Frank's Monster 6psi Manual Dyno Chart 285whp and 270tq

[jetbtkng]

nope, actually its about 273, flywheel hp not crank hp............

[RON]

nope, actually its about 273, flywheel hp not crank hp............

??? Not sure what you're saying. How much power (%) is lost from the flywheel to the wheels in a manual? Does 12% sound about right? That's how I get 250WHP if the CRANK HP was 285.

[jetbtkng]

i posted the horse power rating from there web site on page 1 or 2 read it they explain it........... other post bbq bobs or obx exhaust post

[jetbtkng]

flywheel it goes through the whole drive train except they take the wheels off and run on the axles...........

[Mr_Chunkz]

even though you pissed me off frank im gonna step in and help out Ron

Ron, for some reason, church automotive's dynapack graphs always print flywheel at the top. Ive had my car tuned there before
Rest assued these charts reflect WHP.

I've asked them the same exact question when I had my dyno print out. All they could say is that when it prints thats just what it prints.

Not sure I like their explanation... but there you go.

Frank its not flywheel hp either... or so theyve told me.... so that means your car probably makes more than you are thinking at the crank.

[jetbtkng]

are u happy now tracy..........

[Mr_Chunkz]

are u happy now tracy..........

well im not happy with the way you act toward people
but im happy with the power you are making

But why does bobs camry read 7?!
I still cant figure that out.
Unless by some freak miracle it pulls 7 pounds from a 5.5 pulley

By the way... does it read 7 consistently? Or does it only spike at 7 for a moment?

[jetbtkng]

i only treat poeple the way im treated, and church's told me all pullies are different, its only appox psi, they said they all read different with the aplication, plus his boost gauge may not be rite a 1/2 psi or so off..........

[Mr_Chunkz]

i only treat poeple the way im treated, and church's told me all pullies are different, its only appox psi, they said they all read different with the aplication, plus his boost gauge may not be rite a 1/2 psi or so off..........

yeah but frank
1 and a half psi from this charger is a HUGE difference......

Maybe pull the boost gauge from gregs camry or your solara and run it on bobs camry to see if it reads the same?

[jetbtkng]

i asked bob that, he dont care, he said it looks good, lol.........

[Mr_Chunkz]

i asked bob that, he dont care, he said it looks good, lol.........

you guys should still run a diff boost gauge still though cause if something is screwey about the compression on the engine, pushing the car may yield catastrophic results.

[jetbtkng]

he dont care , if it breaks, he'll fix it...........

[RON]

even though you pissed me off frank im gonna step in and help out Ron

Ron, for some reason, church automotive's dynapack graphs always print flywheel at the top. Ive had my car tuned there before
Rest assued these charts reflect WHP.

I've asked them the same exact question when I had my dyno print out. All they could say is that when it prints thats just what it prints.

Not sure I like their explanation... but there you go.

Frank its not flywheel hp either... or so theyve told me.... so that means your car probably makes more than you are thinking at the crank.

Thanks...

Found this:

hp (SAE)
In the United States the term "bhp" fell into disuse after the American Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) recommended manufacturers use hp (SAE) to indicate the net power of the engine, given that particular car's complete engine installation. It measures engine power at the flywheel, not counting transmission losses (or anything after the flywheel).
Starting in 1971 automakers began to quote power in terms of SAE net horsepower (as defined by standard J1349). This reflected the rated power of the engine in as-installed trim, with all accessories and standard intake and exhaust systems. By 1972, US carmakers quoted power exclusively in SAE net hp. The change was meant to 'deflate' power ratings to assuage the auto insurance industry and environmental and safety lobbies, as well as to obfuscate the power losses caused by emissions-control equipment.
SAE net ratings, while more accurate than gross ratings, still represent the engine's power at the flywheel. Contrary to some reports, it does not measure power at the drive wheels.
Because SAE gross ratings were applied liberally, at best, there is no precise conversion from gross to net. Comparison of gross and net ratings for unchanged engines shows a variance of anywhere from 40 to 150 horsepower. The Chrysler 426 Hemi, for example, in 1971 carried a 425 hp gross rating and a net rating of 350 hp.[6]

I still don't understand why they state it as *FLYWHEEL HP* unless they want to keep it the *standard* SAE NET as stated above. They should NOT leave it that way, unless they *mean it*..it makes no sense Why not simply change the wording to WHP...or at least REMOVE the wording FLYWHEEL HP

[RON]

i only treat poeple the way im treated, and church's told me all pullies are different, its only appox psi, they said they all read different with the aplication, plus his boost gauge may not be rite a 1/2 psi or so off..........

True about the gauge....but pulleys of the SAME size in this application will make the same boost. All you need to know is the diameter. It's possible, however, that the diameters are measured DIFFERENTLY! It's not taken from the outer lip, but from the ridges of the grooves in the pulley. The original table of pulley sizes (and boost produced) that TRD produced is the *bible* as far as I'm concerned.

[jetbtkng]

well ron call them, i want to know 2............