GMan

Seeing as I hate VW's Not really. but here http://www.oettinger.de/en/ they manage to push 270 German street legal Euro 5 Emissions Hp out of a golf GTI though and one of them hung with my skyline when I was at 333 whp. (we won't Argue crank HP again;))

I'd Put losses of a TT6 at about 18-19% so 352 at the wheels with only a decat pipe at .8 bar? Bring it on! my skyline would read 550 whp on that one!

They are actually considered an auto manufacturer under German law due to the extensive nature of the mods they do to vehicles. Just like RUF, Brabus, Techart, Alpina and others.

Absolutely Right WHP is all that counts really, If I hit it here I'll definitely put ssr on my list as it seems to read on the high side! Hell only 250 bhp a puny 30 over stock with my ultra efficient autobox. Beer is on you if I do it though:D

Will do! no need for the name calling But like I said the RWHP is there on paper again you Turbo Guys get all defensive I'm just trying to prove the NA is not the slug you all make it out to be, Like I said originally I don't hold any delusions of chasing TT's down the strip. It is really no wonder anyone looking to do anything to an NA that doesn't involve boost gives up with the hammering and abuse you get on this forum. The Negativity must be a "Limey" thing, must be the weather.:cool:

No this was in germany see here http://www.mkivsupra.net/vbb/showthread.php?t=212441 The German VW guys call this Dyno "Hertzbrecher" or heart breaker, it consistently reads 5% or more, less than other dyno types so is generally bad for the ego which is why I chose it as my baseline, Once I reach my goal of 200 WHP on this dyno (only 19 to go and I haven't even touched timing or a cold air intake yet) I plan on visiting some of the UK Dynos people on here go to to verify my claims.

Good Idea Scott, we will need to know mods though as close to stock as possible would be best,

258 actually fwd cars will always have much better efficiencies than FR cars due to the mass of metal that must be turned, I'll scan a before and after of a light weight flywheel 5lbs less or something gaining 8 hp on a dyno. You are approaching my logic wrong, I am saying that an AWD car has MORE flywheel horsepower than people think, I used the manufacturer figures to show that, if a modern 6 speed Nissan car like the 350z is putting out 22% less horsepower than advertised that a 17 year old Toyota automatic is equal to or better than it in efficiency, If the na you said dyno'ed at 180 whp it would need a driveline loss of only19.2% mine is an auto and making one more pony.

so you Believe the the ge is underrated by the same percentage as a tt gte

good point:p But Most US built automatics will handle much more than a tt automatic ever can. We American Love Automatics! Drag Supras often switch to TH400's who's design is 30 years old

They can and do look at mpg figures for Subaru fwd auto vs awd manuals, with the same engine the manuals still win, when you use a fluid as a power transportation medium you create lots of waste heat. Ever wonder why automatics need so many coolers to be reliable as the fluid heats it becomes less dense and will create even more heat when you try to compress it again. it is a vicious cycle which is why automatics are so sensitive to heat. 25% would be good for a cold automatic.

I'm using 30% not 35% In school 1995 we tested an auto 1994 Mustang drive line, we hooked an electric generator to the input shaft of the transmission (engine was out) the car was strapped to something similar to a dyno but the roller is powered electrically (it is a very precise measurement device used to test drivelines, loss was 27% on a car 1 year old

I'm loving the discussion by the way. good man

Like I said I found the lowest reading dyno I know of, Wheel dyno not hub so even lower, I will eventualy visit one of the much higher reading dyno dynamics hub dynos, in shootout mode, that people use to make themselves feel better for a laugh. Only an Intake & Exhaust? How about equal length manifold? Every ignition component replaced Lowest impedance & grounded.(checked with multimeter) sparkplug wires i could find (nology hot wires) double decat I made 10 more rwkw in the mid range just by pulling out the apexi Active tail silencer. which opens up at wot anyways. So now again to the manufacturer figures, I said they were bs in the first place but we are comparing apples to apples now. You didn't Answer my question, there are only a few choices here. Ok so a bone stock NA makes 1 less RWHP than me, Was it an AUTO or manual? Dyno sheet? Corections? So Toyota claimed the NA put out 220 bhp stock , you say they all make make 180 to the wheels so your options are 1)They lied to make the turbo look better it really makes between 240 and 260 stock? They did lie about the power of the j spec turbo to stay under the 280hp limit, 2)I proved above that Every car tested(manuals no less) read 17 to 26% less at the wheels than their claimed figures. that only gets worse with age. so if 180whhp =220 fwhp toyota built the most efficient automatic transmission ever known to man even 16years later at 20% I would bet that a TT loses more than 20% with a Getrag, 3)every dyno in the world overeads N/A supras by 40hp or so? so which one is it?

I'm fairly sure the 181wheel hp was on a chassis dyno, or what do you call that thing i strapped the whole car to with some rollers under the rear wheels?(SEE DYNO SHEET!) I also thought I spent the most of the first post explaining why I am converting the wheel hp to a figure more closely approximating the engine output, So in short I found the most conservative dyno I could, and put down 181 whp with 0% correction for air temp/humidity/elevation on a car that by all of the work I just did above to prove mfr claims are bs (like you just pointed out) should be putting out 145 rwhp using the same formula So which part am I dreaming? Did Toyota seriously understate the power of the N/A? is the N/A auto box the most efficient automatic ever made? (by your calculation it is 22% or so, better than most of the manual cars up there) or fill in your answer Looking for a frying pan for the egg

exactly the kind of person this thread is aimed at proves my point: there is always some snob wanting to feel better about himself

yes and no I really get annoyed at the General scorn N/A supras get on this and other forums and when people use bad information to justify their comments. and I love a good argument and underdogs. and Can't tell you how great a feeling it is to go to a meet here get harassed by some fanboi's in a golf with a big wing and stupid size tires for not having a "Real Car" only an N/A manual, then soundly whopping that ass on the next stretch of unlimited autobahn. and last but not least being able to drink a cup of coffee whist driving my daily driver to work in stop and go traffic. (was a bit of a chore in my skyline I assure you) and pay 2/3rds the insurance rate as a TT

Hey all, I have been a member of this great forum for a little over a year now, and while this forum is filled with Massively good information and helpful members, I am amazed that some of the myths/"old wives tales" about cars are still prevalent, I'd like to address some of them here. A little background on myself, I earned my degree in Automotive Engineering at Three rivers College in New London Connecticut in the US. I then decided to do something completely different and join the US Army for 10 years. I have now come full circle and am back into cars with a passion I lacked as a teenager. Ok enough about me. The First thing I'd like to address is Flywheel horsepower, which is basically a marketing ploy used by the auto industry to present a larger number to the public, what you make at the wheels is the only thing that matters but since we usually only have the MFR claimed power to go off of we use correction factors to try to match it up, Fair enough The ONLY way to truly measure parasitic loss would be to mount an engine to an engine dyno with the FULL exhaust system mounted to it, then mount that very same engine and accessories in a chassis and dyno that. Then you would have the parasitic loss for that engine with that transmission with those wheels on that Dyno. This can give you the basis for an educated guess on similar setups. And that is what everything else is, An Educated guess, an uneducated guess, or an outright lie. A dyno drag/coast down test is the second best option but is only as accurate to about 5% of the dyno's accuracy. I can and will get into specifics of why the percentage system is inherently flawed but time has proven that it is the least flawed system available without actually dynoing every engine and every car separately (Discussion Later) Ok what started this Rant/post was when someone suggested after my dyno run that a RWD automatic transmission was only losing 20% to the wheels. This wasn't done maliciously, just out the misinformation found on the web, That's why I didn't take issue with the poster and hit my books for some proofs. Attached are the baseline Dyno sheets for several manual transmission cars New and Old from Import Tuner. I like them because they don't screw around with Engine power and go Straight to the wheels. 2005 Nissan 350z 6sp Manual 300 fwhp - 232.7 rwhp = a 22.4% Loss 2008 Infinity G37 6sp Manual 330 fwhp - 273.0 rwhp = a 17.2% Loss Damm Good 2010 Hyundai Genisis 2.0T 6sp Manual 210 fwhp - 161.5 rwhp = a 23.1% Loss 2003 Honda S2000 6sp Manual 240 fwhp - 198.0 rwhp = 17.5% Loss 2005 Acura RSX type S 6sp Manual 210 fwhp - 167.1 rwhp = 20.4% Loss 1991 SR20det swaped 240sx with intake, 5sp manual 205 fwhp - 152.6 rwhp= 25.6% Loss So at this point at 20% loss Toyota has produced the most efficient 16yr old torque converter automatic transmission in history, far more efficient than most 6speed manuals! In reality at school we found most conventional automatic transmissions lose between 27% and 34% to the wheels. So I stand by my 30% so my 181 rwhp converts to 258.5 fwhp or a 38.5 hp gain at less than 1000 US dollars.The GE does respond well to basic bolt ons, so just wait and see when my new detcans and digital timing gun (and some hot weather) get here. Any other Myths you guys want me to dispel, just ask.(my dyno sheet does the whole "n/a's need back pressure myth") the reason they lose power with big exhausts is because of exhaust gas velocity and scavenging. Let the discussions begin:Popcorn:

it is very tempting i agree, but I am on a mission now. I will keep everyone posted especially if I fail still only 19bhp to go!

that is basically correct;) should be 14 to 17, I have to find my old engineering textbook and calculate flame front speed vs max pressure point vs piston speed in an 86mm stroke engine which would allow me calculate precisely what my ideal ignition point would be at 6800 rpm, but should roughly be 22 or 28 deg btdc on 95 ron and about 30 with 98 unfortunately with the dizzy i am limited by the built in mid range timing advance, wich will problably cuse det when it jumps to 44 deg in the mid range at light load

I want to stay away from ITB's and stand alone ecu's on this build, once you are at that extreme you should have just gone turbo in the first place, I also want to keep the cost down or again it makes no sense, Finally after checking with the insurance company as long as I don't add nitrous or turbocharging, I don't have to declare the modification as long as it passes safety inspection The most I am willing to consider is an intake manifold change, I have seen some TT style for the GE with built in velocity stacks, if i can find one cheapish I'll get it , but I'd rather leave this area as "stock looking" as possible

Honestly if it were not for all the negativity I got when I posted my last thread I probably would never have contnued the N/A route, now that i sold my skyline a tt lump is very appealing, and I have no illusions about taking on a stock tt even. I've just noticed that all of the NA guys think that you can bolt on a few parts and make big numbers and get discouraged when it doesn't happen. I can't believe i haven't found one post on ignition timing! my dad was doing this in the 60's With the Dizzy I am adjusting base timing, using the 3/2 method. + 3 degrees and dyno with det cans,all the way to redline. repeat until you hear det anywhere in the range (especially 4-6k rpm) then back off 2 degrees for a safety margin. Then road test at high load (still using det cans) and see if you pick any up. Of course you also stop if the engine idle becomes too unstable. I found BMW 3.2 I-6 engines Idle quite well at up to 20 deg BTDC these engines are under square with a relatively long stroke to make advancing base timing difficult. RB25's on skyline which are very over square with a very short stroke (71.2mm) will idle at 25-30 deg btdc I'm guessing the square (86x86) 2jzge will idle at up to 22 deg btdc, I'm hoping to get 6-7 degrees of advancement before that dreaded midrange det rears it's head. should be good for whole lot of top end power

quite possibly Then again I have seen manuals lose more than 20% and short of an engine dyno (not going to Happen) can't be verified. it's all guesswork really, that's why I insisted on RWHP only numbers To all NA owners, If someone is willing to Dyno their TOTALLY STOCK n/a Auto I will split the cost with you I swear, I'd do it myself but can't really be justify the work it would take to return the car to stock. My goal is still 200 RWHP (19rwhp away) which is what really matters, whatever the engine is making is irrelevant really Homer your input is very welcome and valid I just wanted to avoid the whole "it's not worth tuning an NA" argument that happened on my last thread

You should have heard it on the dyno without the silencer mate, People were running over from all over to see what was rocking the house, tried to shoot a vid with my cell Phone but it was just a garbled mess. The sound of a fully uncorked N/A is impressive and oppressive hence why I keep the APEXi ATS In almost permanently.

Most cars sold in Germany are Manuals, Mercs are the largest segment of automatics but the vast Majority of Beemers, Audis, Vdubs and Porkers are good ol 3 pedal manuals. Only recently with the Germans leading the charge on Dual clutch transmissions is the trend changing but with the exception of VW it hasn't hot the realm of affordability yet. Also most are so new that they are still under warranty so off limits to tuning.