and not pictures

makes DJEMZ ANGRY!!!!!

Postwhoring makes Steady slightly irritated, but I'm far too apathetic to get angry.


Yeah, you can't add a percentage of the rwkw figure to get fwkw.
That's just silly.

Only way to do it, is to have a known fwkw figure, get a rwkw and figure out the percentage loss.
Of course that then brings up the question, if more power is made, does driveline loss stay at a constant, or does it change?
I don't know the answer for sure, but I'm thinking it changes. More torque + more strain = more heat = more loss.
What does this mean?
Let's say you have, for example, a car that has from the factory 100fwkw (ignore tolerances, or how the factory got that figure, just assume it's right).
It pulls 80rwkw on a chassis dyno, so a 20% (20kw)loss from the original figure.
It has a turbocharger slapped on it, and now pulls 120rwkw.
So, does it have 140 at the flywheel now, or does it have 160 (losses doubled), or does it have 120 + 20% of a figure we don't know and can't work out?

Add to this uncertainty manufacturing tolerances, car manufacturers making power readings with no ancillaries on the engine, and it makes the whole thing seem less of a science and more of a creative art.
Like synchronised swimming.
Pretty to look at, but what the f**k the point?

edit: Me maffs is real good an' all that

Last edited by Steady ED on Tue Feb 21, 2006 11:42 am, edited 1 time in total.

I'd rather believe different transmissions soak up different ammount of power. If my stock EA was doing 100rwkw, and it is supposed to be givin out 139fwkw, then I'd say that EB 4 speed elec. transmission soaks up roughly 40kw.

We all know that heat thins out the trans fluid, and then your power changes alltogether, so maybe its soakin 50kw now... then I have no idea if the engine is even producing 139fwkw??? Engine temp, Air temp & density, fuel quality, ignition & timing, engine ware condition, trans condition, engine load... they are all factors...

Either way, I think transmission loss would vary model to model and would have to be on a logerithmic??? scale, and who knows what the multiplication factors could ever be.

And to be quite honest, who really cares that much.

Like, if it goes, then it goes, and if it don't... well, do something about it.

I have read that thread, and find it interesting no-one has bought up the fact BA ECU's adjust when they click over 1500, 5000 and 10,000km.

As for the BA GT, I wasn't there, I haven't seen the car, or C&V's workshop before, so I don't KNOW every fact. On the same dyno on the same day, a HSV GTS with the C4B 300Kw motor ran 230-odd rwkw, and Motor also commented that the GT had over 10,000km on it, and was the fastest factory BOSS 290 they have tested.

So, If a 290 BA is loosing between 25% to 30%, and a HSV the same, and a EF/EL is also loosing 25% to 30% (figures all taken on independent dynos, and there is no argument that a standard EF will make around 110rwkw from a factory quoted 165fwkw), would it not be safe to assume that a 25% to 30% loss is a safe guess??

These figures, from three different cars, one producing nearly half the power to the others and the loss through the drive train is roughly the same would have to throw some light on the argument.

Tickford 6, try not to take this personally, but it seems to me that half the time your replies to these question just involve you trying to “big noteâ€￾ yourself. Maybe once in a while you should step back and take notice of other peoples opinions, even though they might be different to yours doesn’t mean that they are wrong..

nothing further needs to be said about trying to use a % loss to prove it's bull s**t.


case closed

I don’t think anyone has said that %30 is a definite figure, just a rough guide...



Would that be the same as saying, something costs $100 ex gst, so you add 10% to get the inc GST = $110, then if want to get the EX gst price do you take %10 off?? if you do then the price is $99..., do that enough times and you get it for free.

Its not a valid argument....

LOL yeah, its just basic maths.

Ur on the ball smally351 yes its just simple mathematics

will use this example like tjb45 used

if something costs $100 plus 10% GST then u have to pay $110 in total
what is the GST component 10% which is $10

so if i quoted u for a product $110 including GST , what is the GST component of that product ?

well if i did what the guy suggested way back before the argument
110 times 10% = 11 dollars which is incorrect

actually u have to divide by 11 to get the GST component

which would be 110 divided by 11 = 10 dollars is the GST component

so in the kilowatt conversion factor the way our transferring the 30% is incorrect and that's why u get different answers to rear wheel kilowatts

cheers