Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Cobra Forums
2020+ Shelby GT500 Mustang
It's Official! 2020 GT500 Makes 760HP
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AustinSN" data-source="post: 16267011" data-attributes="member: 159453"><p>I understand what you are saying, and can see the point of view, but I think youre getting hung up on the ultimate temperature being the power sap when it's the <em>energy losses that build to the higher temperatures</em>. It doesn't matter if the axle is running 150 degrees or 300 degrees at that point, you're right about it probably being a 1% difference in power, but it's when you force a lot more power through the system is when you have greater losses.</p><p></p><p>Again, think about running your car on the dyno at 4,000 rpm with as little throttle input as possible to maintain, it might not even take 20 hp to spin the drivetrain, but at full load and 500+ hp running through it, we are losing a lot more than 20hp.</p><p></p><p>I don't think the losses are perfectly linear, but I feel it's probably close. That's why we always have a range when talking about dyno losses. </p><p></p><p>These waters get horribly muddy when we look at engines that are under rated by manufacturers and dyno sheets from different dynos. This all seems so pointless.</p><p></p><p>The trinity makes what? 580 wheel? So 80hp to "spin" that drivetrain, that seems fair. If we put a 1.6 from an old UK mondeo in it, is it really going to require 100 throttle just to spin the drive train while it has no load on a dyno? No, not at all, it will probably push the car along just fine on the street, it won't be fast but it would probably run doors with a 2CV, with an engine that supposedly makes as much power as it takes just to spin the tires. </p><p></p><p>For what it's worth, the BSFC (brake specific fuel consumption) for unleaded is .45-.50 gallons per hour per horsepower. So if we need 80 horsepower to spin that drive train with no load or wind resistance, it will consume 5.8 gallons per hour on the low end (6.4gph on the high end). That's 10 mpg at 60. It could probably do better than that with wind resistance at whatever RPM and just maintaining throttle. </p><p></p><p>I think I've got my point across, more power=more losses, less power=less losses. And again, this seems so pointless.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AustinSN, post: 16267011, member: 159453"] I understand what you are saying, and can see the point of view, but I think youre getting hung up on the ultimate temperature being the power sap when it's the [i]energy losses that build to the higher temperatures[/i]. It doesn't matter if the axle is running 150 degrees or 300 degrees at that point, you're right about it probably being a 1% difference in power, but it's when you force a lot more power through the system is when you have greater losses. Again, think about running your car on the dyno at 4,000 rpm with as little throttle input as possible to maintain, it might not even take 20 hp to spin the drivetrain, but at full load and 500+ hp running through it, we are losing a lot more than 20hp. I don't think the losses are perfectly linear, but I feel it's probably close. That's why we always have a range when talking about dyno losses. These waters get horribly muddy when we look at engines that are under rated by manufacturers and dyno sheets from different dynos. This all seems so pointless. The trinity makes what? 580 wheel? So 80hp to "spin" that drivetrain, that seems fair. If we put a 1.6 from an old UK mondeo in it, is it really going to require 100 throttle just to spin the drive train while it has no load on a dyno? No, not at all, it will probably push the car along just fine on the street, it won't be fast but it would probably run doors with a 2CV, with an engine that supposedly makes as much power as it takes just to spin the tires. For what it's worth, the BSFC (brake specific fuel consumption) for unleaded is .45-.50 gallons per hour per horsepower. So if we need 80 horsepower to spin that drive train with no load or wind resistance, it will consume 5.8 gallons per hour on the low end (6.4gph on the high end). That's 10 mpg at 60. It could probably do better than that with wind resistance at whatever RPM and just maintaining throttle. I think I've got my point across, more power=more losses, less power=less losses. And again, this seems so pointless. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cobra Forums
2020+ Shelby GT500 Mustang
It's Official! 2020 GT500 Makes 760HP
Top