FR-S/BRZ vs. Genesis Coupe

[Deslock]

Originally Posted by Dragonitti

It sounds like you are just being anal retentive. It is the standard measuring device, do you have a new method of acquiring the wheel torque that the rest of the free world is unaware of? Please do share. It is what we have to work with across the board period. I never stated a gear was going to be exactly 1:1. Cars are dynoed in the gear closest to 1:1 is what I stated. Like I said, if you want to design a system of measurement that finds out 100% down to the tenth degree, then have at it boss.

But to sit here an nit pick a common talk of wheel torque vs engine torque (being that wheel torque is in reference to a dyno measurement) is just being anal. No one cares that you think it doesn't represent the 100% accurate number seen at the wheels. It is common calculation and talk among all enthusiast. They don't sit there go...."well, it isn't really wheel torque you know, because X this and Y that..."

If the gear is multiplying the torque then so what....If that's what makes it to the ground, then that's what makes it to the ground.

It's not nitpicking, or about being 100% accurate. What's on those dynos is not even remotely close to wheel torque.

As I mentioned in my last post, let's move this to PM or another thread if you want to keep discussing it.

[Dragonitti]

Originally Posted by Deslock

It's not nitpicking, or about being 100% accurate. What's on those dynos is not even remotely close to wheel torque.

As I mentioned in my last post, let's move this to PM or another thread if you want to keep discussing it.

No one sits there and do a whole mathematical break down man...really come on. Sitting an chilling at the spot with your boys, are you seriously going to walk up to me and ask me what the car put down on the dyno, and then break out your pin and pad and tell me the true number? No...if you did, people would look at you weird...

I get what you are saying, but no one talks this way is what I'm saying. So, why bring it up. It didn't need to get THAT technical.


Side note, not all dyno's measure the same way (i.e. dynapack attaches to the hubs and by and far shows higher numbers than most any other type of dyno).

[carbonBLUE]

Originally Posted by Dragonitti

Underatted means 100% stock, but dynoing more than it should thus the number at the crank is more than what was stated from the dealer, not adding mods to the engine and opening up the restriction of flow.

im just saying the engine is underrated OR has hardcore emissions restrictions....

probability of it being one of those.... pretty good...

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by Deslock

It's not nitpicking, or about being 100% accurate. What's on those dynos is not even remotely close to wheel torque.

As I mentioned in my last post, let's move this to PM or another thread if you want to keep discussing it.

I was doing a similar comparison on my own over here:

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showt...p?t=654&page=5

What I was working with is take the engine torque to weight ratio of the GenCoupe compared to a hypothetical FT86 number and then figure out what final drive ratio would give the car the same axle-torque to weight ratio per gear. (was also assuming equal diameter tires)

What I think I've figured out is that with more optimistic engine torque output and/or low weight coupled to a final drive of ~4.10:1 and smaller diameter tires, the FT86 could be very close to a first gen 3.8L V6 GenCoupe, in a straight line. In this case it would have a slight edge in axle/wheel torque but need to shift a couple mph earlier, so losing a bit of acceleration time in the lower gears (and needing an extra shift to reach 60mph), but accelerating a (small) bit harder in the same gears.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by Dragonitti

Internet, car enthusiast, car groups...it's pretty standard across the board that anyone "other" than Manufactures talk in w(wheel)hp.

The "closest to" is referring to gears when on the dyno. It is what it is, that's how cars are measured. There is nothing else other than sitting there trying to do a series of mathematical equations, that's what dynos do already. Pretty sure some can take into account the gearing ratio of a vehicle when the dyno operator puts in the parameters for that car. But seriously do we need to be THAT anal about it?

Sure you have more torque to the wheels in lower gears, but that is not how a car is dynoed.

its not me being anal. just me showing that some people are but its all good. having different reference points doesnt make cars any faster or slower, it just earns people posts with famous people doing facepalms in this pseudoculture where everybody is a badass thanks to google and the fact that there is a low chance for a physical encounter

[MrVito]

Originally Posted by fatoni

its not me being anal. just me showing that some people are but its all good. having different reference points doesnt make cars any faster or slower, it just earns people posts with famous people doing facepalms in this pseudoculture where everybody is a badass thanks to google and the fact that there is a low chance for a physical encounter

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by Dragonitti

No one sits there and do a whole mathematical break down man...really come on. Sitting an chilling at the spot with your boys, are you seriously going to walk up to me and ask me what the car put down on the dyno, and then break out your pin and pad and tell me the true number? No...if you did, people would look at you weird...

I get what you are saying, but no one talks this way is what I'm saying. So, why bring it up. It didn't need to get THAT technical.


Side note, not all dyno's measure the same way (i.e. dynapack attaches to the hubs and by and far shows higher numbers than most any other type of dyno).

Yeah I have never seen someone go so technical ever!!

[Ryephile]

Deslock, your point is not on deaf ears. However, you must understand that what you're describing will blow over almost everyone's head. When someone enthusiastically posts "ZOMG my car just dyno'd 205wHP and 160wtorks!!!1!", they're obviously quoting the figures from the chassis dyno's calculation printout, not the raw measured data. We know the difference, but IMO it's not worth hashing out the already known and blissfully ignorant. Hell, even I will disclose chassis dyno pulls in wHP and wLbFt [chassis dyno] or cHP and cLbFt [interpolated crank figures from chassis dyno plus datalogging].

[serialk11r]

If the dyno attaches at hubs, there is no rolling resistance from the wheels That's actually how it should be measured, no one factors in aerodynamic resistance so rolling resistance shouldn't be either, of course assuming you care to know exactly how much power your car puts to the ground.

[pkptd447]

Originally Posted by carbonBLUE

for example
2012 ft-86
say if it were 2660 lbs
had 212 whp after mods and tune
= 12.547 power to weight

2012 mustang v6
3453 lbs
259.25 whp (after 15% drivetrain loss, being optomistic ofc and not using 20% drivetrain loss)
= 13.319 power to weight

2013 genesis coupe 2.0T
3294 lbs
233 whp (assuming under the same drive train loss as the mustang)
=14.092 power to weight

im not sure about the accuracy of the mustang and GC weights, but i highly doubt the ft86 will be under 2700lbs. My guess is closer to 2800lbs stock, with the 212whp you mentioned (which i agree should be easy to get even if the engine is not underrated by toyota) that puts us at 13.208 p/w.

and another thing, there is NO WAY the mustang only loses 15%. anyone here dynoed one?

[Gardus@Supersprint]

The only way to measure accurate flywheel power and torque values is to use a brake dyno which measures the power loss during the deceleration.
If you have one like the MAHA we use, you can do runs in 3rd, 4th and 5th gear and get the same results if the tyres or the clutch don't slip.
If your dyno is connected to the hubs even better, but I haven't seen many of these, especially in 4WD form.

The WHP data from an inertial dyno is ok if you need to measure the increase a mod gets you in the same day on the same car, if you use a different gear ratio, or tyres pressure, or a different setup of the dyno, you'll get different values.
This doesn't happen on a brake dyno when you DO get different values of WHP and power loss but it calculates the correct flywheel power everytime.
Then it takes that value and it corrects it with the ambient temperature, pressure and humidity to obtain values independent from the weather conditions.

REAL power losses are way more than 15% in the real world...
And they change all the time, just fitting some bigger wheels will make you lose WHP because they have a higher flywheel effect.
The variation of the temperature in the gearbox oil is just one of the factor that change the power loss values.

[Matador]

Originally Posted by Dragonitti

The whole Veloster front end is just fail to me.

+1

Originally Posted by Dark

To each of his own, I think it looks bad.

I'd go as far as saying Horrible. It does look more aggressive.. but not in an attractive way (like the GT-R for instance).

Originally Posted by cassidy90998

They haven't copied anyone, they're only being competitive. Anyone can say that any two cars look the same or share similar qualities/features, there are so many out there that it's nearly impossible to be totally original.

The have copied. Ridiculously so.

Originally Posted by fatoni

i think its important to think back a couple years when criticizing hyundai. i mean lexus made a name for itself by copying merc with the ls and now you are mentioning them as being original. give it time

Benchmarking is not the same as copying. The first LS looks similar to the Benz of the time (the same one Lexus sent them back to the drawing board with) and It stops there. The latest GS has quite a few BMW ques though... Although it also shares many similarities in my eye with their previous cars, more than any other brands.

Originally Posted by Dark

You mean the LS? Yes, of course, it's Toyota Crown. First generation was made since 1950s. It's about the same time S-class was made. I admitted that 1991 Model look similar to S-class, but not a direct copy like Hyundai using very similar headlight to MB concept headlight and side profile. Well, if LS copied front design S-class, then E-class also copied quad-squared headlight from GS.

The LS is not the Crown. Never was. Just thought I should point that out.

[Dark]

Originally Posted by MatadorRacing_F1

The LS is not the Crown. Never was. Just thought I should point that out.

You're right, LS is not Crown. It's just LS design was heavily derived from Crown.

[carbonBLUE]

Originally Posted by pkptd447

im not sure about the accuracy of the mustang and GC weights, but i highly doubt the ft86 will be under 2700lbs. My guess is closer to 2800lbs stock, with the 212whp you mentioned (which i agree should be easy to get even if the engine is not underrated by toyota) that puts us at 13.208 p/w.

and another thing, there is NO WAY the mustang only loses 15%. anyone here dynoed one?

253-261 HP 229-237 torque are what most people are getting. Both mustangs are underrated the v8 is dynoing at 396-399 whp and its labeled at 412 crank hp

13.208 power to weight is still faster than the new 3.7 mustang not to mention its got a better CoD ratio, better suspension, lower center of gravity, not numb when it comes to driving feedback, reliable.

EDIT even the old 4.0 v6 in the 06-10 mustangs dynoed at 200 something whp they were rated at 210 crank hp or something like that.... (simple point made, ford lies to the gov and insurance companies what hp they are really making...)