Essex RR II Power Figures

[Mark Edwards]

Well mine is what 21%.

[screech]

21% would be about 348 at fly.

[BenF]

The transmission losses do look a bit 'generous' - 17-20% is what I'd normally expect. 137bhp from a Mk1 is optimistic - 120-125bhp is what I'd expect, which is with transmission losses of 17-20%.

To befair though, their rollers had worn smooth to the metal and a number of cars slipped on the rollers so perhaps the tyre to rollers loss was higher than you'd normally expect?

[Mark Edwards]

21% would be about 348 at fly.

364.6 - 21% = 288

Where are you getting 348 from?

[CosmosblueMR2]

21% would be about 348 at fly.

364.6 - 21% = 288

Where are you getting 348 from?

Back to school for screech !

364.6 / 100 = 3.646
3.646 x 21 = 76.566
364.6 - 76.566 = 288.034

so transmission loss is spot on compared to the RWHP figure.

Screech - go to the back of the class - you will find a pointy hat with a D on it


just jesting fella !

[3sgte]

4. Marc Weatherley 329.5 BHP/234.0 lbft




yipee there i am 260 at the wheels and peak power at 7495
and according to my boost gauge only running 0.8 bar (11.5psi)
apexi avc-r on order to hopefully hold bosst at 1.25 bar( 18 psi)
should see good gains in torque would be happy with 300 whp and 300wtq
hopefully 6psi should see this as long as the fuelling is there

[Pete J]

To throw a cat amongst the pigeons...

14. James Dodsworth 290.9 BHP/233.9 lbft

A stock rev3

So why are transmission losses higher if you have an engine with higher power output? The cars all have a near identical transmission system afterall

[Pete J]

21% would be about 348 at fly.

364.6 - 21% = 288

Where are you getting 348 from?

Back to school for screech !

364.6 / 100 = 3.646
3.646 x 21 = 76.566
364.6 - 76.566 = 288.034

so transmission loss is spot on compared to the RWHP figure.

Screech - go to the back of the class - you will find a pointy hat with a D on it


just jesting fella !

'D' cap for Frank and Mark

A 21% transmission loss increase on 288bhp is 348bhp. Remember a backwards calculation will always be a smaller percentage. but you have failed to take that into account

Just like VAT (come on we all did that at school ) to add vat the calculation is +17.5%, but to remove VAT from the gross figure the calculation is -14.89%.

[Mark Edwards]

364.6 - 21% = 288

Where are you getting 348 from?

Back to school for screech !

364.6 / 100 = 3.646
3.646 x 21 = 76.566
364.6 - 76.566 = 288.034

so transmission loss is spot on compared to the RWHP figure.

Screech - go to the back of the class - you will find a pointy hat with a D on it


just jesting fella !

'D' cap for Frank and Mark

A 21% transmission loss increase on 288bhp is 348bhp. Remember a backwards calculation will always be a smaller percentage. but you have failed to take that into account

Just like VAT (come on we all did that at school ) to add vat the calculation is +17.5%, but to remove VAT from the gross figure the calculation is -14.89%.

Have to dissagree there Pete. The loss is from the flywheel, therefore you have to take away from the fly fig and not add to the wheel fig. It's not an increase on 288 to get 364, it's a loss from 364 to get 288.

[Pete J]

Back to school for screech !

364.6 / 100 = 3.646
3.646 x 21 = 76.566
364.6 - 76.566 = 288.034

so transmission loss is spot on compared to the RWHP figure.

Screech - go to the back of the class - you will find a pointy hat with a D on it


just jesting fella !

'D' cap for Frank and Mark

A 21% transmission loss increase on 288bhp is 348bhp. Remember a backwards calculation will always be a smaller percentage. but you have failed to take that into account

Just like VAT (come on we all did that at school ) to add vat the calculation is +17.5%, but to remove VAT from the gross figure the calculation is -14.89%.

Have to dissagree there Pete. The loss is from the flywheel, therefore you have to take away from the fly fig and not add to the wheel fig. It's not an increase on 288 to get 364, it's a loss from 364 to get 288.

But the rolling road can only measure at the wheel, so any transmission losses can only be added to the at the wheels figure.

[Mark Edwards]

Thats true yes, but it works out the loss as a horsepower figure which is then added on, the % loss figure i have i have worked out afterwards so 21% is correct.

[Pete J]

Like that reply =D>

So if the transmission loss is a bhp figure instead of a percentage of the RWHP, why is yours alot higher than mine

[Mark Edwards]

Like that reply =D>

So if the transmission loss is a bhp figure instead of a percentage of the RWHP, why is yours alot higher than mine

The diff could be the first answer to that.

[Pete J]

Yours 76bhp and mine 43bhp. My diffs better than yours

[Mark Edwards]

Yours 76bhp and mine 43bhp. My diffs better than yours

LOL, mine is a brand new TRD.

[jimGTS]

Yours 76bhp and mine 43bhp. My diffs better than yours

LOL, mine is a brand new TRD.

mine was 58 if that matters....