R33 Torque

[Sydneykid]

Be careful, dynos can display newtons which is NOT the same as newton metres.

Be careful, dynos display torque at the wheels, so you have multiplier effects of the gearbox and diff ratios plus tyre diameter.

Be careful, dynos have rollers and calibration differences like ramp rates, not to mention ambient and inlet air temperatures, barometric pressure etc etc

Cheers

Gary

[gotRICE?]

340 @ 213rwkw.

Sound right?

The way the dyno i used is set up i get an NM reading of 1300++! But you need to divide that number by your final drive, being 4.1, giving you the "proper" NM reading.

EDIT, this is a hub dyno too. Not sure how much diff that makes.

Edited April 22, 2008 by gotRICE?

[platnumglow1]

ok so the stock 265nm for a r33 gtst series two would probably only go up to around 300 - 350nm if you did an exhaust and intake ?

Autobarn have a mod list and they say 160rwkw if you do cat back with BOV and somthing else, fuel pump i think...

just want to know what mods youd need to get around the 350- 400nm of torque mark, id assume then a full exhaust and intercooler could give you even more..

[PM-R33]

ok so the stock 265nm for a r33 gtst series two would probably only go up to around 300 - 350nm if you did an exhaust and intake ?

Autobarn have a mod list and they say 160rwkw if you do cat back with BOV and somthing else, fuel pump i think...

just want to know what mods youd need to get around the 350- 400nm of torque mark, id assume then a full exhaust and intercooler could give you even more..

Which autobarn? Lol. Cause i wrote up a list at work for a skyline mod list thing, some one is stealing my Autobarn ideas

[The Mafia]

its an older type of dyno and reads proper power not bullshit power like all your typical shootout modes etc and on a new type it would read around 250rwkw so i dont think my nm is wrong , but hey worth having a go

Well that means my car would dyno at 1000nm+ on your special mode then?

and u claim 314rwkw and only 114mph and only 700nm? for starters u dont even have the mph to back up ur aclaimed 314rwkw so id watch what u say about dynos and bullshit figures.

Actually, the 114mph was run at about 270rwkw on a mild tune, lower boost.

The 314rwkw was done well after that 114mph run. Its doing a lot more than that now...Smartass...

Might want to do a real dyno run one day, anyone that knows what they are talking about are going to think you're any idiot claiming 213rwkw and 670nm or torque.... An Edited BA XR8 with 240rwkw only makes 550 - 600nm or torque. And you saying that yours is higher? Why? Is it special?

As I said before, I made:

209rwkw @ 420nm - Standard Turbo (done on 3 different dynos)

240rwkw @ 520nm - GT3076 - Cropped Turbine

300rwkw @ 695nm - GT3037

314rwkw @ 720nm - GT3037

Bit of a pattern there eh?

Ahh, but I don't know what I'm talking about, even though I've tuned about 30 cars, and tuned mine about 30 times..

[l0WRB]

haha like sk said alot of things come into play.

and u best be gettin to the track then and backing up with sum decent mph to claim ur true 314rwkw

30 tunes i'd hope it had atleast 314rwkw by now

each to there own, believe wot u must

[nick81xd]

chassis dyno torque readouts are not engine torque, its the tractive effort on the rollers so yeah only way you can accurately measure a motor torque is to put it on a engine dyno. So unless your quoting engine dyno figures in a way all your figures are wrong.

Edited April 22, 2008 by nick81xd

[govich]

You can get a rough idea by estimating engine power from a dyno readout around the midrange (with the stock turbo). Using my graph with 0.7bar on the stock turbo, at around 3800rpm it's making 125rwkW which we'll call 160 engine kW - corresponds to 400Nm of torque. Which sounds about right for peak, maybe a tiny bit enthusiastic.

Edited April 22, 2008 by govich

[Granthem]

You can get a rough idea by estimating engine power from a dyno readout around the midrange (with the stock turbo). Using my graph with 0.7bar on the stock turbo, at around 3800rpm it's making 125rwkW which we'll call 160 engine kW - corresponds to 400Nm of torque. Which sounds about right for peak, maybe a tiny bit enthusiastic.

maybe just a tiny but you reckon?

There we go cheers Gary. I knew ratios came into play, along with alot of other things.

Either way generally (99% of the time), your torque graph will be correct (as to where the peak it etc where it tapers off), but the figures arent worth considering as true and correct

[govich]

maybe just a tiny but you reckon?

Well they make 200 wheel kW peak at around 6500rpm, which, if you call it 240kW at the flywheel, corresponds to just over 350Nm when it's running out of puff, so is it hard to imagine that torque would peak at around 400Nm in the midrange?

Edited April 22, 2008 by govich

[The Mafia]

haha like sk said alot of things come into play.

and u best be gettin to the track then and backing up with sum decent mph to claim ur true 314rwkw

30 tunes i'd hope it had atleast 314rwkw by now

each to there own, believe wot u must

I will get to the track, when its fixed, it was destroyed in the flood we had here 3 months ago.

And keeping on top of a setup that shouldn't be making this kind of power needs constant attention, seeing 314rwkw is nearly unheard of with a 0.63 rear housing on a GT3037 at 18psi of boost. Plus I've made changes that require new tunes. Latest change is seeing an extra 40kms out of a tank at the same power and drivability. Averaging 12l per 100kms around town which is great, better than most cars.

Also, I don't need to believe anything by the way, I've seen plenty of numbers to know what are bogus and what are believeable, and your numbers are crap, full stop. The stock turbo is not capable of flowing enough air to make that sort of torque, and to make the torque at such a low power you'd need to be either dynoing a tractor, or a diesel ute with massive stroke.

As I said before, you're only going to sound like a tool telling someone experienced that you made 670nm and only 213rwkw..

I don't think I need to say anything more on this. I absolutely hate usless dyno operators that don't know how to create decent readouts. I've been to a dyno before, and told them to shove their figures up their ass because they tried to tell me all of these fake and bullshit readings.

Then I attended a mainline dyno, had a mate that had the mainline training run it and put REAL correction factors in and everything was perfect.

Just like another guy on my home forum - Had a nice big dyno readout, even posted the dyno sheet. Had a look at the correction factors. Ambient air temp was 22 degrees (in summer which is really about 33 degrees) and the IAT was 65 degrees......... Nice big fudge there.. tried to tell me his starion with a 300hp turbo could make 500hp at the engine..

Anyway, enjoy your dodgey readings.

Edited April 23, 2008 by The Mafia

[l0WRB]

its not stock turbo its a kkr480

Edited April 23, 2008 by l0WRB

[govich]

its not stock turbo its a kkr480 on 18psi but still ill let u assume whatever u must

He's right. Do it with maths. An RB25 making 670Nm peak in the midrange is going to drop off a bit towards redline, and will still be making over 550Nm at 6500rpm, given good flow capacity.

550Nm at 6500rpm gives 375kW at the flywheel. Your reading was 213 wheel kW, so make your own conclusions. I've been conservative..

[l0WRB]

anyway im over it lol

he can think what he wants.

114mph and 314rwkw just like his sig says.

yet he uses the same old excuse "low boost man or its only got a bit of timing and half ass tune" haha who goes to the track and races on low boost

isnt that everyones excuse when they loose or cant back up something?

let us know when u hit the track again be good to see some mph that actually backs up your 314rwkw

i was doin 108mph on 200kw and 2.4sec 60ft id sure hope that extra 70rwkw and 1.9sec 60ft would net u more then extra 6mph....

good day.

Edited April 23, 2008 by l0WRB

[Dale FZ1]

Depending on spec, it is possible to make a massive mid range torque number but not a correspondingly large power number. The issue is whether the torque graph has a profile like this:

or this:

Power is just a function of torque and revs, so if the torque doesn't hold up, it won't show a lot of power. The 34mm intake restrictor mandated in the ARC rally cars keeps maximum power right down, so they have to make the things tractor down in the rev range and keep pulling gears.

I'd suggest looking at the shape of the curve, and area under the curve rather than a peak number.

cheers

[Guilt-Toy]

I can understand my friends frustration there. sometimes its just too hard.

ohhh i forgot to mention.. numbers are only good to win lotto with.

Stains in your undies is a better indication then half the numbers getting around here

f**k I love it how people have no idea

Jeepers you woke up on the wrong side of the bed!

Edited April 23, 2008 by Guilt-Toy

[bluegts]

Plus I've made changes that require new tunes. Latest change is seeing an extra 40kms out of a tank at the same power and drivability.

Lol. I don't think a re-tune is required for a bigger fuel tank, and I would say it may affect your driveability after throwing extra weight at the back

[PM-R33]

Lol. I don't think a re-tune is required for a bigger fuel tank, and I would say it may affect your driveability after throwing extra weight at the back

He ment his latest tune has allowed him to get more km's out of his tank (ie more fuel efficient) yet retaining the same power level. He didn't mean he got a bigger fuel tank.

Edited April 23, 2008 by PM-R33

[Guilt-Toy]

Hahahhahahahahaaa!

Dude you made my day.

[bluegts]

Some of us are tuned to the same frequency