = 398wtq, 379whp = 283kW 7000 RPM: 509nm = 375wtq, 500whp = 373kW Next let's convert STD correction to SAE correction with a 3% scalar: 3000 RPM: 447nm = 329wtq, 188whp = 141kW 5000 RPM: 524nm = 386wtq, 368whp = 275kW 7000 RPM: 494nm = 364wtq, 485whp = 362kW Last let's convert STD correction to Crank TQ and HP using 12% correction factor: 3000 RPM: 523nm = 386ctq, 220chp = 164kW 5000 RPM: 614nm = 453ctq, 431chp = 321kW 7000 RPM: 578nm = 426ctq, 568chp = 424kW I hope this helps. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-13-2013, 08:53 PM | #260 | |
Private First Class
9
Rep 161
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
2010 Melbourne Red E92 M3 / DCT / 220M / CF Roof / Premium / Assist / BT / PDC.
Evolve Stage 1 Tune / GTS DCT Flash / Servo Tune / OEM Exhaust Mod / BMC Drop In / H&R Sports Springs / BMS 15/12mm Spacers / CF Grilles / CF Gills / CF Hood Vents / Painted Reflectors / Extended Paddles / BMS ARC AE's / Cyba Scoops / 20% Tint |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-13-2013, 09:46 PM | #261 | |
Captain
23
Rep 638
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-13-2013, 11:21 PM | #262 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
427
Rep 1,947
Posts |
Quote:
Converting to CHP doesn't require any atmospheric data because you're only factoring drivetrain loss. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-14-2013, 08:17 AM | #263 | |
Captain
23
Rep 638
Posts |
Quote:
Maybe we should just pester them to get the graph up. I have a suspicion they didn't do that, because of higher RPM power, as 8000 rpm figures are not listed as well.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-14-2013, 09:58 PM | #264 |
Lieutenant Colonel
427
Rep 1,947
Posts |
Yes, I realize nobody asked for STD to SAE correction. But even my approximation will be within ~2-4 whp of accuracy. I'm sure to many that will be very helpful since SAE correction is the industry standard.
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|