997 GT3/RS Performance Mod Thread******
#48
please transalate this into HP or whp
Motorleistung (gemessen) 307.2kW @ 255km/h / 7567 1/min
Radleistung (gemessen) 280.3kW @ 255km/h / 7567 1/min
Verlustleistung (gemessen) 26.9kW @ 255km/h / 7567 1/min
Motorleistung (korrigiert) 306.2kW @ 255km/h / 7567 1/min
Drehmoment (korrigiert) 409Nm @ 6434 1/min (Motor)
Druck / Temp. (Standard) 1012mBar / 18°C (ISO 1585)
Oiltemperature
Radleistung (gemessen) 280.3kW @ 255km/h / 7567 1/min
Verlustleistung (gemessen) 26.9kW @ 255km/h / 7567 1/min
Motorleistung (korrigiert) 306.2kW @ 255km/h / 7567 1/min
Drehmoment (korrigiert) 409Nm @ 6434 1/min (Motor)
Druck / Temp. (Standard) 1012mBar / 18°C (ISO 1585)
Oiltemperature
#49
please transalate this into HP or whp tooo after exhaust....
Motorleistung (gemessen) 326.1kW @ 255km/h / 7662 1/min
Radleistung (gemessen) 298.9kW @ 255km/h / 7662 1/min
Verlustleistung (gemessen) 27.2kW @ 255km/h / 7662 1/min
Motorleistung (korrigiert) 325.8kW @ 255km/h / 7662 1/min
Drehmoment (korrigiert) 431Nm @ 6238 1/min (Motor)
Druck / Temp. (Standard) 1012mBar / 19°C (ISO 1585)
Oiltemperature
Radleistung (gemessen) 298.9kW @ 255km/h / 7662 1/min
Verlustleistung (gemessen) 27.2kW @ 255km/h / 7662 1/min
Motorleistung (korrigiert) 325.8kW @ 255km/h / 7662 1/min
Drehmoment (korrigiert) 431Nm @ 6238 1/min (Motor)
Druck / Temp. (Standard) 1012mBar / 19°C (ISO 1585)
Oiltemperature
#50
please transalate this into HP or whp
Motorleistung (gemessen) 307.2kW @ 255km/h / 7567 1/min
Radleistung (gemessen) 280.3kW @ 255km/h / 7567 1/min
Verlustleistung (gemessen) 26.9kW @ 255km/h / 7567 1/min
Motorleistung (korrigiert) 306.2kW @ 255km/h / 7567 1/min
Drehmoment (korrigiert) 409Nm @ 6434 1/min (Motor)
Druck / Temp. (Standard) 1012mBar / 18°C (ISO 1585)
Oiltemperature
Radleistung (gemessen) 280.3kW @ 255km/h / 7567 1/min
Verlustleistung (gemessen) 26.9kW @ 255km/h / 7567 1/min
Motorleistung (korrigiert) 306.2kW @ 255km/h / 7567 1/min
Drehmoment (korrigiert) 409Nm @ 6434 1/min (Motor)
Druck / Temp. (Standard) 1012mBar / 18°C (ISO 1585)
Oiltemperature
Last edited by greekm3; 07-21-2008 at 02:56 AM.
#53
Folks-
It's early here, but a 15% loss from 460 hp is 391 hp. If you are only measuring hp at the rear wheels, and trying to calculate crank hp, then you are probably multiplying 392 x 1.15, which does not yield the correct answer. It is the engine output that is suffering the parasitic loss, not the rear wheel output that is adding a percentage of its power using that approach.
Thanks...
It's early here, but a 15% loss from 460 hp is 391 hp. If you are only measuring hp at the rear wheels, and trying to calculate crank hp, then you are probably multiplying 392 x 1.15, which does not yield the correct answer. It is the engine output that is suffering the parasitic loss, not the rear wheel output that is adding a percentage of its power using that approach.
Thanks...
#55
Nice explanation makes sense.....
therefore 392whp = ?hp
the way i calculated was 392 x 1.15 = 450hp
but 460hp is a number that you cant get either way especially that you have two numbers to work with 392 and 15%.....
therefore 392whp = ?hp
the way i calculated was 392 x 1.15 = 450hp
but 460hp is a number that you cant get either way especially that you have two numbers to work with 392 and 15%.....
Folks-
It's early here, but a 15% loss from 460 hp is 391 hp. If you are only measuring hp at the rear wheels, and trying to calculate crank hp, then you are probably multiplying 392 x 1.15, which does not yield the correct answer. It is the engine output that is suffering the parasitic loss, not the rear wheel output that is adding a percentage of its power using that approach.
Thanks...
It's early here, but a 15% loss from 460 hp is 391 hp. If you are only measuring hp at the rear wheels, and trying to calculate crank hp, then you are probably multiplying 392 x 1.15, which does not yield the correct answer. It is the engine output that is suffering the parasitic loss, not the rear wheel output that is adding a percentage of its power using that approach.
Thanks...
#56
Guys we are going nuts over a lousy 10 bhp. I do believe that a 15% loss of 460 = 391 but no need to sweat it.
I will post the dyno graphs later to day. Currently in the office and can not do it.
Cheers,
Ranger
I will post the dyno graphs later to day. Currently in the office and can not do it.
Cheers,
Ranger
#57
Ranger, does the FVD exhaust use mufflers or is it just header, cat, and pipe? Are you using FVD software? Please post graphs and video's. Your yellow GT3 looks awesome.
Thanx
Thanx
#58
Folks-
Has anyone done a engine conversion to 3.8L, 3.9L or 4.0L?
I know that the Alex of SharkWerks did a 3.8L conversion to his GT3RS (see also Sept. 08 issue of Excellence). It does look like the next GT3RS will have both direct injection and the new 3.8L engine for ~450 bhp.
-Gerry
Has anyone done a engine conversion to 3.8L, 3.9L or 4.0L?
I know that the Alex of SharkWerks did a 3.8L conversion to his GT3RS (see also Sept. 08 issue of Excellence). It does look like the next GT3RS will have both direct injection and the new 3.8L engine for ~450 bhp.
-Gerry
#59
WildBill glad to help with info on the system. Presently at work in the hospital and can not post the details. It will take a little time to put it together over the time that all mods have been done.
Will work on it later today.
The FVD system can be with or without mufflers. Obvious without system saves more weight and louder.
Basically headers, 200 cell cats, elbow pipe, stock center resonator and tips.
This is what I have and it's awesome.
Someone asked about software. I am not running FVD software.
Thanks,
Ranger
Will work on it later today.
The FVD system can be with or without mufflers. Obvious without system saves more weight and louder.
Basically headers, 200 cell cats, elbow pipe, stock center resonator and tips.
This is what I have and it's awesome.
Someone asked about software. I am not running FVD software.
Thanks,
Ranger
#60
+1, thanks alex