So, what's wrong with this graph?

[v-g]

In another thread my power was mentioned. It's a little strange to put out almost 210 HP on almost a stock set-up.

Model year 2000, APP code engine with out VVT. Stock K03, not S.
The engine mods are about non existing.
I've a new TIP,
some other hoses,
open air kit,
dumps atmospheric,
N75 J,
nothing done to the mapping,
peaks at 1,5 BAR max.
New back box, not cat back/turbo back.

So for those who knows, look below, and spit it out. Thanks.

 

[andycupra]

well you are running a J valve N75 which may give you more boost during spool up as well as the tip.

if you are hitting 1.5 bar thats not stock boost levels.


dyno lottery.

whats the transmission loses?

 

[RikH]

dyno id say

 

[DPJ]

Torque and power lines crossing way higher than 5252.

 

[v-g]

well you are running a J valve N75 which may give you more boost.

I'm hitting it (in 6th), but not holding it for very long.
I don't know if where I pick up the boost has a significant influence? It's a HKS meter so I assume the quality on the meter is ok enough.

if you are hitting 1.5 bar thats not stock boost levels.

I know 1,5 is not stock level, but how have I managed to reach it? I know that the N75 isn't a boost valve per se, but that it controls how/when the wastegate operates.
It's so strange to me that this can increase the boost so much. I've read N75 stories before and people have different results.

you can knock a little off as its in KW not HP.

What does KW vs HP has to do with this, I don't understand what you mean.

also im unsure about adding 55+bhp due to transmission loses.

Eh? I've 180 HP on the wheels, nobody's adding 55+ to my knowledge.

 

[v-g]

Torque and power lines crossing way higher than 5252.

And that means...? Sorry.

 

[andycupra]

I know 1,5 is not stock level, but how have I managed to reach it? I know that the N75 isn't a boost valve per se, but that it controls how/when the wastegate operates.
It's so strange to me that this can increase the boost so much. I've read N75 stories before and people have different results.

Ok you may be reaching higher boost as you have several mods that will allow this, perhaps not the level you hold, but certainly the level it will peak at:
The J N75 will allow earlier spool up earlier and with slightly higher boost, the
K03 turbo spools up fast as stock, and the J valve will help this,
you also have a TIP which helps spool up
you also have a uprated pipework and slightly upgraded exhaust which also may help.

What does KW vs HP has to do with this, I don't understand what you mean.

apologies, i did not realise you had converted the reading from KW to bhp already. most graphs show power at the wheels, then add transmission loses to give power at flywheel.
In your case it looks like the graph is power at the flywheel in KW.

Eh? I've 180 HP on the wheels, nobody's adding 55+ to my knowledge.

we need to know what has been added for transmission loses as this is not shown

 

[DPJ]

And that means...? Sorry.

(Torque x RPM)/5252 =BHP.

If the lines don't cross at 5252, there are some inaccuracies in the measurements.

 

[v-g]

Ok you may be reaching higher boost as you have several mods that will allow this, perhaps not the level you hold, but certainly the level it will peak at:
The J N75 will allow earlier spool up earlier and with slightly higher boost, the
K03 turbo spools up fast as stock, and the J valve will help this,
you also have a TIP which helps spool up
you also have a uprated pipework and slightly upgraded exhaust which also may help.

Ok, sounds sane.

KW is a different measurement to BHP. the graph has KW on the scale not bhp.

I know about they being different measurements and I convert KW to HP quite often. The 153.6 KW the graph peaks at, gives 206 HP.

the graph as i can see shows top power of about 155 KW.
the tranmsision loses are then added to give you reading at the wheels.

I know about the transmission loses, but 55+? Where can you see that number?
I think it's so stupid we all operate on engine power, when it's almost impossible to measure.
It's the power on the wheels we should talk about.

 

[DPJ]

...........I know about the transmission loses, but 55+? Where can you see that number?
I think it's so stupid we all operate on engine power, when it's almost impossible to measure.
It's the power on the wheels we should talk about.

This isn't a Vidar bashing session, BTW.

I don't see where Andy is getting 55 from. (Not 210bhp -155kw...)

You aren't saying 155kw is at the wheels, are you Vidar?

 

[v-g]

(Torque x RPM)/5252 =BHP.

If the lines don't cross at 5252, there are some inaccuracies in the measurements.

Am I learning something today, maybe?

Torque in lbf/ft or Nm?

If in Nm:

337.9 x 3490 gives 1179271

Divide 1179271 with 5252, gives 224,5 BHP. Not possible.


If in lbf/ft:

249 x 3490 gives 869010

Divide 869010 with 5252, gives 165,5 BHP. Not possible I hope.

Yes, something isn't right!

 

[DPJ]

Am I learning something today, maybe?

If in lbf/ft:

249 x 3490 gives 869010

Divide 869010 with 5252, gives 165,5 BHP. Not possible I hope.

Convert to Lb/ft to do the calculation.

Respectable figure at the wheels, unmapped.

 

[v-g]

This isn't a Vidar bashing session, BTW.

Thanks for that, I didn't think so, but one can never know since we originally don't speak the same language.

I don't see where Andy is getting 55 from. (Not 210bhp -155kw...)

You aren't saying 155kw is at the wheels, are you Vidar?

155 KW is approx 210 HP. (208 HP)
And no, I'm not saying I've got 153,6 KW at the wheels, it's what the company who dyno'ed it says I've got on the enginee.
They say I've about 180 HP on the wheels.

What I meant earlier was that the whole tuning and car business should talk about power on the wheels and not the engine.
Since we usually don't take out the engines on RR days. That would be a sight!

 

[v-g]

Convert to Lb/ft to do the calculation.

Respectable figure at the wheels, unmapped.

Yeah, maybe this is not so wrong as I thought.
What IS wrong, is the dyno company! How do they come up with this actual numbers?
It's kinda stupid. This company used to be very serious, they've been around for ages, but in the recent years, they've been a bit, yeah, stupid.

I'm still a bit worried about the 1,5BAR, tho'.

Yet again it boils down to the driver! I can now say: You fekker got beaten by a 166 HP, haha! What do you need your illegal turbo swap for?

I say illegal, because we're not allowed to do anything for higher horsepower over here.
As long as you have your original papers and haven't re-registered and paid a lot of extra tax, it's illegal. And I haven't mentioned the insurance yet. But people still do it.
I don't dare to do it, as I've had a case with an insurance company and I won, big time. After a seven years struggle.

 

[DPJ]

There must be good things about living in Norway?

 

[PhilW]

How do you know its 1.5bar?

 

[G2232]

There must be good things about living in Norway?

yeah the snowboarding isn't bad.
But living over there costs a fortune!!!

 

[PhilW]

Are you lookin at a vag com log to say your hitting 1,5bar?

Coz to me that sounds like your not taking off atmospheric pressure, so 1500mbar minus atmospheric pressure of ~100mbar is 500mbar which equals ~7.2psi. Which is about right for a non mapped N75J'd leon.

 

[Willie]

There must be good things about living in Norway?

Ever see the female population

 

[andycupra]

I know about the transmission loses, but 55+? Where can you see that number?
I think it's so stupid we all operate on engine power, when it's almost impossible to measure.
It's the power on the wheels we should talk about.

This isn't a Vidar bashing session, BTW.

I don't see where Andy is getting 55 from. (Not 210bhp -155kw...)

You aren't saying 155kw is at the wheels, are you Vidar?

my error, ive removed that comment, this was added before i realised the graph was in KW. (i presumed bhp, the graph showing about 154 with output being given as 210bhp... = just over 55 bhp added). that was my theory, but it was wrong.
oops