|
displaying posts 1 to 12 of 12
| Author | Subject: Rolling Road WHP's |
 matt.gti6
Regular  Location: Warwickshire Registered: 03 Aug 2008 Posts: 478 Status: Offline |
Post #1
I'm interested to know what wheel horsepower (WHP) and wheel drag output people have got from rolling road sessions.a. ) with a standard '6 and b. ) with low boost Rotrex charger conversion Also, if you could state whether this was on a traditiional rolling road, or on a hub/chassis dynamometer (rototest/dynapack)? Cheers Matt |
 Posted 24th Jun 2010 at 20:30
|
|
|
matt.gti6
Regular Location: Warwickshire Registered: 03 Aug 2008 Posts: 478 Status: Offline |
Post #2
Having a better look around I have found a figure of 138 hp at the wheels for a standard '6. I know lots of people have posted up RR results on here, but not many of them state WHP.I only ask as I have just seen a fairly disappointing printout for a '6 with the Ecosse S/C conversion, showing 157hp at the wheels (and drag output of 47hp!). I got hold of this kit second hand on here and am soon to fit it to my car. Since the RR results were taken a smaller pulley has been fitted to the charger, so hopefully power will have increased. Torque curve looks good though, 247Nm @ 5260rpm (although the printout does not say if this is wheel torque, or calculated flywheel torque). I'll post up the graph later on. |
|
Posted 25th Jun 2010 at 15:10
|
|
|
adam b
Seasoned Pro  Location: The Nam Registered: 24 Jan 2006 Posts: 12,828 Status: Offline |
Post #3
Depending on the dyno and how its been calibrated you'll get different WHP. Some places seem to not give too much notice to it and go for accurate fly figures, although one without the other may seem impossible it depends on how it measures the coastdown figure which takes drag and transmission losses accurately into account. The two local ones to me do it differently - Ajec's dyno yesterday worked on an accurate wheel figure with no coastdown, whereas Powerstation uses a coastdown to give an accurate flywheel figure. This give Powerstation's dyno a very low wheel figure but fairly accurate fly, whereas Ajec has an accurate wheel figure but i've no idea if the fly figure can be accurate.What was very interesting yesterday was how much the correct engine rpm settings affect the result. We had issues getting a clean rpm feed and the change in the result when we did get it was startling - +22lbft and -6BHp. That was only 750rpm out top end as well. Anyway mine was on there to look at the curves and check the fuelling was ok, not to give me a pub-talk figure - its 10% off where I want it anyway  Also certain to be calculated flywheel torque. ________________________________________ Nothing to see here |
|
Posted 25th Jun 2010 at 15:46
|
|
|
rallyestyle
Seasoned Pro  Location: London Registered: 23 Jul 2003 Posts: 14,990 Status: Offline |
Post #4
My low boost SC made 239bhp ATW on a TAT Rolling Road (TAT Chassis Dyno Model CHD2 "V" High Performance).How do i go about finding out the wheel drag output? ________________________________________ Just Drive It |
|
Posted 25th Jun 2010 at 16:13
|
|
|
rallyeash
Seasoned Pro  Location: Devizes Registered: 11 Dec 2006 Posts: 4,424 Status: Offline |
Post #5
thats pretty good, so around 270 @fly yar?________________________________________ 230 hp 2.1 16v XU 205 rallye on jenveys Project thread here309 3dr K20 Type R |
|
Posted 25th Jun 2010 at 16:17
|
|
|
matt.gti6
Regular Location: Warwickshire Registered: 03 Aug 2008 Posts: 478 Status: Offline |
Post #6
Cheers Adam,Well I'm guessing Ecosse's rolling road approach is similar to Powerstation's based on what you said. With the figures on mine the flywheel power is 157+47 = 204bhp. But the printout also has Pnorm (normal power), which is quoted as 213.5bhp. Do you know what normal power refers to? I know that bhp and rolling road results are a bit of pub talk, but I was just surprised by how low the WHP figure was. Once the kit is fitted, all that is improtant is how fast it feels! I know from riding in Dave's (roberts306) car with it fitted, that it was pretty rapid. |
|
Posted 25th Jun 2010 at 16:18
|
|
|
ballardpaul
Seasoned Pro  Location: Croydon Registered: 22 Jul 2008 Posts: 4,135 Status: Offline |
Post #7
rallyestyle wrote: My low boost SC made 239bhp ATW on a TAT Rolling Road (TAT Chassis Dyno Model CHD2 "V" High Performance). How do i go about finding out the wheel drag output? Mine was 197 at wheels on the same rolling road but only made 250bhp at fly as opposed to his 270. still thought mine would be more at the wheels though. (crap tyres a f*cked cv boot and ball joint and god knows what else with my supension is probably the culprit to the low reading at the wheels) ________________________________________ Phase 2 Blaze GTi 6 (Standard) SoldPhase 3 Supercharged China GTi 6 (249.8 BHP) Sold Phase 3 Supercharged Diablo GTi 6 (443 BHP)Sold Nissan 350Z (300 BHP) |
|
Posted 25th Jun 2010 at 16:27
|
|
|
rallyestyle
Seasoned Pro Location: London Registered: 23 Jul 2003 Posts: 14,990 Status: Offline |
Post #8
rallyeash wrote: thats pretty good, so around 270 @fly yar? 267.9   ________________________________________ Just Drive It |
|
Posted 25th Jun 2010 at 16:25
|
|
|
welshpug!
Capt Pedantic  Location: Bigend, Wales. Registered: 27 Mar 2007 Posts: 25,838 Status: Offline |
Post #9
rallyestyle wrote: My low boost SC made 239bhp ATW on a TAT Rolling Road (TAT Chassis Dyno Model CHD2 "V" High Performance). How do i go about finding out the wheel drag output? rallyestyle wrote: rallyeash wrote: thats pretty good, so around 270 @fly yar? 267.9 eric....  267.9 - 239 = 28.9  which sounds about right, ish.________________________________________ need a part number? get on here - http://public.servicebox.peugeot.comBring on the Trumpets. |
|
Posted 25th Jun 2010 at 16:36
|
|
|
rallyestyle
Seasoned Pro Location: London Registered: 23 Jul 2003 Posts: 14,990 Status: Offline |
Post #10
welshpug! wrote: rallyestyle wrote: My low boost SC made 239bhp ATW on a TAT Rolling Road (TAT Chassis Dyno Model CHD2 "V" High Performance). How do i go about finding out the wheel drag output? rallyestyle wrote: rallyeash wrote: thats pretty good, so around 270 @fly yar? 267.9 eric.... 267.9 - 239 = 28.9 which sounds about right, ish.Ok so its basically the loss between the fly and the wheels, thats all i needed to know, i do have a maths gcse ________________________________________ Just Drive It |
|
Posted 25th Jun 2010 at 16:58
|
|
|
adam b
Seasoned Pro Location: The Nam Registered: 24 Jan 2006 Posts: 12,828 Status: Offline |
Post #11
Pnorm is usually a corrected figure taking air pressure, temp and humidity into account. Well it is on Powerstation's MAHA RAM3000 iirc.________________________________________ Nothing to see here |
|
Posted 25th Jun 2010 at 17:13
|
|
|
Denis
Regular  Location: Cambridge Registered: 07 Sep 2004 Posts: 493 Status: Offline |
Post #12
From rolling road day in March at Track n Road.They did cost down measurements for each car. First figure – calculated flywheel power BHP, second – measured wheel power BHP, and drivetrain loss rallyestyle Tom Rallye LBSC 267.9 238 11% greenbelt Royston GTI6 LBSC 247.7 207.5 16% fletch Matt 125k 106GTI 127.3 108 15% ballardpaul Paul GTI6 LBSC 249.8 197 21% gazzerdaman Gary GTI6 As God Intended 170.4 151 11% astragsi237 Chris Cams/Exhaust 170.1 147 14% xsimoss (avalaugh) Cams/Chip/Modded TB Paul 173.6 142 18% kraig Kraig GTI6 173.3 157 9% gota6again Dee GTI6 Std 158.9 140.8 11% lee_gti6 Lee GTI6 LBSC R1 260.4 233 R2 264.6 234 11% cosmic spanner Mike GTI6 LBSC 241.1 203 16% russian guy Denis PT81/Chip/Long-track Induction 193.4 165 15% ash Ash GTI6 LBSC Road 236.1 198 16% ash Ash GTI6 HBSC Race 324.2 275 15% Bill CTR 208.1 167 20% Brett Shepherd Mountune Fiesta 1.6 140.7 104 26% teej Tim Nova 1.6 8v 116 93 20% ________________________________________ Cherry Red Rallye Project threadWhiteBMW M140i |
|
Posted 25th Jun 2010 at 19:23
|
|
The Peugeot GTi-6 & Rallye Owners Club - ©2024 all rights reserved.
Please Note: The views and opinions found herein are those of individuals, and not of The Peugeot 306 GTi-6 & Rallye Owners Club or any individuals involved.
No responsibility is taken or assumed for any comments or statements made on, or in relation to, this website. Please see our updated privacy policy.