If you're loosing that much power due to the driveline, you may want to find
an alternative solution before putting anything else on the vehicle. Also,
let me clarify this: the 200HP mark that I gave was a very general example.
400HP FW and 270HP RW?? That's a 130HP loss and not even worth the money
anymore. As I said, if you're loosing that much HP through the driveline,
you've got a problem. Normally there shouldn't be more than a 20-30% max
loss.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dakota-truck@buffnet4.buffnet.net
[mailto:owner-dakota-truck@buffnet4.buffnet.net]On Behalf Of James
Harmon
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 1999 11:59 PM
To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
Subject: Re: DML: Rear Wheel Horsepower
To answer a query about rear wheel hp and flywheel hp, you loose about 40%
due to
the drive train. factor that out from the 245 hp for the 360 engine and
that
gives you around 166 hp (with 68% efficiency). The stock 318 runs only
around 153
hp at the rear wheels. This is the reality and not the DC hype. That is
why some
people are not too impressed with a 225 +17 hp at the rear wheels for my
truck.
That is until they realize what it really means - 355 hp at the flywheel.
And
that is without a supercharger. Our eventual goal is to get around 270 hp
at the
rear wheels or almost 400 hp at the flywheel.
Jim
Bernd D. Ratsch wrote:
> I was mainly giving a average example. I personally don't know what the
> rearwheel HP is of an R/T...but it should be above 200 IMHO.
>
> At 03:15 PM 06/24/1999 -0400, you wrote:
> > Bernd wrote "Doesn't that sound a little bit low for the HP
gains??
> >The average gains from the Paxton's are 40%. Now take a (low powered)
engine
> >at 200HP and
> >that gives you an 80HP boost. (The R/T's should be well above 200HP.) "
> >
> > Bernd, are you talking, at the rear wheels ? 200 hp..
> > Ted O.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:14:29 EDT