I think I'm gonna like them too

The 3073s look like the perfect setup for big top end and streetable

mid - low. With a meticulous attention to the setup and tuning, looks like

lag can really be kept minimal. It's gonna be cool to see what's possible...


I read the email with the fellow down south. WOW! He took 3rd place

and 200mph on pump gas!

I'm going to talk to Prodigy about the E85 setup. He's like a "pioneer"

with that stuff lol.

 

Hi,

I am not sure what you mean with your 17/12% losses reference. When we did our runs on a Dynojet with a couple of 996TTs being all in RWD configuration, we had a consistent drivetrain loss of around 20-25 HP. That's far from 12%. Just saying.

Are you sure you are not mixing cars here? The 1200 HP car of Markski is not the same car as the 871 rwhp that you are referring to. At least that's what I understood.

Andreas

 

Andreas

Did you do engine dyno's before the wheel dyno's? If not how did you calculate the loss?

 

LOL, I already told you I don't care about that. Never have. I have enough friends and I get along fine with the large majority of people I come in contact with on forums. Also remember that these forums aren't popularity contests.

Out of my respect for Chuck, I'll stand down in this thread. However, if in the future you continue to post BS or attack other vendors for building faster cars than yours, I am going to correct you (just like I would correct anyone else). Keep that in mind before you post.

Thanks and have a nice day.

 

Is Golden Girls over already?

 

I was about to log off and I saw this! Poor Paulie. It never ends!

 

For God's sake it's not Golden Girls time yet. Judge Judy is really kicking *** today.

 

Hi Paulie,

of course not. We did not calculate the loss. It get's measured on the dyno: drag losses vs the measured rwhp.

Different dynos show different results that need to be interpretated. 12% losses would mean 84 HP for a 700 HP car. That figure is totally off.

I personally don't like the reverse calculation at all and am pretty happy with rwhp. That's all that matters.

But the assumptions on what the losses would be are way off to my taste and a % value is not what I would consider being a valid approach. At least not for all involved components.

Andreas

 

This thread has so much awesome in it that it should become a stickie. Thanks for the entertainment while I'm sitting on another delayed United flight.

 

Andreas

I have to agree with the above statement.

Thanks for explanation

 

One can only assume that the factory did it's due diligence with regard to BHP. If you dyno your car on "X" dyno, whatever your whp is on that dyno, will be your % loss on that dyno. My old 996 turbo made 338 on a Mustang dyno. 338/420= 20% loss on that dyno. My guess is it would be less...like 12-15% on a Dynojet...
If you use many dyno's, for whatever reason, you will never really know...as that number is a moving target.

 

You are not comparing apples to apples there because one is an AWD, Mustang, and the other rear wheel, Dyno Jet..
A AWD is going to have a greater loss due to AWD..
Others have to beware of that simple fact..

 

You missed the whole point John...and I wasn't comparing fruit either.

My point was and is: you need to baseline a stock car on any specific dyno to extract the driveline loss on THAT dyno for THAT car, whether it be RWD, AWD, 4WD, 9WD, whatever....
I was using MY numbers as an example to show that our cars STOCK potentially have much more than a 12-15% DL loss. Our cars STOCK are AWD, so my point stands.

 

Really?? But you through a DynoJet figure, which is less, that is rear wheel drive only??
The only true way is to put the motor on an engine dyno then put it in the chassis.. That would give you the true loss..

 

Surely you don't need the "pioneer". Markski got you covered. Throw a bunch of 044s inline and 80lb injectors and u r set