...

Go Back   Lateral-g Forums > Lateral-G Open Discussions > Open Discussion
User Name
Password



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 05-20-2013, 09:07 PM
Che70velle's Avatar
Che70velle Che70velle is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Dawsonville Georgia
Posts: 2,248
Thanks: 641
Thanked 175 Times in 119 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash68 View Post
Sorry, I missed that in your first post.

Just for a reference, when I was in the Porsche world for a couple years. Engine to chassis dyno conversions were routinely in the 12-15% range.

I have read about sub 10% losses for NASCAR... any truth to it, Che70velle?
Actually yes, there are those types of numbers out there, but again, this technology does not apply AT ALL to anything that you'll see on here, which is why I spoke about "real world" experience. The money going into drivetrain testing is in the millions of dollars, in the NASCAR world.
I worked for a firm that built cup engines, but also did testing on things such as lightweight reciprocating assemblies vs. lap times, which would take months to complete, and cost several million dollars also...The results would surprise you. We were involved in early development of many things that most people would call BS on. Some stuff I can talk about, some stuff I can't.
The owner of this firm is a dear friend of mine. He was behind Cale Yarborough at the Daytona 500 in the late 70's, when Cale blew up. No big deal, until you find out he broke 8 rods...carbon fiber rods. This was Late 70's! Totally off topic, but true.
__________________
Scott
---------------------------------------------------------------
70 velle' on custom chassis w/custom RideTech coilovers, RED sleeved 434” with Mamo 265’s, F-body Magnum, 12 bolt 3:73, wilwood 6/4's, bla, bla, bla...build. thread https://lateral-g.net/forums/showthread.php4?t=39631
New 434” engine build here https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...ved-block.html

Thanks Dad!!

My Chevelle is old school... It has a belt driven power steering pump.
They're 17's, but I keep em clean!
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-20-2013, 09:09 PM
Che70velle's Avatar
Che70velle Che70velle is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Dawsonville Georgia
Posts: 2,248
Thanks: 641
Thanked 175 Times in 119 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Sutton View Post
That's interesting Scott.

For our race teams, not finishing races due to parts failure was unacceptable.


So we went the other direction. Stronger driveshafts (3"), bigger u-joints (1350's not 1310's or 1330's), nothing "borderline".
We found this during testing on dynos, not on the track. Same philosophy here.
__________________
Scott
---------------------------------------------------------------
70 velle' on custom chassis w/custom RideTech coilovers, RED sleeved 434” with Mamo 265’s, F-body Magnum, 12 bolt 3:73, wilwood 6/4's, bla, bla, bla...build. thread https://lateral-g.net/forums/showthread.php4?t=39631
New 434” engine build here https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...ved-block.html

Thanks Dad!!

My Chevelle is old school... It has a belt driven power steering pump.
They're 17's, but I keep em clean!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-20-2013, 10:20 PM
Matt@BOS's Avatar
Matt@BOS Matt@BOS is offline
Lateral-g Supporting Vendor
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,042
Thanks: 2
Thanked 37 Times in 30 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash68 View Post
Sorry, I missed that in your first post.

Just for a reference, when I was in the Porsche world for a couple years. Engine to chassis dyno conversions were routinely in the 12-15% range.

I have read about sub 10% losses for NASCAR... any truth to it, Che70velle?
The Porsches all (almost all) have transaxles, which I think helps a little. I know my engine builder, who only deals in LS stuff always tells Corvette owners to factor out roughly 12 percent from their chassis dyno numbers, as compared to 15 percent for F-bodies. (all of that is to guestimate SAE net numbers)

Now, I'm also curious, are we trying to compare engine dyno numbers with no accessories to chassis dyno numbers?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-20-2013, 10:23 PM
badmatt's Avatar
badmatt badmatt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: winnipeg
Posts: 725
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Che70velle View Post
Actually yes, there are those types of numbers out there, but again, this technology does not apply AT ALL to anything that you'll see on here, which is why I spoke about "real world" experience. The money going into drivetrain testing is in the millions of dollars, in the NASCAR world.
I worked for a firm that built cup engines, but also did testing on things such as lightweight reciprocating assemblies vs. lap times, which would take months to complete, and cost several million dollars also...The results would surprise you. We were involved in early development of many things that most people would call BS on. Some stuff I can talk about, some stuff I can't.
The owner of this firm is a dear friend of mine. He was behind Cale Yarborough at the Daytona 500 in the late 70's, when Cale blew up. No big deal, until you find out he broke 8 rods...carbon fiber rods. This was Late 70's! Totally off topic, but true.
What CAN you talk about? me and Dave will blow up your PM box soon.
__________________
97 Sonoma "NERA": Pile O Sh*t. Literally.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-20-2013, 11:26 PM
BBC71Nova BBC71Nova is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 849
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Default

Peter, this is easy. Surely NRE did an engine dyno. So just strap your ride down to a chassis dyno and let us know the result .

Seriously though I've put some thought into this lately as well. Primarily because I can't figure out why the LS setups put down so much rwhp compared to some pretty strong big block combos. I would generally think flywheel hp was flywheel hp regardless of it being LS, BBC or even a Ferd FE .

However, I then read a few examples where some solid 600+hp BBC builds were only getting high 400/low 500 rwhp numbers. That would support the closer to 20% drivetrain loss figure.

On the other hand, it seems fairly common/easy to get 500 rwhp out of an LS3. I know they are efficient and all but geez. Similar rwhp and 100 less cubes???? I also can't see a basic LS3 putting out 600 flywheel HP to start with.

That just doesn't seem to add up so I gotta think drivetrain differences maybe. Most certainly any BBC rwhp number you'll find is likely through an auto trans so that may explain some of it.
__________________
John
'71 Nova (Build thread)
FFR Roadster
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-21-2013, 08:45 AM
DTM Racing DTM Racing is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 76
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Don't get to wrapped up on peak numbers. Average HP/TQ numbers over the operating RPM is much more important.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-21-2013, 09:25 AM
V8TV's Avatar
V8TV V8TV is offline
Lateral-g Supporting Vendor
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,889
Thanks: 8
Thanked 22 Times in 15 Posts
Default

We tested a 1970 Buick 455 on an engine dyno several years ago, and then dropped it in a 1970 GS ragtop with an M22 4-speed and chassis dyno tested it. If I recall, we lost 17.5% at the wheels.
__________________
Kevin Oeste
V8 Speed and Resto Shop
V8TV
Muscle Car Of The Week
V8 Radio Podcast

All about us:
https://www.v8speedshop.com

Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-21-2013, 09:36 AM
Ron Sutton's Avatar
Ron Sutton Ron Sutton is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom, CA
Posts: 2,422
Thanks: 45
Thanked 35 Times in 26 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by V8TV View Post
We tested a 1970 Buick 455 on an engine dyno several years ago, and then dropped it in a 1970 GS ragtop with an M22 4-speed and chassis dyno tested it. If I recall, we lost 17.5% at the wheels.
Kevin, do you recall what rear end was in the car?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-21-2013, 09:41 AM
Ron Sutton's Avatar
Ron Sutton Ron Sutton is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom, CA
Posts: 2,422
Thanks: 45
Thanked 35 Times in 26 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DTM Racing View Post
Don't get to wrapped up on peak numbers. Average HP/TQ numbers over the operating RPM is much more important.

I completely agree. We were looking for total power "under the curve" ... meaning within the usable rpm range that race car was running in. Peak numbers are just to brag about.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-21-2013, 03:04 PM
69znc's Avatar
69znc 69znc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: CHarlotte NC
Posts: 127
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I agree the power curve is the holy grail! But I think the urban rumors about the 10% loss have a real stickiness with no empirical evidence. Ron your testing is exactly what I have found in all the research and studies I have found conducted by various magazines and by individuals posted in forums.

Specifically I was thinking of street legal cars so I think that Ron's reduction of 18% in a race car set up supports my belied 18.5 with PS, AC..... is realistic. I think the low 20's is more realistic for someone who is not overall anal about minimizing the reduction (sorry some self reflection there!)

Scott thank you for your insight. I was not trying to figure out what race teams and cars can do. Really just for the types of cars people on this site talk about and own. NASCAR, Indy, Grand Prix, NHRA are in a different world!!

Last edited by 69znc; 05-21-2013 at 03:08 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright Lateral-g.net