300bhp/ton

Try posts 221-224 including the HYPERLINK and QUOTES therein.

x phantom x

iTrader: (14)

Uhhhh, you posted ONE link .... and it backed up what I said, not what YOU said.

Let me refresh your memory as to what YOUR link said...


YOUR Horsepower Link

horsepower
n., pl. -power.

1. (Abbr. hp) A unit of power in the U.S. Customary System, equal to 745.7 watts or 33,000 foot-pounds per minute.
2. The power exerted by a horse in pulling.
3. Informal. Effective strength: political horsepower; computer horsepower.

and ....

"horsepower, unit of power in the English system of units. It is equal to 33,000 foot-pounds per minute or 550 foot-pounds per second or approximately 746 watts. The term horsepower originated with James Watt, who determined by experiment that a horse could do 33,000 foot-pounds of work a minute in drawing coal from a coal pit."


This defintion is exactly what I said it was ??? You were claiming HP and BHp both units, and were the same thing, remember?? So, are you going to PROVE THAT, or are you going to change around what You originally said, and claim that is what you originally meant, as you have done so many times.
.

x phantom x

iTrader: (14)

.
Let me remind you of your original posts, since you seem to be conveniently forgetting them ….

This is your claim that BHp matters .... I have yet to understand what this means ... even though the Evo is not making the power to the ground, when you trace it back to the engine, it will be about the same, and "statidtically" make the same power to the ground.... (again, nice spelling)

You were the FIRST ONE to state the % loss claim ... then you argue with the people who cite the % loss later? Nice one. Btw, there is no "constant loss rate"... since you are so familar with Newtons laws of motion, you should know that as you spin an object, it will require more energy to spin that object the faster it travels (again, the properties of a rotational mass, which you cannot seem to grasp).


First smart thing you’ve said …. You should’ve thrown in the towel right after this comment.


And my favorite:
This is when RWHP didn’t exist, it was merely a measurement of BHP, which you later claimed was just a measurement of HP …. So you’re taking a measurement, of a measurement? That’s like having 10 foot yards. You then continued to tell us how BHP is a unit (it is not).

P.S. If you noticed in my next 3-4 posts, I DID go look up different ratings, and I DID come back with links, quotes; aka, evidence …. You, however, have done nothing of the sort. FWIW, quotes without references/links are meaningless.
.

ss1129

iTrader: (16)

Man phantom its too easy to beat up retards. Let him go back to class.

x phantom x

iTrader: (14)

Maybe, but it is still a lot of fun.

You're right though, I'll leave him alone and let him get back to whatever it is he does.
.

x phantom x

iTrader: (14)

Maybe, but it is still a lot of fun.

You're right though, I'll quit picking on him and let him get back to whatever it is he does.
.

EvilDylan

This thread needs to be locked anyways. It's way off topic.

BTW ill be dynoing again this weekend with a couple of fresh mods.

B T

Oh Margarette!

Back on topic...

I hear by dub thee "king of the Long threads".

Very nice Evil!

You managed to start another long thread.


Lets get that EVO the same gearing the Z06 has and make everyting else equal down to total car weight,tire size/weight and driver skill.

Run em again and let's see what kind of "useable" power band that EVO really has.

Torque people, it all about useable torque in the power band.

I read all these pages and I haven't watched the video.

After reading this I'm too skirt!

btw, nice kill, er I think.

I may have to dig up that ole thread Evil was in where I listed the EVO gear ratios vrs MPH and RPM per gear.

I'll have to check out the Vette ratios and do a little comparing.

BT

300bhp/ton

the fact you don't understand what you've read is not my problem.

I think you'll find that 3 issues evolved from this. At least thats what I've been discussing.

ISSUE 1: DO NOT DIRECTLY COMPARE 4WD AND 2WD DYNO RESULTS

ISSUE2: DUE TO THE FACT THAT YOU CAN NOT COMPARE 4WD AND 2WD DYNO RESULTS IN MAY BE BETTER TO LOOK AT ENGINE OUTPUT, BUT ALWAYS REMEMBERING TO FACTOR IN OTHER CONSIDERATIONS SUCH AS WEIGHT AND GEARING.

ISSUE 3: INCCORECT USE AND DESCRIPTION OF HP READINGS.


-----------------------------------------

I'll stick to addressing ISSUE 3.

As the English language is so diverse there are many ways of saying this. I've tried a few so I'll try and make it even clearer this time.

BHP = any HP reading derived from measuring torque on a BRAKE device and using a calculation.

This means that ANY reading done via a BRAKE device (this would be such as a dyno, engine or chassis as they work the same) then using a calculation to determine BHP.

If you are still convinced that rwhp should NOT be RWBHP then please tell me how they are measured differently?

Remember the location of the reading is not important.

Here you seem to have missed this each and every time you've read this page:
Please read this statement. See how it says 'at several points in the transmission'. A flywheel is part of the transmission and is one of these locations. The wheels of the car are another example, a different location but the reading is performed in the same manor.

N.B. Remember an engine does not have to have a flywheel, this is most commonly seen in automobiles.


From the above statement it then goes on to site BHP as one such method.


You may not like this fact. But ultimatley it is a fact. I think this may be a better way of explaining it, I have tried in the past and did not want to make it too complex. And to add a minor correction, BHP and HP = the same thing, but BHP is not infact the unit, it was mearly easier to explain it at such.

HP (unit) -> BHP (expression of unit) -> xxBHP (this would be rwbhp or flywheel bhp) -> Then any standards used (SAE)

x phantom x

iTrader: (14)

Where did these "issues" come from? Show me where you brought up these Issues in the posts that you made?? We were all well aware that comparing 2wd and 4wd dyno numbers wasn't the best ... which is why if you look closely, you will see a number of people asking what that 300ish WHP of the evo would be equivillent to on a RWHP dyno.

Haha, I have explained 9 times already, that I had 2 thoughts in my head and combined them, in an attempt to make what I was attempting to say to you more clear, since you didn't understand it the first time.

- Smaller wheel size = smaller wheel weight = less rotational mass.

- Less rotational mass = less drivetrain loss = faster acceleration.

- A larger wheel/tire combo will lessen your final drive gear ratio, and will therefore make your car slower.

- A skinny tire on a large rim will have less sidewall flex, and will therefore spin more.

- And, we ALL DO use WHP as a standard to measure the performance of our cars


I believe the REAL issues here were the ones I mentioned before. And it is REAL funny how all those definitions you gave in your last post look NOTHING LIKE THE ORIGINALS, and look 95% like mine. Are you just slightly changing your view in each post, so eventually you'll be right?

Gman2002Z06

It's not the "WHP" vs. "RWHP"...It doesn't matter if you are measuring the hp at just 2 wheels or at 4 wheels...Measure wheel hp is measured wheel hp...

HP is basically a measure of work done per unit of time...If an AWD car made 300 whp on a dyno, then a rear wheel drive car made 300 whp on the same dyno, even though the front wheels were doing no accelerative work...Then both cars have the ability to do the same amount of work per unit of time...

Now traction is a different issue...300 whp with AWD is naturally going to have better starting traction, i.e. the 6000 rpm clutch drop these guys do...Do that with 300 whp and only 2 wheel drive and the only thing you will see is a cloud of smoke...

What you guys can't compare directly is one dyno brand to the next...As for the HP at the engines being equal in two cars of the same wt., same gearing, only difference being 2 wheel drive vs. AWD...

The 2 wheel drive car will outrun an AWD car from a roll...Plain old physics will tell you that the additional drivetrain components will sap power from the engine, thus making it slower that the 2 wheel drive car...

Peace...Gman

necrocannibal

iTrader: (5)

Very well said.