Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

whats the kw difference between power at the fly or at the wheels .. its like .. 50kw difference? but in which favour?

cheers :)

Johno

theres more power at the fly then at the wheels. power is lost due to a whole bunch of things, like friction. i'm sure someone will give you a better answer, but theres my 2 cents.

You can also have the halfway point and measure power at the hubs, which eliminates power loss through tyre heat/friction, but still has transmission/drivetrain losses, just to complicate things further...

it takes power to turn the gearbox, diff, etc.

on a stock car a very rough conversion is flywheel kw = rear wheel horsepower.

your average drivetrain takes out about 30-40kw.

yeah bout 30-40kw is lost from the flywheel to the rear treads.

It's not a "30-40 KW is lost"

Other wise a car that only pushes say 60KW stock at the fly, would only be 20-30 at the wheels, BUT this isn't so.

What it actually is, is approximately 30% loss in a RWD for an auto

About 25% loss for a RWD in manual

And around 20% is the general give for a FWD car of either manual or auto.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • You're making my point for me. 95 is not "premium". It is a "slightly higher octane" version of the basic 91 product. The premium product that they want people to buy (for all the venal corporate reasons of making more profit, and all the possibly specious reasons of it being a "better" fuel with nicer additive packages) is the 98 octane stuff. 95 is the classic middle child. No-one wants it. No-one cares about it. It is just there, occupying a space in the product hierarchy.
    • 98 and 95 have to meet the same national fuel standards beside the actual RON.  91 has lower standards (which are quite poor really), so 95 is certainly not 91 with some octane booster. It would be an easier argument to claim 98 is just 95 with some octane boosters. Also RON doesn't specify 'quality' in any sense, only the octane number.  Anything different retailers decide or not decide to add to their 95 or 98 is arbitrary and not defined by the RON figure.
    • Anyone know alternatives to powerplus tungsten? Can't find an alternative online. 
    • 95 is just a scam outright. 98 is the real "premium" with all the best detergents and other additive packages, and at least historically, used to be more dense also. 95 is just 91 bargain basement shit with a little extra octane rating. Of course, there's 91 and there's 91 also. I always (back in the 90s early 2000s) refused to put fuel in from supermarket related fuel chains on the basis that it was nasty half arsed shit imported from Indonesia. Nowadays, I suspect that there is little difference between the nasty half-arsed shit brought in by the "bargain" chains and the nasty half-arsed shit brought in by the big brands, given that most of it is coming from the same SEAsian refineries. Anyway - if there's still anything to that logic, then it would apply to 95 also. 98 is only made in decent refineries and, as I said, is usually the "premium" fuel, both in terms of octane rating and "use this because it's good for your engine because it's got the unicorn jizz in it!".
    • Yeah since those first 2 replies I actually went and put some 98 in it and tbf it's already doing much better than the 95 (which is weird and makes my inner tinfoil hat wearer think the 95 was a crap batch), getting 8ish around town. Again, wonder if it takes a while to stabilize if the fuel is changed a couple of times. I swear cars used to just either run "well" or "s**t* in my 20s, none of this fuel optimisation business haha 
×
×
  • Create New...