Fordmods Logo

FWKW vs RWKW 

 

Page 2 of 3 [ 31 posts ] Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

 
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2005 3:01 pm 
Oompa Loompa
Offline

Age: 40

Posts: 31

Joined: 7th Nov 2004

Ride: bluebird

Location: Orange
NSW, Australia

I was under the impression that driveline losses are pretty much constant. ie if you have 165 fwkw and 100 rwkw then if you do an engine mod that gives you 110 rwkw you then have 175 fwkw.

 

_________________

1970 V6 GT Capri
1971 1UZ powered Capri
1984 1UZ turbo powered Bluebird wagon
1989 GLX Cressida

Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:28 pm 
Getting Side Ways
Offline
User avatar

Age: 38

Posts: 1013

Joined: 12th Nov 2004

Gallery: 3 images

Ride: MY06 REX

Location: Perthoslavakia
WA, Australia

Yeah, thats what my understanding was - the driveline takes about the same power no matter what mod you do. I guess about 50kw in falcons.

 

_________________

The Evil Strawberry

Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:50 pm 
Getting Side Ways
Offline
User avatar

Age: 31

Posts: 2450

Joined: 5th Nov 2004

Gallery: 1 images

Ride: NL V8 Fairlane

Location: Sydney
NSW, Australia

KTASTRPHE wrote:
Yeah, thats what my understanding was - the driveline takes about the same power no matter what mod you do. I guess about 50kw in falcons.


That's what I meant, I was just unable to elaborate.

 

_________________

There are 10 types of people in this world.
Those who know binary and those who don't.

Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2005 7:34 pm 
Stock as a Rock
Offline

Age: 35

Posts: 149

Joined: 6th Nov 2004

Ride: XH Ute

Location: Dandenong
VIC, Australia

4.9 EF Futura wrote:
Questamation thing.

I guess the one theory we have....

Let's assume the standard EF 4.0L V8 produces 165kw at the flywheel (probably a big assumption).

ON AVERAGE, these engines yield 105-110kw at the rear wheels (of course, all dynos are different, different weather etc etc.) with an automatic transmission.

So 165fwkw to 110rwkw = 33% loss through drivetrain. So ppl usually assume 30% loss from fw to rw on a standard car.

As for modded engines.... anyone's guess. Need some figures to compare... fwkw to rwkw.


SO what i wanna know is when did ford produce a 4.0L V8???? :lol:

 

_________________

The Ute with the Most

Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2005 8:11 pm 
ACT Cruise Moderator
Offline
User avatar

Age: 36

Posts: 6275

Joined: 24th Nov 2004

Ride: '06 BF GT-P

Power: 293 rwkw

Location: Canberra
ACT, Australia

Madxh wrote:
4.9 EF Futura wrote:
Questamation thing.

I guess the one theory we have....

Let's assume the standard EF 4.0L V8 produces 165kw at the flywheel (probably a big assumption).

ON AVERAGE, these engines yield 105-110kw at the rear wheels (of course, all dynos are different, different weather etc etc.) with an automatic transmission.

So 165fwkw to 110rwkw = 33% loss through drivetrain. So ppl usually assume 30% loss from fw to rw on a standard car.

As for modded engines.... anyone's guess. Need some figures to compare... fwkw to rwkw.


SO what i wanna know is when did ford produce a 4.0L V8???? :lol:


Jaguar is a Ford owned company, they make plenty of 4.0 V8's

 

_________________

1998 DL LTD in Sparkling Burgundy, daily, 302W, stereo, slow - 97.5rwkw
2006 BF GT-P in Ego, mods. 293rwkw - 12.427@109 - 0-1000m 24.838@221

Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2005 8:12 pm 
Getting Side Ways
Offline
User avatar

Age: 54

Posts: 4102

Joined: 18th Nov 2004

Gallery: 10 images

Ride: PX2 Ranger 4x4 XLT Dual CAB

Location: Carrum Downs
VIC, Australia

data_mine wrote:
Madxh wrote:
4.9 EF Futura wrote:
Questamation thing.

I guess the one theory we have....

Let's assume the standard EF 4.0L V8 produces 165kw at the flywheel (probably a big assumption).

ON AVERAGE, these engines yield 105-110kw at the rear wheels (of course, all dynos are different, different weather etc etc.) with an automatic transmission.

So 165fwkw to 110rwkw = 33% loss through drivetrain. So ppl usually assume 30% loss from fw to rw on a standard car.

As for modded engines.... anyone's guess. Need some figures to compare... fwkw to rwkw.


SO what i wanna know is when did ford produce a 4.0L V8???? :lol:


Jaguar is a Ford owned company, they make plenty of 4.0 V8's


And they put them into EF's?? :)

 

_________________

Image
She's meanness put to music and the b**ch is born to run!
Like the sign says, "speed's just a question of money. How fast can you go?"

Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Tue Feb 01, 2005 10:22 pm 
Getting Side Ways
Offline
User avatar

Age: 41

Posts: 3519

Joined: 6th Nov 2004

Gallery: 1 images

Ride: BA XR8, XD Fairmont Ghia

Location: Ferntree Gully
VIC, Australia

there is no direct conversion for fwkw and rwkw there are to many factors that come into play.
auto or manual, tyre type and size and lots more can all vary the rwkw.
on my nissan patrol we work on a 50% power loss down the driveline.
i can change tyres and change rwkw,s quite a bit
Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 8:51 am 
Getting Side Ways
Offline

Age: 35

Posts: 533

Joined: 12th Jan 2005

Location: Melbourne
VIC, Australia

30% is a rule of thumb that most people use and it is wrong.

Losses are in the order of 12-15%... that's including losses in the diff and top gear in the transmission (1:1)

Have a look http://toyotaperformance.com/dyno.htm

Yes, yes. I know it's a toyota website, but it is the BEST resource I have come across that tells you everything you need to know about engines, transmissions, tuning, fuel, spark, turbo.... anything basically.

Where I work we make right angle gearboxes for irrigation. They use spiral bevel gears in them. When we test them, we put about 2Hp through the box and this is enough to heat the gearbox up to about 60 centigrade in about 30mins. This is a 170kg gearbox we're talking about. The bigger ones we make, weighing in at about 300Kg, take about 1hr to heat up.

Now, if you are losing 50kw in the transmission to heat, and the transmission weighs no more than 100kg, that's 33 times more heat and 42% less mass to absorb the heat.
Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 9:18 am 
Getting Side Ways
Offline
User avatar

Age: 36

Posts: 8655

Joined: 5th Nov 2004

Gallery: 37 images

Ride: V8 EF Futura

Location: Adelaide CBD
SA, Australia

Madxh wrote:
4.9 EF Futura wrote:
Questamation thing.

I guess the one theory we have....

Let's assume the standard EF 4.0L V8 produces 165kw at the flywheel (probably a big assumption).

ON AVERAGE, these engines yield 105-110kw at the rear wheels (of course, all dynos are different, different weather etc etc.) with an automatic transmission.

So 165fwkw to 110rwkw = 33% loss through drivetrain. So ppl usually assume 30% loss from fw to rw on a standard car.

As for modded engines.... anyone's guess. Need some figures to compare... fwkw to rwkw.


SO what i wanna know is when did ford produce a 4.0L V8???? :lol:


Hehehe - yeah yeah..... 4.9L then.... you know what i meant (i certainly wouldnt be talking about the I6 now would i? :wink: )

 

_________________

I promise..... I will never die.

Fordmods Administration Group MINOR PUNKED

Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 9:31 am 
Getting Side Ways
Offline
User avatar

Age: 36

Posts: 8655

Joined: 5th Nov 2004

Gallery: 37 images

Ride: V8 EF Futura

Location: Adelaide CBD
SA, Australia

unclewoja wrote:
30% is a rule of thumb that most people use and it is wrong.

Losses are in the order of 12-15%... that's including losses in the diff and top gear in the transmission (1:1)

Have a look http://toyotaperformance.com/dyno.htm

Yes, yes. I know it's a toyota website, but it is the BEST resource I have come across that tells you everything you need to know about engines, transmissions, tuning, fuel, spark, turbo.... anything basically.

Where I work we make right angle gearboxes for irrigation. They use spiral bevel gears in them. When we test them, we put about 2Hp through the box and this is enough to heat the gearbox up to about 60 centigrade in about 30mins. This is a 170kg gearbox we're talking about. The bigger ones we make, weighing in at about 300Kg, take about 1hr to heat up.

Now, if you are losing 50kw in the transmission to heat, and the transmission weighs no more than 100kg, that's 33 times more heat and 42% less mass to absorb the heat.


Awesome read and some interesting opinions... link at the bottom of the page:

http://www.pumaracing.co.uk/power3.htm

Suggests some formulae for calculating drivetrain losses (lol, after explaining that it's impossible to calculate... altho he/she does state they are rough, 'rule of thumb' type calcs). Would be interesting to see some results from FM users:



FWD cars - add 10 bhp to the wheel figure and divide the result by 0.9

RWD cars - add 10 bhp to the wheel figure and divide the result by 0.88

4WD cars - add 10bhp to the wheel figure and divide the result by 0.84

To estimate the expected wheel bhp from a known flywheel bhp just reverse the equations

FWD - multiply flywheel power by 0.9 and then deduct a further 10 bhp

RWD - multiply flywheel power by 0.88 and then deduct a further 10 bhp

4WD - multiply flywheel power by 0.84 and then deduct a further 10 bhp



Results in my engine making 265hp altho prolly add a few more on there thanks to the slushomatic (i assume this person talking manual trans).

 

_________________

I promise..... I will never die.

Fordmods Administration Group MINOR PUNKED

Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 10:46 am 
Parts Gopher
Offline
User avatar

Age: 33

Posts: 62

Joined: 8th Nov 2004

Ride: Falcon EF

Location: Canberra
ACT, Australia

Cheers Guys for all of that

The reason I made the post was because i have an EF 5 speed and im currently getting 135rwkw after the 10th of feb i should have 160+rwkw what i want know is would i have more power at the wheels and the fly wheel than a BA 6??

sounds stupid but just something i would like to find out.

 

_________________

EF EL Fibreglass bonnet with BA Bulge Click Here: http://fordmods.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=54102
95 EF Falcon Gli 5ltr V8!!!!!

Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 3:07 pm 
Getting Side Ways
Offline

Age: 35

Posts: 533

Joined: 12th Jan 2005

Location: Melbourne
VIC, Australia

Choca wrote:
Cheers Guys for all of that

The reason I made the post was because i have an EF 5 speed and im currently getting 135rwkw after the 10th of feb i should have 160+rwkw what i want know is would i have more power at the wheels and the fly wheel than a BA 6??

sounds stupid but just something i would like to find out.


All you need is an extra 30kw @ the fly to equal a BA (185kW if I remember correctly?)... not hard to do at all.

EDIT: Also, you can get dissapointed if you overestimate the losses in teh transmission. This is because you get an actual fly wheel kW of less than you calculated. So when you calculate your 160 RWKW as 228 FWKW(30% loss - overestimated) and you only barely keep up with a 185kW BA, you get dissapointed.

If you underestimate your transmission losses, you get an actual fly wheel kW of more than you calculated. So if you calculate your 160RWKW as 168 FWKW (5% loss - underestimated) and you barely keep up with a 185kW BA, you get happy.
Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2005 12:54 pm 
Getting Side Ways
Offline
User avatar

Age: 30

Posts: 3184

Joined: 8th Nov 2004

Gallery: 6 images

Ride: EF Falcon

Location: Townsville
QLD, Australia

Usually you can guestimate it at around 20% loss. Which for my brothers commodore works perfectly. But ford measures there flywheel KW differntly from holden.

Holden puts on all the accesories, AC pump, alternator power steering etc. This all drain kW.

Ford doesnt, it runs the motor without any accesories. Which is why we lose about 30%. Our fly wheel figures are a tad optimistic.

But my brother doesnt need to know that when i rub it in about my EF having more power and tourque than his VY S!!! 8-)

 

_________________

Nicco's M112 Blown, T-56 equipped EF
forums/viewtopic.php?t=68319

Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:08 pm 
ACT Cruise Moderator
Offline
User avatar

Age: 36

Posts: 6275

Joined: 24th Nov 2004

Ride: '06 BF GT-P

Power: 293 rwkw

Location: Canberra
ACT, Australia

nicco wrote:
Usually you can guestimate it at around 20% loss. Which for my brothers commodore works perfectly. But ford measures there flywheel KW differntly from holden.

Holden puts on all the accesories, AC pump, alternator power steering etc. This all drain kW.

Ford doesnt, it runs the motor without any accesories. Which is why we lose about 30%. Our fly wheel figures are a tad optimistic.

But my brother doesnt need to know that when i rub it in about my EF having more power and tourque than his VY S!!! 8-)


I always thought it was Holden that were optimistic. Remembering back to when the GT was released, and its 290KW 530NM (I've seen one dynoed with 221RWKW), laying waste to the GTS' 300KW.

Anyway, who beats who (your EF vs VY S) down the 1/4, to 100KM/H, 80-120? THATS all you need to know.

 

_________________

1998 DL LTD in Sparkling Burgundy, daily, 302W, stereo, slow - 97.5rwkw
2006 BF GT-P in Ego, mods. 293rwkw - 12.427@109 - 0-1000m 24.838@221

Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2005 10:01 pm 
Getting Side Ways
Offline
User avatar

Age: 30

Posts: 3184

Joined: 8th Nov 2004

Gallery: 6 images

Ride: EF Falcon

Location: Townsville
QLD, Australia

Sadly, my brother beat me the only time we raced. He got the start, and was slowly pulling out from there. Damn that short first gear!! But, next time we race i might actually expect him to race, meaning i might actually stall it up...

 

_________________

Nicco's M112 Blown, T-56 equipped EF
forums/viewtopic.php?t=68319

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:
Sort by  
 Page 2 of 3  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 30 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

 

 

It is currently Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:47 pm All times are UTC + 11 hours

 

 

(c)2014 Total Web Solutions Australia - Australian Web Hosting and Domain Names