Jump to content
The mkiv Supra Owners Club

Converting THOR dyno figures


Tannhauser

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Originally posted by Wez

Ahh i see, really need someone a bit more technical to look these over.

 

The top shows a an increase in temp with both turbos online, I am guessing that this is because the amount of airflow has doubled.

 

The bottom one start to climb in the same way but then drops off, not sure why that is.

 

:thumbs:

 

What was the power figure for both runs?

 

The power and torque figures for both runs were almost identical. The car ran lean once number 2 turbo came on line.

powertorque_2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Branners

your sure about that stock boost? The Veilside exhaust should have given an extra 1psi or so as the toyota system is quite restrictive compared to the aftermarket units.

 

JB

 

Yeah John, stays around the 0.8 mark.. on Thors the boost seems to stay higher for longer, and starts droping off at 6k revs, rather than the 5600 rpm at G-Force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by eyefi

the air temp is the intake (pre filter) temp not at manifold (post turbo).

 

OK so only shows how much heat is under the bonnet and absolutely nothing about the effeciency of the intercooler.

 

:(

 

EDIT: this would also explain the drop in temp as more air is pulled over the sensor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Bobbeh

I'd just like to say that G-Forces system (supports over 1000rwhp) is a lot more advanced that many rolling roads in this country. I'm happy to stand by their figures whereas I'd raise serious eyebrows at Michaels 500+ figures

 

I agree with Bobbeh the G Force figures made sense and seemed realistic. Trying to interpret the THOR figures seems to be a nightmare!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Wez

Why is it a nightmare, the powertorque_2.jpg image posted shows at the top that this is crank power whch most dynos show.

 

EDIT: that should be fly wheel, sorry :twak:

 

Cos the original figures seemed so high and then everyone is trying to workout a formula to convert them to make some sense....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could be because the dyno is bolted direct onto the hub that it is measuring less loss than other dynos that measure at the wheel.

 

I kinda see what you mean now, does anyone have dyno report for THOR and another dyno with the same car and spec?

 

:cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't think that the Thor figures quoted flywheel or crank figures at all, I thought they only showed rhhp figures (hence this thread)?

 

Darren - I wouldn't say the Thor figures are a nightmare. The figures obtained are bound to be higher than traditional rwhp measurements, but it doesn't mean they can't be trusted. In fact, potentially, measuring at the hub presumably takes out a load of variables.

 

The only problem is the lack of cars tested with known crank bhp figures or known rwhp figures. Once we get a few more we should be able to convert the figures - at least roughly.

 

Regards,

 

Cliff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Wez

Could be because the dyno is bolted direct onto the hub that it is measuring less loss than other dynos that measure at the wheel.

 

I kinda see what you mean now, does anyone have dyno report for THOR and another dyno with the same car and spec?

 

:cool:

 

Wes - look back to the first post - that's what I was trying to base a conversion on. i.e. Bobbeh and wipeout's.

 

Edited to make sense.

 

Cliff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i wouldnt bother with crank or flywheel numbers, they r always gonna b guesses unless its from an engine dyno (like we r ever gonna see many of them).

 

thor measures hub power. the text on the graphs is incorrect, they r definately hub figures. hub measurement does remove alot of wheel and tyre variables.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All IMHO, so please don't get funny if u don't agree :)

 

I've been having a nose around and looking at people's graphs and car specs etc.

 

For us to make reasonable/fair comparisons between each other (boost/exhaust/IC's/etc) we must stick to the hub figures as any "guesstimates" will only introduce error and uncertainty.

 

However, for the sake of "pub boasting"....

 

I don't think the straight percentage correction (eg add 15%) is a valid one. The idea that a high powered well built engine and drivetrain could lose a lot more power than an older car with much lower power does not seem logical.

 

I think we should consider a certain hp loss figure across all mkiv's and also a percentage loss on top of that to account for what extra power is indeed lost as crank power increases (be it increased heat/noise/vibration etc)

 

Having played around a bit i think this seems a fairly useful "correction":

 

(Hub Horsepower x 1.06) + 18 = Flywheel power

 

eg

 

Hub Flywheel

280 315

300 336

330 368

350 389

380 421

400 442

430 474

450 495

 

You may or may not agree with this, and i'm sure some people may think the figures are too low. However, don't forget Bobbeh's car was only losing 30-35bhp from flywheel to hubs. (Assuming healthy flywheel power of 320-325).

What do you reckon?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cant beleive that there is a 20-25% loss between the transmission and the hubs. Especially when you look at my figures. That means with BPU mods my car is putting out over 440 bhp!!! Unlikely. I would think that the majority of the loss is due to the inefficiency of transmitting the power through the wheels. Although I'm speaking from absolutely no technical background in this field at all :) I would think that a more likely figure is around the 10% figure. Would it be a linear correlation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. You might also be interested in our Guidelines, Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.