RWHP to Crank HP reduction

[hp2]

Originally Posted by 69znc

hp2 - yes I have "heard" many things but the point is not "heard" but empirical data. This I can believe in with many points of verification. Thus my post. No it does not matter the crowd you hang with if they are serious.

I guess I didn't get my point across adequetly. IMO, the guys with a fist full of timeslips or a log book of info have empirical data. These guys tend to speak from data driven results. Liek you said, these are the people who are serious about their performance and how to improve it.

The guy who swears his 396 Chevelle with dual quads put down 500 horses because it would burn rubber in all four gears is at the other end of the spectrum. In my experience, these two groups typically only tolerate each other for about 90 seconds at a time before hostilities begin. They don't hang together very often, so association with one group will never get you data. Association with the others will get you as much info as you are willing to digest.

[Vegas69]

Originally Posted by Ron Sutton

Hey Todd thanks for sharing.

Was the 15% torque loss at peak torque? and if yes, what rpm? Was the 16% HP loss at peak HP? and if yes, what rpm?

Ron, I found the old thread. https://lateral-g.net/forums/show...ayback+chassis

I was wrong, it was 17% HP loss and 15% torque loss at peak.

This was my 1st combo, not the ZL1.

[Ron Sutton]

Thanks for the update Todd.

Take care !

[69znc]

Originally Posted by Vegas69

Since this is a pro touring website I'll chime in with my results from a pro touring car.

I had the engine dynoed and then a chassis dyno. It worked out to 16% hp loss and 15% torque loss. Big block chevy, tko 600, 3.5" aluminum driveshaft, and 12 bolt with 33 spline axles.

There is only one way to figure it out. Do as I just said...

Todd, that is impressive that your reduction was only 16% / 15%. Best that I have heard of and my research. Also curious to see the answers to Rons questions.