Mi16 Rolling Road Results

[happygoron 2]

It would seem he's 'torqueing' bulls*it!

 

Edited May 13, 2010 by happygoron

[Batfink 201]

well really for a rolling road run you want to choose the gear that gives nearest to 1:1 ratio.

How about looking at your ratios to see, then determine whether he's worth using again..

[djc 0]

The way I understand it you need a 1:1 ratio or as close as. On a dyno (not a r/r) torque is measured at the crank/flywheel as is hp for a true reading because, of course, there is no gearbox attached this is the best way of getting a true figure imo. Your man is way out, I expect my wheelbarrow on his rollers would show a reading!.

[hcmini1989 16]

The way I understand it you need a 1:1 ratio or as close as. On a dyno (not a r/r) torque is measured at the crank/flywheel as is hp for a true reading because, of course, there is no gearbox attached this is the best way of getting a true figure imo. Your man is way out, I expect my wheelbarrow on his rollers would show a reading!.

i see mate .I dont understand how it all works. i see what you all mean with the 1:1 ration so that you get the power from the engine .I will have to work out the ratios to see what the ration is on 3rd gear.

 

tbh i thought it was ridiculosly high but as i said i have no idea i just assumed it was the gearing

[Batfink 201]

a lower gear from the optimum 1:1 should give a higher bhp reading as it multiplies the power up, a taller gear like 5th will give a lower bhp figure..

[KRISKARRERA 2 1 Cars]

Of course he's talking bulls*it, no gear is going to give you torque that high. I remember back in 2002 when I had my old 405 on the rollers and due to a sticking rev counter the calibration of the dyno computer was all wrong and as a result the torque measurement was all wrong yet the bhp was correct. Maybe something similar happened here?

[hcmini1989 16]

Of course he's talking bulls*it, no gear is going to give you torque that high. I remember back in 2002 when I had my old 405 on the rollers and due to a sticking rev counter the calibration of the dyno computer was all wrong and as a result the torque measurement was all wrong yet the bhp was correct. Maybe something similar happened here?

 

 

you could be right mate bhp is about right .They are a back street garage.But i have only ever heard good things about them and they do have a good rep.

Im going to book it in with either skip brown or i think its powertune or something like that then ill post the figures up.

 

oh an i dont have a rev counter wired up so that could be something to do with it

Edited May 13, 2010 by hcmini1989

[Lan 24 1 Cars]

took my car to skip browns recently it was definitely worth the trip i'd go there personally

[GLPoomobile 958]

But i have only ever heard good things about them and they do have a good rep.

 

I'm not surprised I bet all his customers go away with big grins as they have 3 times more torque than they expected!

[swordfish210 20]

I'm not surprised I bet all his customers go away with big grins as they have 3 times more torque than they expected!

 

I was going to say the same, i bet they have to beat the chavs in their 1.2 Corsas away with a stick.

 

I remember being at a respected engine builders workshop once while he was dynoing an engine. It didn't make the power he wanted so he just opened up the graph and added an extra 12bhp Shocking what some people do sometimes.

[Daviewonder 533 3 Cars]

Reminds me of the time my mate Rob took his standard 309 gti to get a power boost valve fitted, the garage came out with some amazing power figures it would gain so my mate asked them to rolling road it too. When we went to pick it up the garage owner said the printer on the RR was broken so they had DRAWN him a graph of what the power increse would be like. The most worrying thing about this was my mate was quite happy with this

[Richie 32]

Reminds me of the time my mate Rob took his standard 309 gti to get a power boost valve fitted, the garage came out with some amazing power figures it would gain so my mate asked them to rolling road it too. When we went to pick it up the garage owner said the printer on the RR was broken so they had DRAWN him a graph of what the power increse would be like. The most worrying thing about this was my mate was quite happy with this

 

[large 33]

Reminds me of the time my mate Rob took his standard 309 gti to get a power boost valve fitted, the garage came out with some amazing power figures it would gain so my mate asked them to rolling road it too. When we went to pick it up the garage owner said the printer on the RR was broken so they had DRAWN him a graph of what the power increse would be like. The most worrying thing about this was my mate was quite happy with this

 

LMFAO!

[Batfink 201]

oh an i dont have a rev counter wired up so that could be something to do with it

 

ahh there you go then!

[Richie 32]

Reminds me of the time my mate Rob took his standard 309 gti to get a power boost valve fitted, the garage came out with some amazing power figures it would gain so my mate asked them to rolling road it too. When we went to pick it up the garage owner said the printer on the RR was broken so they had DRAWN him a graph of what the power increse would be like. The most worrying thing about this was my mate was quite happy with this

 

I imagine it to be like this

 

[C_W 3 1 Cars]

The torque figure will probably be 122lb/ft, and if that's at 6300rpm sounds about right, normally peak torque is closer to 5000rpm I think on these engines. With 322lb/ft the car with probably twist itself over hehe.

 

I'm not totally aufait with rolling roads but yes if you gear it down in a low gear the torque at the wheels goes up, like you could make the wheels turn extra slowly but with massive torque, but it should also be calculated "back" to a figure that corresponds with the engine output. I'm also not sure why the operator has said the alternator can affect things as it would run normally without one.

[jo's MI16 0]

mine went on a rolling road about a year and a half ago and mine was:

peak power 156.6Bhp @ 6467 Rpm and peak torque 129.9 lb ft @ 5397 rpm.

Does this sound about right?.

[welshpug 1,627]

not bad, torque seems low though, healthy standard 8 valver's make nearly that much, but it is a RR and they're all different and have variables, its an educated guesstimate at the end of the day.

[jo's MI16 0]

yes the bloke at MIKEANICS that did it was talking to the other half about the car and told him that it needed something do to it( cant remember what it was)to bring the torque up. But all that was done before I had the engine fully rebuilt so hopefully now it may be a bit better. Will ahve to take it back someday and see.

[welshpug 1,627]

cam timing most likely, it has a big effect on torque, is it a DFW or D6C though?

 

they're a good bunch at Mikeanics, used to see their Escort Cosworth out on the rallys quite often, don't know if they've rebuilt it after a heavy crash at rockingham last year.

[jo's MI16 0]

Its a D6C. Apperantly from what I can gather off the other half there is 2 adjusters on the cam thingy which one needs to be adjusted to make the torque better?.

[Cameron 16]

322lbft at 6300rpm would be 385bhp, so I think he's gone wrong somewhere.

[DrSarty 90 1 Cars]

But has it got a FSE 'Power Boost' valve, as that would explain this huge power gain?

[Longun 1]

I suspect mistake somewhere.

 

Not the best picture but I owned this car before and had it on a RR.

 

[KRISKARRERA 2 1 Cars]

Its a D6C. Apperantly from what I can gather off the other half there is 2 adjusters on the cam thingy which one needs to be adjusted to make the torque better?.

Not on standard pulleys there isn't.