rear wheel hp = motor hp
#1
rear wheel hp = motor hp
I just had my car put on a chasis dyno and the car produced 392 hp at the rear wheels. Is there a calclation to convert rear wheel hp to motor hp? I just want to know how much motor hp i have. Thank in advance for any help.
#6
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Danville, VA
Posts: 684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by davered00ss
rule of thumb is 15-18% for drivetrain loss.
392/.85=461
Trending Topics
#9
Thanks everybody for the fast response. I was feeling pretty low once I saw my rear wheel hp reading today after I had my car chassis dynoed. I feel alot better knowing my motor has around 480 to 490 hp. I'm going to the track tommorow to try and get into the 11 second club. Wish me luck, I wil need it.
#11
10 Second Club
iTrader: (11)
It's more of a set number for drivetrain loss than it is a percentage. More like:
(HP required to turn part)*(X% lost due to friction and binding) so those who say it's a percentage are nuts. Let's make the numbers easy for discussion's sake. If it's a straight percentage, then if a TH350 is 10% loss, it takes a 300hp car 30hp to turn it, but it takes a 1000hp car 100hp to turn the same part? That's just silly thinking.
(HP required to turn part)*(X% lost due to friction and binding) so those who say it's a percentage are nuts. Let's make the numbers easy for discussion's sake. If it's a straight percentage, then if a TH350 is 10% loss, it takes a 300hp car 30hp to turn it, but it takes a 1000hp car 100hp to turn the same part? That's just silly thinking.
#12
Launching!
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by N4cer
It's more of a set number for drivetrain loss than it is a percentage. More like:
(HP required to turn part)*(X% lost due to friction and binding) so those who say it's a percentage are nuts. Let's make the numbers easy for discussion's sake. If it's a straight percentage, then if a TH350 is 10% loss, it takes a 300hp car 30hp to turn it, but it takes a 1000hp car 100hp to turn the same part? That's just silly thinking.
(HP required to turn part)*(X% lost due to friction and binding) so those who say it's a percentage are nuts. Let's make the numbers easy for discussion's sake. If it's a straight percentage, then if a TH350 is 10% loss, it takes a 300hp car 30hp to turn it, but it takes a 1000hp car 100hp to turn the same part? That's just silly thinking.
#13
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Central TX
Posts: 699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 93redBIRDman
Manual
392 / .85 = 461hp
Auto
392 / .80 = 490hp
Obviously these are just ballpark guesses...
392 / .85 = 461hp
Auto
392 / .80 = 490hp
Obviously these are just ballpark guesses...
#14
12 Second Club
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Fort Myers, FL
Posts: 589
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by N4cer
It's more of a set number for drivetrain loss than it is a percentage. More like:
(HP required to turn part)*(X% lost due to friction and binding) so those who say it's a percentage are nuts. Let's make the numbers easy for discussion's sake. If it's a straight percentage, then if a TH350 is 10% loss, it takes a 300hp car 30hp to turn it, but it takes a 1000hp car 100hp to turn the same part? That's just silly thinking.
(HP required to turn part)*(X% lost due to friction and binding) so those who say it's a percentage are nuts. Let's make the numbers easy for discussion's sake. If it's a straight percentage, then if a TH350 is 10% loss, it takes a 300hp car 30hp to turn it, but it takes a 1000hp car 100hp to turn the same part? That's just silly thinking.
#15
12 Second Club
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Fort Myers, FL
Posts: 589
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Medic/Z28
How could an auto make more power than a manual transmission? I thought thats why we all got manuals to get the most out of the motor. Please explain this so that my next car we be an auto.
#17
TECH Resident
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 822
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Boodyrider
Why? You taking just the motor for a drive?
IMHO, motor hp is totally irrelevant.
IMHO, motor hp is totally irrelevant.
#19
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Indianapolis Indiana
Posts: 1,299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
+1 on it being a static % is ludicrous, saying 15% loss for a manual means if i have 460 FWHP im at 400 RWHP, but if i'm at 1000 FWHP i'm losing over 150 HP to turn the same components? Bah this thread can get ugly lol
#20
On The Tree
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: ERIE, PA
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by N4cer
It's more of a set number for drivetrain loss than it is a percentage. More like:
(HP required to turn part)*(X% lost due to friction and binding) so those who say it's a percentage are nuts. Let's make the numbers easy for discussion's sake. If it's a straight percentage, then if a TH350 is 10% loss, it takes a 300hp car 30hp to turn it, but it takes a 1000hp car 100hp to turn the same part? That's just silly thinking.
(HP required to turn part)*(X% lost due to friction and binding) so those who say it's a percentage are nuts. Let's make the numbers easy for discussion's sake. If it's a straight percentage, then if a TH350 is 10% loss, it takes a 300hp car 30hp to turn it, but it takes a 1000hp car 100hp to turn the same part? That's just silly thinking.