Video: HKS 86 drift car + first 86/FR-S/BRZ dyno = 170 rwhp!!!

[Gearbanger]

Call it what you want but with that power to weight it will be lucky to trap 90 in the quarter. Just saying.

[Spaceywilly]

Originally Posted by concept_cynic

I think we all are starting to confuse terms some. I put earlier that HP=work but that isn't true. TQ=work and HP=work/time. Just to clear that up. Also, 1hp=550lbft/second. I think your 5252ft/day thing is off some.

TQ does NOT equal work. Work is force applied over a distance. Hp = work/time is right.

I think you may be right about the 5252ft/day thing, I believe they measured a bunch of horses over some period of time and calculated the average rate of work. That's the important part.

Not that wikipedia is super reliable but

Horsepower from a horse

In 1993, R. D. Stevenson and R. J. Wassersug published an article calculating the upper limit to an animal's power output.[9] The peak power over a few seconds has been measured to be as high as 14.9 hp. However, Stevenson and Wassersug observe that for sustained activity, a work rate of about 1 hp per horse is consistent with agricultural advice from both 19th and 20th century sources.

and from another site

To help sell his steam engines, Watt needed a way of rating their capabilities. The engines were replacing horses, the usual source of industrial power of the day. The typical horse, attached to a mill that grinded corn or cut wood, walked a 24 foot diameter (about 75.4 feet circumference) circle. Watt calculated that the horse pulled with a force of 180 pounds, although how he came up with the figure is not known. Watt observed that a horse typically made 144 trips around the circle in an hour, or about 2.4 per minute. This meant that the horse traveled at a speed of 180.96 feet per minute. Watt rounded off the speed to 181 feet per minute and multiplied that by the 180 pounds of force the horse pulled (181 x 180) and came up with 32,580 ft.-lbs./minute. That was rounded off to 33,000 ft.-lbs./minute, the figure we use today.

[Daemione]

Originally Posted by concept_cynic

No one said tq=h*rpm. The formula is tq=(hp*rpm)/5252

backwards again.

doesn't anyone proofread anything anymore before hitting submit?



Just to be clear, I never suggested that torque is calculated from horsepower. Horsepower is obviously the manufactured number, useful for quick peak comparisons only. But for our purposes here, when we're only shown a snapshot of of the hp line on someone else's dyno graph, working backwards to get the torque numbers isn't very hard, as long as you use the correct formula.

[concept_cynic]

Originally Posted by Daemione

backwards again.

doesn't anyone proofread anything anymore before hitting submit?



Just to be clear, I never suggested that torque is calculated from horsepower. Horsepower is obviously the manufactured number, useful for quick peak comparisons only. But for our purposes here, when we're only shown a snapshot of of the hp line on someone else's dyno graph, working backwards to get the torque numbers isn't very hard, as long as you use the correct formula.

Haha, ah dammit, you're right. tq=(hp*5252)/rpm

[Daemione]

Ask 100 car enthusiasts what their favorite car is of all time . . . how many of them will name the fastest car they've ever driven? My bet: less than 5.

170 whp in a lightweight car with no turbo lag or compressor whine? Seriously good times.

[concept_cynic]

Originally Posted by Spaceywilly

TQ does NOT equal work. Work is force applied over a distance.

Yeah, like you say, work = force * distance. work = lb(force) * ft(distance)=tq

[brewksy]

Originally Posted by Gearbanger

Right 07 Camry 268 at the flywheel. Should have gone with turbo NA is nice but not unless it's a LS1 etc.

When are you racing a Camry with an FRS? At a drag strip through school zones?

Originally Posted by Gearbanger

Call it what you want but with that power to weight it will be lucky to trap 90 in the quarter. Just saying.

90 is 60 mph over the school zone limit. You are truly badass.

[Spaceywilly]

Here's my best guess for the torque curve from the video

based on this screen shot:


I got this



What I see is a pretty big flat torque curve from about 3000-6500 RPMs. It's not a huge amount of torque but it looks very usable.

[Ryephile]

Why are there two distinct general curves on the dyno screen? One set peaks at 150 PS and the other peaks about 170 PS. Look how hideous the drop off of power is past the peak; the torque must plummet!

[Guff]

Originally Posted by Spaceywilly

Here's my best guess for the torque curve from the video

What I see is a pretty big flat torque curve from about 3000-6500 RPMs. It's not a huge amount of torque but it looks very usable.

[IMG]http://cdn.styleforum.net/5/5d/5d***53f_clap.gif[/IMG]

[concept_cynic]

Originally Posted by Ryephile

Why are there two distinct general curves on the dyno screen? One set peaks at 150 PS and the other peaks about 170 PS. Look how hideous the drop off of power is past the peak; the torque must plummet!

I was wondering that too. Maybe standard vs corrected lines?

[Spaceywilly]

Originally Posted by Ryephile

Why are there two distinct general curves on the dyno screen? One set peaks at 150 PS and the other peaks about 170 PS. Look how hideous the drop off of power is past the peak; the torque must plummet!

My guess is different gears. I'm assuming it has to do with the 5 and 4 in the lower right. Hopefully someone can translate.

It definitely doesn't look like there's much incentive to rev past 7000rpm.

[concept_cynic]

Originally Posted by Spaceywilly

My guess is different gears. I'm assuming it has to do with the 5 and 4 in the lower right. Hopefully someone can translate.

It definitely doesn't look like there's much incentive to rev past 7000rpm.

Ah yeah that's probably it. 4th gear probably doesn't load the engine as much and makes less HP. I see that when people put different rear end gears into corvettes.

[aspera]

It's hard to read but that drop off might be a good thing. That could be where your extra horses are hiding. A free 10 minute muffler delete might be just the ticket to see if that's true.