|
Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated. |
|
The Pub For General Automotive Related Talk |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
18-08-2007, 12:59 AM | #31 | ||
GT
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: SYDNEY
Posts: 9,205
|
20 % HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE ACCEPTED RULE. FOR A MANUAL. . this is a rule of thumb for all engineering design . an 80 tonne shackle is capable of lifting 100 tonne safely.
friction losses of rotating gears equate to 20% . it doesnot get better with modern times, it's a fact. i was told during my apprentiship is the late 80's that all machines with rotating and recipricating parts lose power due to linear forces on rotating parts and surface friction. which equates to a measured 20 % loss on a vehicle driveline. obviously the more gears the more friction loss. so a 4 wheel drive would lose more. |
||
18-08-2007, 12:40 PM | #32 | ||
Rob
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Woodcroft S.A.
Posts: 21,737
|
so a stock ef/el falcon should have about 125rwkw based on your theory. i've never seen that and i never will. facts speak a lot louder than theories. also based on a 20% loss stock ba sixes would be around 143rwkw. also a little optimistic if you ask me but not as far out as earlier cars.
drivelines have become more efficient in modern times, namely gearboxes. |
||
18-08-2007, 01:02 PM | #33 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: My house
Posts: 1,637
|
Prydey because ford tell us that the EF/EL had x kilowatt did it have it or does the one Ford put together for analysis have that kw.
|
||
18-08-2007, 01:04 PM | #34 | |||
VFII SS UTE
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Central Coast
Posts: 6,353
|
Quote:
manuel's do not
__________________
I don't often hear the sound of a screaming LSX. But when I do, So do the neighbours.. GO SOUTHS
|
|||
18-08-2007, 01:16 PM | #35 | ||||
BA Falcon XT
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Perth WA
Posts: 848
|
also over time the eninge become less efficant, so more loss of power from the start
__________________
Click here to check out my signature http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/f...ignature-1.jpg Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
18-08-2007, 01:43 PM | #36 | |||
Rob
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Woodcroft S.A.
Posts: 21,737
|
Quote:
most stock vt/vx gen3's are around 160 - 170rwkw from a 220/225kw motor. most stock xr6t's are around the 180rwkw mark from a 240kw motor. most xr8's are around 200 from a 260kw motor etc etc. based on all these figures which are very average, 20% loss seems too little but 30% seems too much. all engines will vary from factory. there are freaks and lemons but to assume they are all down on the quoted factory figures is a bit out. like i said a lot earlier though. does it really matter except for bragging rights. its just a number and maybe the difference between telling your mates you have cracked the 300kw with your motor, or fallen 15kw short. maybe a little of the mine's bigger than yours syndrome. there's also the ageless debate over the accuracy of a lot of dyno's. ive seen quotes of up around 180rwkw in a ba but backed up by a 15sec 1/4 mile time, or 170 odd in a e series with a 14.4 1/4 time. i'm no expert but to me, one contradicts the other. this could go on forever. how long is a piece of string? |
|||
This user likes this post: |
18-08-2007, 01:45 PM | #37 | ||
...
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,046
|
Modern cars do quarter mile times around 14.5 seconds.
Thats a pretty stupid thing to say because there are far to many variables, far to many cars and drivers and other things that make cars different from each other. I do realize that there are less variables in a gearbox, but suggesting that you can ACCURATELY work out drive train losses over hundreds of different gearbox's with a blanket 50kw or ANY percentage figure is just as stupid. Vague generalisations FTL. |
||
18-08-2007, 04:18 PM | #38 | ||
LPG > You
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Posts: 4,277
|
The closest thing to a true global standard would be 18% manual, 20% auto. However, it differs from country to country, with Australia and its lot of dyno crowd inflating it big time (people on this forum have told me to expect 35% drivetrain losses before... lol!).
The truth is... wheel kW is a bunch of hooey. It means nothing, never did, never will, end of story. Its a gimmick to make some money off people in the aftermarket game. Chassis dyno's are excellent tuning devices and nothing more. Want a real indication of how powerful your car is? Take it to the strip stock, then take it to the strip after mods.
__________________
LPG Lovers Association President & Member #1. : |
||