Stop in for a cup of coffee

-
Just sayin'
29512599_1614206215300008_2756158791862092419_n.jpg
 
What you really want is SAE net flywheel HP. Drive train losses are too inconsistent to model and expect them to be accurate.
The website didn't say that I could find but they said the results were within 5% of real world Dyno horsepower. It's fun to mess around regardless of what the numbers are.
 

Well, the clean up after this storm was a breeze. I went out around 10 am and made a few cuts across the driveway with a shovel and let the sun do the rest. By 5 pm it was all melted, even the stuff the plows put across the driveway. 47* with late March sunshine plus a 15 mph breeze made short work of it.
Wow! That sure was fast. We're at 42 here and 90 percent of our 6 inches is gone. Only the shaded spots does any snow remain. But they're saying we're going to get another round tomorrow night
 
Wow! That sure was fast. We're at 42 here and 90 percent of our 6 inches is gone. Only the shaded spots does any snow remain. But they're saying we're going to get another round tomorrow night
And we are supposed to get 6+ inches of snow Sat. nite. I call :bs_flag:.
 
The website didn't say that I could find but they said the results were within 5% of real world Dyno horsepower. It's fun to mess around regardless of what the numbers are.
Someplace I've seen, and maybe saved, an explanation of how advertised Hp ratings were done by the manufacturers. The method changed several times (not talking about fudging part of it, just what the standard method was within the industry). NHRA had their own method...

Anyway, I agree - the drivetrain factors make it hard to compare. Lets see what Mike did vs what I did (and anyone else too) because someplace my info in must be garbage.
 
Someplace I've seen, and maybe saved, an explanation of how advertised Hp ratings were done by the manufacturers. The method changed several times (not talking about fudging part of it, just what the standard method was within the industry). NHRA had their own method...

Anyway, I agree - the drivetrain factors make it hard to compare. Lets see what Mike did vs what I did (and anyone else too) because someplace my info in must be garbage.
Cool. I'll go get my lapto
 
I think we are pretty much done with snow here now. Only a small chance of some light snow showers here over the next few days and by next Thursday we are supposed to be back up in the low 60s. I think the pattern of the Nor’easters is broken.
 
Someplace I've seen, and maybe saved, an explanation of how advertised Hp ratings were done by the manufacturers. The method changed several times (not talking about fudging part of it, just what the standard method was within the industry). NHRA had their own method...

Anyway, I agree - the drivetrain factors make it hard to compare. Lets see what Mike did vs what I did (and anyone else too) because someplace my info in must be garbage.
The original measurements were done as gross HP using engines without accessories, drive belts, etc using header type manifolds. By 1971 they all switched to using the SAE net HP requirements after California made it a Law that they couldn’t advertise HP unless it was done by the SAE method.

The net HP measurements require that the engine is in fully stock trim with all accessories attached and using stock exhaust manifolds and exhaust pipes.
 
The interesting thing is that the modern certified SAE net HP rating that everyone uses requires an SAE observer to be present when the randomly pull a car off the assembly line and do the test. The manufacturer is then allowed to claim a HP rating that is +/- 1% of the measured value.

Chrysler, beginning with the Viper, has consistently claimed the lower number because they say that they would rather have customers getting more HP than claimed rather than less on an average basis.
 
The interesting thing is that the modern certified SAE net HP rating that everyone uses requires an SAE observer to be present when the randomly pull a car off the assembly line and do the test. The manufacturer is then allowed to claim a HP rating that is +/- 1% of the measured value.

Chrysler, beginning with the Viper, has consistently claimed the lower number because they say that they would rather have customers getting more HP than claimed rather than less on an average basis.
Yep do you blame them? Under promise and over deliver
 
OOPS I am a asshole I should not treat youngers That whine all the time like I treated them sorry wake the F up!(no name) .......get a set!
 
The 76 trans am i had was 200 hp fresh out of the box.
455/4 speed.
That was rated with all accessories on engine and running
Shoulda kept it.
But i bought it for 500 and sold it for 2500 10 years later. But never did a thing to it.
 
-
Back
Top Bottom