Fordmods Logo

rear wheel kilowatts to fly wheel kilowatts convertor!!!!! 

 

Page 4 of 4 [ 55 posts ] Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

 
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 9:57 am 
Tyre Shredder
Offline

Age: 29

Posts: 389

Joined: 12th Sep 2005

Ride: R32 Rb25

Location: Melbourne
VIC, Australia

and not pictures
Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 9:57 am 
Tyre Shredder
Offline

Age: 29

Posts: 389

Joined: 12th Sep 2005

Ride: R32 Rb25

Location: Melbourne
VIC, Australia

makes DJEMZ ANGRY!!!!!
Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 10:22 am 
Fordmods Addict
Offline
User avatar

Age: 31

Posts: 7958

Joined: 1st Jun 2005

Gallery: 13 images

Ride: Falcon

Power: 237 rwkw

Location: Melbourne
VIC, Australia

Postwhoring makes Steady slightly irritated, but I'm far too apathetic to get angry.

aaron_ef8 wrote:
As for working out kw figures on percentages, someone else pointed out the percentages change depending on if you convert rwkw to fwkw or vise-versa.

Say a car has 100rwkw, add 30%, and it becomes 130fwkw.

To convert back to RwKw, you take 30% off the flywheel power figure (130kw), which means this same car now has 91rwkw....

Yeah, you can't add a percentage of the rwkw figure to get fwkw.
That's just silly.

Only way to do it, is to have a known fwkw figure, get a rwkw and figure out the percentage loss.
Of course that then brings up the question, if more power is made, does driveline loss stay at a constant, or does it change?
I don't know the answer for sure, but I'm thinking it changes. More torque + more strain = more heat = more loss.
What does this mean?
Let's say you have, for example, a car that has from the factory 100fwkw (ignore tolerances, or how the factory got that figure, just assume it's right).
It pulls 80rwkw on a chassis dyno, so a 20% (20kw)loss from the original figure.
It has a turbocharger slapped on it, and now pulls 120rwkw.
So, does it have 140 at the flywheel now, or does it have 160 (losses doubled), or does it have 120 + 20% of a figure we don't know and can't work out?

Add to this uncertainty manufacturing tolerances, car manufacturers making power readings with no ancillaries on the engine, and it makes the whole thing seem less of a science and more of a creative art.
Like synchronised swimming.
Pretty to look at, but what the f**k the point?

edit: Me maffs is real good an' all that :P

 

_________________

ED XR8 Sprint - S-Trim, V500, 249rwkw
BF MKII F6 Tornado - 237rwkw

Last edited by Steady ED on Tue Feb 21, 2006 11:42 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 11:33 am 
Smokin em up
Offline
User avatar

Age: 36

Posts: 258

Joined: 7th Nov 2004

Gallery: 6 images

Ride: '98 EL XR8

Location: Katherine
NT, Australia

I'd rather believe different transmissions soak up different ammount of power. If my stock EA was doing 100rwkw, and it is supposed to be givin out 139fwkw, then I'd say that EB 4 speed elec. transmission soaks up roughly 40kw.

We all know that heat thins out the trans fluid, and then your power changes alltogether, so maybe its soakin 50kw now... then I have no idea if the engine is even producing 139fwkw??? Engine temp, Air temp & density, fuel quality, ignition & timing, engine ware condition, trans condition, engine load... they are all factors...

Either way, I think transmission loss would vary model to model and would have to be on a logerithmic??? scale, and who knows what the multiplication factors could ever be.

And to be quite honest, who really cares that much.

Like, if it goes, then it goes, and if it don't... well, do something about it.

 

_________________

"...we can rebuild him, we have the technology... we just dont want to spend a lot of money."
SIX MILLION PESO FALCON

Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 6:32 pm 
Stock as a Rock
Offline

Age: 34

Posts: 132

Joined: 5th Nov 2004

Ride: EF Fairmont 5.0

Location: Adelaide, SA
SA, Australia

Quote:
hi

not be a smart _ass like someone quoted me and rigging figures have a read of this thread http://www.fordmods.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=19941


" ran a BA GT on C&V's Dyno Dynamics dyno, and it pulled 241rwkw."
this dyno figure to me ( my opinion ) seems to be to high for a stock standard BA GT that is rated at 290 flywheel kilowatts from Ford Motor Company

I havent bothered to run my BA_GTp on my dyno cause i know what the reading in rear wheel kilowatts will be and i just cruise around with mine but just for arguement sake i will this week and again i will pridict (guess the rear wheel kilowatts cause i'm assuming from the factory it has 290 flywheel kilowatts

eg.

290 fwkw times 30% = 87kwatts

290 minus 87 = 203 kwatts at the raer wheels there abouts plus or minus 5%

lets see hopw i go on this one and no i will not rig the dyno figures


"Say a car has 100rwkw, add 30%, and it becomes 130fwkw.

To convert back to RwKw, you take 30% off the flywheel power figure (130kw), which means this same car now has 91rwkw.."

interesting piont i will comment just wanna see what other people have to say and its no trick LOL


I have read that thread, and find it interesting no-one has bought up the fact BA ECU's adjust when they click over 1500, 5000 and 10,000km.

As for the BA GT, I wasn't there, I haven't seen the car, or C&V's workshop before, so I don't KNOW every fact. On the same dyno on the same day, a HSV GTS with the C4B 300Kw motor ran 230-odd rwkw, and Motor also commented that the GT had over 10,000km on it, and was the fastest factory BOSS 290 they have tested.
Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 7:13 pm 
Getting Side Ways
Offline
User avatar

Age: 37

Posts: 575

Joined: 5th Nov 2004

Ride: EF

Location: Wodonga
VIC, Australia

So, If a 290 BA is loosing between 25% to 30%, and a HSV the same, and a EF/EL is also loosing 25% to 30% (figures all taken on independent dynos, and there is no argument that a standard EF will make around 110rwkw from a factory quoted 165fwkw), would it not be safe to assume that a 25% to 30% loss is a safe guess??

These figures, from three different cars, one producing nearly half the power to the others and the loss through the drive train is roughly the same would have to throw some light on the argument.

Tickford 6, try not to take this personally, but it seems to me that half the time your replies to these question just involve you trying to “big noteâ€￾ yourself. Maybe once in a while you should step back and take notice of other peoples opinions, even though they might be different to yours doesn’t mean that they are wrong..
Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 7:13 pm 
Getting Side Ways
Offline

Posts: 6449

Joined: 11th Nov 2004

Aaron_EF8 wrote:
.

Say a car has 100rwkw, add 30%, and it becomes 130fwkw.

To convert back to RwKw, you take 30% off the flywheel power figure (130kw), which means this same car now has 91rwkw....


nothing further needs to be said about trying to use a % loss to prove it's bull s**t.


case closed

 

_________________

PERMANENTLY BANNED

Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 7:20 pm 
Getting Side Ways
Offline
User avatar

Age: 37

Posts: 575

Joined: 5th Nov 2004

Ride: EF

Location: Wodonga
VIC, Australia

I don’t think anyone has said that %30 is a definite figure, just a rough guide...

Quote:
Say a car has 100rwkw, add 30%, and it becomes 130fwkw.

To convert back to RwKw, you take 30% off the flywheel power figure (130kw), which means this same car now has 91rwkw....


Would that be the same as saying, something costs $100 ex gst, so you add 10% to get the inc GST = $110, then if want to get the EX gst price do you take %10 off?? if you do then the price is $99..., do that enough times and you get it for free. :)

Its not a valid argument....
Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 8:13 pm 
Stock as a Rock
Offline

Posts: 168

Joined: 5th Jan 2006

Ride: XY Fairmont

Location: Berri
SA, Australia

LOL yeah, its just basic maths.

 

_________________

Real Cars have Chrome Bars

Top
 Profile  
 
 
Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 12:08 pm 
Getting Side Ways
Offline

Posts: 1656

Joined: 22nd Jun 2005

Location: Melbourne
VIC, Australia

smally351 wrote:
LOL yeah, its just basic maths.


Ur on the ball smally351 yes its just simple mathematics

will use this example like tjb45 used

if something costs $100 plus 10% GST then u have to pay $110 in total
what is the GST component 10% which is $10

so if i quoted u for a product $110 including GST , what is the GST component of that product ?

well if i did what the guy suggested way back before the argument
110 times 10% = 11 dollars which is incorrect

actually u have to divide by 11 to get the GST component

which would be 110 divided by 11 = 10 dollars is the GST component

so in the kilowatt conversion factor the way our transferring the 30% is incorrect and that's why u get different answers to rear wheel kilowatts

cheers

 

_________________

FS [VIC]: WorkShop CleanOut - Assorted Parts Some New & Chassis Dyno http://www.fordmods.com/ford-parts-for-sale-f17/fs-workshop-cleanout-assorted-parts-some-new-chassis-dyno-t123623.html

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:
Sort by  
 Page 4 of 4  [ 55 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 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 Wed Dec 13, 2017 1:38 am All times are UTC + 11 hours

 

 

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