Thought I would get the car dyno'd the other day as some friends were. Was worried about the sound my car was making a while back. That was just bad acoustics though. Basically a stock Coupe, bar a 2 inch catback and a K/N induction kit.

It made 215bhp and 225lb/ft of torque, I was rather happy with it . Not bad for a 1998 100k mile engine.

2" thats tiny? off the top of my head the standard is 2.5" must be a typo

Thats near enough bang on where it should be.

Well done mate!

Different dyno might have given you the standard figures, so nothing to be worried about at all!!

Ross

2" would restrict a little, standard is 2.25?

when I had my very first coupe in 2004, It had on warranty a brand new engine and turbo, car was a 1998 20vt with 60k,

That made 219bhp which i though was a testament to a new lump, had a high boost scotty in 2005 with ported head etc and that made 190 on the same rollers lol

Yeah I meant 2.5

I'm happy with the figure, next is a chip and an FMIC then i'll head back for another run.

Seems great - loads of miles and same power as a brand new engine . Sounds like a good solid lump for uprating; get the compression tested though before spending more money,

Tim

Was a good day, there was a lad there with a 1.9 Pd130 and I putting out almost the same amount of torque as him, but he only had 140bhp

thought the NA's were 2.25?

anyway making good standard power mate

Hmm, someone told me the dyno we were on measures the bhp at the wheels. The figure seems optimistic to me . Quote me happy dyno i think

If you have a completely standard 20vt then 215bhp will be the flywheel power, which would be approx 180bhp at the wheels. If you had 215bhp at the wheels it would be around 240bhp at the flywheel.

Rolling roads measure the power/torque at the wheels then work out the transmission losses to calculate the flywheel figures.

215bhp at the flywheel is bang on the money for a 13year old standard 20vt with 100k on the clock. It's a good sign of a healthy engine, you should be pleased with the result!

They didn't do a run down to calculate loss though, just up to the limiter then dip the clutch.

If it was a Dyno Dynamics then it won't have any coastdown, but they still add a "generic percentage" for transmission losses.

Someone better informed may say different, but the dipping of the clutch measures the loss through transmission without the engine placing a load on the rollers, or something along those lines anyway!

if its pdtuning they havent got a clue and give you no comment on your results as they dont know them selfs, but that result is for flywheel and yeah and when its slowing down with the clucth pressed in it calculates the loss through the transmission then gives you wheelbhp

According to "pumaracing" article, the coastdown losses are only aproximation of the real transmission losses, because it measures the mechanical losses of the "unladen" drivetrain. If you dyno a stock 220hp coupe and a 500hp monster, the coast-down losses would be roughly the same, because the drivetrain is basically the same, apart the engine/clutch, and there lies the problem.

Pumaracing "Coastdown" article link

IMHO, it's better to ask for the wheel bhp, and compare only that; flywheel is allways a product of some equation that multiplies the chances for misinterpretation or error, especially between different rollers and/or operators.

It was Sedox in Sunderland, no idea what they are like, but they don't do a lot more then power runs and revo remaps. Anyone can do that..

Anyway, here is the graph.

As I said above, Dyno Dynamics so no coastdown. The figure quoted is the calculated flywheel figure.

Cheers Flea, i'll assume it means my engine is in pretty good health