Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2010 12:49:56 GMT -7
It was a blast!!! Car actually did pretty darn good if I must say so.
Mods; Mopar CAI, Magna Flow Exhaust with High Flow Cats, 91 Diablo Can tune, 180 Thermostat.
Max Horsepower at Wheels 379.02; at the crank - dividing by a .8) 473.77
Max Torque at wheel 390.20; at the crank - dividing by a .8) 487.75
But I suspect realistic its closer to 455, If I take 379 x 20%(parasitic lost from crank to wheel) which is 75.8 + 379 = 454.8
and Torque calculation would be 468.2
But I like Gordon calculation alot better ;D, So I am going with 474 HP & 488 Torque!
Good Times for sure. JC is an very cool guy .We certainly should plan this event again when there isnt any car shows conflicting with schedule. Thanks again JC!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by MoNoChRoMaTiC (Patrick) on May 8, 2010 15:27:40 GMT -7
Dang great job Chris! I knew it would make me mad getting on here and reading how much fun you guys had! this was definitely one of the events i was looking most forward to but i got called into work this morning  I really wanted to see what numbers my girl could lay down especially compared to other R/T's with different intakes types of exhaust and my Doug Studdard custom tune! d**n i wish i didn't have to work!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Glad you all had fun! |
|
|
|
Post by jr300 on May 8, 2010 15:52:49 GMT -7
put down 190whp and 225wtq for the 6'er.thats about 20 more than stock,from what ive read and seen.
|
|
|
|
Post by 1sikcharger on May 8, 2010 22:44:38 GMT -7
yea it was a blast kinda nervous at the begining but it was pretty fun .. oh thanks gordon and chris for leaving me all the way behind in layton entering the freeway  |
|
|
|
Post by 440Gordy on May 9, 2010 11:30:41 GMT -7
But I suspect realistic its closer to 455, If I take 379 x 20%(parasitic lost from crank to wheel) which is 75.8 + 379 = 454.8 and Torque calculation would be 468.2 But I like Gordon calculation alot better ;D, So I am going with 474 HP & 488 Torque! Just an FYI, to get a 20% increase you can't take the wheel HP, take 20% of that number and then add it to the base. Because the 20% you are getting is 20% of the wheel HP, not a 20% increase. For example let's work backwards, if we take Chris' estimated crank HP at 473.77, take 20% of that you would get 94.75, subtract that from the crank HP and you get 379.02 HP at the wheels, matches his dyno numbers. The only way to get a true 20% increase from the base number is to divided by .8. Hope that helps.  I've heard some people say that the estimated loss is 18%, not sure which is correct 18% or 20%. But even at 18% Chris had 462.22 (divide by .82) at the crank and I had 451.12. Not bad for stock motors and minor performance mods. Also remember that those numbers are at 4,200 ft elevation, they would be higher if we were at sea level! That's why the barometric pressure of 25.83 inches is printed on the Dyno paperwork. |
|
|
|
Post by 440Gordy on May 9, 2010 11:44:45 GMT -7
yea it was a blast kinda nervous at the begining but it was pretty fun .. oh thanks gordon and chris for leaving me all the way behind in layton entering the freeway Sorry, about that! I thought that R/T of your wouldn't have any trouble keeping up with Chris! ;D (Sorry I couldn't resist) I noticed however that it didn't take you long to catch up! Don't forget to post your numbers. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2010 17:22:54 GMT -7
put down 190whp and 225wtq for the 6'er.thats about 20 more than stock,from what ive read and seen. Pretty darn impressive if I must say so myself!  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2010 17:38:14 GMT -7
But I suspect realistic its closer to 455, If I take 379 x 20%(parasitic lost from crank to wheel) which is 75.8 + 379 = 454.8 and Torque calculation would be 468.2 But I like Gordon calculation alot better ;D, So I am going with 474 HP & 488 Torque! Just an FYI, to get a 20% increase you can't take the wheel HP, take 20% of that number and then add it to the base. Because the 20% you are getting is 20% of the wheel HP, not a 20% increase. For example let's work backwards, if we take Chris' estimated crank HP at 473.77, take 20% of that you would get 94.75, subtract that from the crank HP and you get 379.02 HP at the wheels, matches his dyno numbers. The only way to get a true 20% increase from the base number is to divided by .8. Hope that helps. I've heard some people say that the estimated loss is 18%, not sure which is correct 18% or 20%. But even at 18% Chris had 462.22 (divide by .82) at the crank and I had 451.12. Not bad for stock motors and minor performance mods. Also remember that those numbers are at 4,200 ft elevation, they would be higher if we were at sea level! That's why the barometric pressure of 25.83 inches is printed on the Dyno paperwork. Great Explanation, that makes much more sense. I think you are absolutely correct with it being more like 18% loss than 20% loss on RWD. Either way, I am totally satisfied with 462 or 474 HP at crank from a bone stock engine ... Hopefully next time we can get more club participation. I really want to see what Eric(hemifk) is putting down as well as Ben and other Stock & lightly modded SRT's are putting down. Well feel closer to my goal of 500RWHP on N/A engine. Even though 121 RWHP seems like a mountain of a task to achieve. |
|
|
|
Post by swtchgr(Kellie) on May 9, 2010 18:51:34 GMT -7
Those numbers look similar to mine with those mods Chris. I had 387 at the wheel with exhaust, predator, and non-working s/c. Karl got that up to 500, so approximately 625 to the crank if I do math Gordon provided. I need to ask Karl why I did get closer to 550 and closer to 680 to the crank as the procharger website claims a 150+ HP increase with a pulley.
|
|
|
|
Post by MoNoChRoMaTiC (Patrick) on May 9, 2010 18:53:15 GMT -7
heck yeah Chris your 300 is an animal! i would love to be able to post those kinda numbers!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2010 8:30:31 GMT -7
heck yeah Chris your 300 is an animal! i would love to be able to post those kinda numbers! Thanks Patrick, I was pretty pleased with the result being that the car is bone stock! You too can have those numbers, all you have to do is trade the Charger in for a 3Hundy ;D, as that is standard numbers for all 300's across the board. Just Playin, I couldnt resist, just teasing all the non 3Hundy's which is bout 95% of this club. |
|
|
|
Post by 1sikcharger on May 10, 2010 8:35:35 GMT -7
Wasn't you the one that said that you wanted to buy a charger converted into a 2 door and make it into a racing car
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2010 8:52:18 GMT -7
Wasn't you the one that said that you wanted to buy a charger converted into a 2 door and make it into a racing car LOL, touche.... words coming back against me.  If I came into some money, I think it would be cool to convert a 4 door charger to 2 door with this front end with flat black hood.  |
|
|
|
Post by sodbuster on May 12, 2010 11:48:11 GMT -7
That would be one of the sickest cars of all time I think I'm gonna steal that idea and pass it off as my own
|
|
|
|
Post by greg095 on May 12, 2010 13:36:23 GMT -7
d**n, thats to much math.
|
|
I really wanted to see what numbers my girl could lay down especially compared to other R/T's with different intakes types of exhaust and my Doug Studdard custom tune! d**n i wish i didn't have to work!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Glad you all had fun!
