Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB

Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community - FT86CLUB (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/index.php)
-   Engine, Exhaust, Transmission (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=8)
-   -   BRZ / FR-S Boxer Engine Dyno Powerband revealed (https://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3583)

SUB-FT86 02-10-2012 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahausheer (Post 131545)
Ok, for all you smarty pants, if torque is what moves you and is also what you ''feel'' why do F1 cars have basically no torque and super high Hp? I still argue that, in the end, HP is more important. That's why we see power to weight, not torque to weight metrics.

Formula 1 engines have terrific torque for the weight of those cars. But those cars have a ridiculous P2W ratio.

Exage 02-10-2012 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahausheer (Post 131545)
Ok, for all you smarty pants, if torque is what moves you and is also what you ''feel'' why do F1 cars have basically no torque and super high Hp? I still argue that, in the end, HP is more important. That's why we see power to weight, not torque to weight metrics.

This was already answered with the bike question I believe.

Power = Force X Distance / Time

HP is roughly calculated with: Torque x Rpm / 5252

5252 is some conversion factor I don't have the heart to research right now.

Speed of the engine torque is applied at gives you the amount of power the engine is producing at RPM.

Something like 10m (~33ft) cable with a 10kg (~22lbs) weight attached, and you have a spool/drum to do a vertical lift. I'm in metric sorry for those who use the imperial.

The force is 10kg x 9.81m/s2 (gravity), distance 10m. Two electric motors lift the weight up vertically. One motor takes 20 seconds the other 30 seconds. They didn't do the same work despite delivering the same force:

(98.1N X 10m / 20s) = 49.1W : In 1 minute this motor can lift 10kg 3 times.
(98.1N X 10m / 30s) = 32.7W: In 1 minute this motor can lift 10kg twice.

Also the RPM of the spool will be different: I'm sure you can figure out which is faster. It's hard to explain, I hoped going liner (strait line) helped.

____________

People try to keep RPM low. Fuel economy, engine wear, noise etc... The way to counter lack of power at daily driving speeds is an increase in torque. This is achieved through drive-train design. Hence when SUB says his RSX is gutless because it has little torque, what he means is it develops insufficient power for his liking at low rpm (or the whole range););).

old greg 02-10-2012 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahausheer (Post 131545)
why do F1 cars have basically no torque...?

Because they are required to be 2.4L, duh. :)

In torque-centric terms, the high rpms at which F1 motors operate allow a relatively large gear reduction and fairly significant torque at the wheels.

Please ignore the fact that I'm saying Torque x RPM is what matters. :D

Dimman 02-10-2012 05:22 PM

Anyone want to overlay some rpm drop by gear over this graph? Throw in some wheel torque figures by gear too?

old greg 02-10-2012 05:25 PM

Did we get gear ratio info while I wasn't looking?

Dimman 02-10-2012 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by old greg (Post 131625)
Did we get gear ratio info while I wasn't looking?

Japanese brochures I thought. I remember seeing for sure the two different diff ratios (stripper JDM gets like a 3.73:1, while the rest are 4.10:1, I think...).

Edit:

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/attac...9&d=1326573273

serialk11r 02-10-2012 05:29 PM

Yea, I almost have them memorized already rofl. 4.1f/d (or 3.727 non-lsd), 3.626, 2.188, 1.541, 1.213 (had to look these two up), 1.000, 0.767. Wheel is 24.6 inches I think. Okay 24.61 or 625mm.

SUB-FT86 02-10-2012 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exage (Post 131614)
This was already answered with the bike question I believe.

Power = Force X Distance / Time

HP is roughly calculated with: Torque x Rpm / 5252

5252 is some conversion factor I don't have the heart to research right now.

Speed of the engine torque is applied at gives you the amount of power the engine is producing at RPM.

Something like 10m (~33ft) cable with a 10kg (~22lbs) weight attached, and you have a spool/drum to do a vertical lift. I'm in metric sorry for those who use the imperial.

The force is 10kg x 9.81m/s2 (gravity), distance 10m. Two electric motors lift the weight up vertically. One motor takes 20 seconds the other 30 seconds. They didn't do the same work despite delivering the same force:

(98.1N X 10m / 20s) = 49.1W : In 1 minute this motor can lift 10kg 3 times.
(98.1N X 10m / 30s) = 32.7W: In 1 minute this motor can lift 10kg twice.

Also the RPM of the spool will be different: I'm sure you can figure out which is faster. It's hard to explain, I hoped going liner (strait line) helped.

____________

People try to keep RPM low. Fuel economy, engine wear, noise etc... The way to counter lack of power at daily driving speeds is an increase in torque. This is achieved through drive-train design. Hence when SUB says his RSX is gutless because it has little torque, what he means is it develops insufficient power for his liking at low rpm (or the whole range););).

:word:

old greg 02-10-2012 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by serialk11r (Post 131629)
Wheel is 24.6 inches I think.

Bling bling.... can we get spinners from the factory, or are they a dealer installed option? :D

old greg 02-10-2012 07:18 PM

2 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dimman (Post 131619)
Anyone want to overlay some rpm drop by gear over this graph? Throw in some wheel torque figures by gear too?

Manual = Blue
Auto = Red
Purple = Manual 5th and Auto 4th

Attachment 4646
Attachment 4647

It looks like the car would benefit from a few more rpm up top, even without any mods.

Homemade WRX 02-10-2012 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ahausheer (Post 131545)
Ok, for all you smarty pants, if torque is what moves you and is also what you ''feel'' why do F1 cars have basically no torque and super high Hp? I still argue that, in the end, HP is more important. That's why we see power to weight, not torque to weight metrics.

It's a 2.4L so more RPM = more air = power but because it's power at RPM, Torque is comparatively seem lower. Then take into account that they gear the shit out of them, which is a torque multiplier.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dimman (Post 131619)
Anyone want to overlay some rpm drop by gear over this graph? Throw in some wheel torque figures by gear too?

I see Greg posted some. I have mine with lines drawn back to gear drop from redline but otherwise the same...and it isn't on this computer but now you get the point.

Deslock 02-11-2012 08:46 AM

2 Attachment(s)
Here it is with 15% drivetrain loss.

Ryephile 02-11-2012 11:53 AM

Thanks for sharing the graphs guys, that helps a bunch.

Mr.Jay 02-11-2012 01:10 PM

I love it when you guys get technical

I get to learn something new all the time

bw1235 02-11-2012 02:16 PM

Based on Subau's history of horrible tunes on the STI, I wouldn't be surprised if the torque dip is due to emissions/economy, but time will tell. If it's anything like their turbo tunes, the dip would be where the AFRs drop from too lean to too rich... :thumbdown:
That would certainly be a good thing- it would be straightforward to tune out.

Found a quick example here with AFR: http://www.iwsti.com/forums/2731193-post16.html

http://i48.tinypic.com/2rz5qnk.jpg

Deslock 02-11-2012 08:33 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Here's a rough estimate for comparing acceleration of the BRZ and WRX. As expected, once the WRX hits boost the BRZ never matches it. Still, I was a little surprised to see that:
  • The BRZ in 6th gear has more pull than the WRX in 5th until 70 MPH.
  • The BRZ has more pull than the WRX when both are in 5th.
  • The BRZ has more pull than the WRX when both are in 4th until 55 MPH.
This doesn't account for traction and of course it doesn't take much to increase the WRX's output. Even stock, it'll be 1.2-1.5 sec faster just to 60 MPH.

serialk11r 02-11-2012 08:41 PM

^^^ the virtues of a 6 speed gearbox. Actually, having a lot of pull in 6th gear isn't really a good thing IMO since an overdrive gear should be optimized for 50-80mph range efficiency, but the closer ratios in between are definitely helping.

bw1235 02-11-2012 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deslock (Post 132262)
Here's a rough estimate for comparing acceleration of the BRZ and WRX. As expected, once the WRX hits boost the BRZ never matches it. Still, I was a little surprised to see that:
  • The BRZ in 6th gear has more pull than the WRX in 5th until 70 MPH.
  • The BRZ has more pull than the WRX when both are in 5th.
  • The BRZ has more pull than the WRX when both are in 4th until 55 MPH.
This doesn't account for traction and of course it doesn't take much to increase the WRX's output. Even stock, it'll be 1.2-1.5 sec faster just to 60 MPH.


... and it doesn't account for the WRX's, um, brick-like aero =)

Deslock 02-11-2012 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bw1235 (Post 132276)
... and it doesn't account for the WRX's, um, brick-like aero =)

Actually it does. Read the text on the bottom left of the plot.

serialk11r 02-11-2012 10:34 PM

How did you add drag in? CdA 1/2 \rho v^2?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:56 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.


Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.