so basically what your saying is, everyone should have gotten manuals and
not auto's or r/t's. that's what I thought, I'd take my 5.2 manual over a
r/t any day. I believe the manuals have won another contest. Let me go get
my armor proof suit on now for all the replies.
----- Original Message -----
From: Bernd D. Ratsch <bernd@texas.net>
To: <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
Sent: Friday, June 25, 1999 8:02 AM
Subject: RE: DML: Rear Wheel Horsepower
>
> 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