Re: Rear Wheel Horsepower

From: Sam Parthemer (rtdkota@yahoo.com)
Date: Fri Jun 25 1999 - 19:01:14 EDT


--- Aaron <acolona@i-55.com> wrote:
> manual or auto?
>
>

RT stock - 250 hp at crank, = 185-190 hp at the
wheels throught the auto tranmission (which is different than the auto
transmission of a 5.2L) for
a 24% loss throught the drivetrain. Now, on the
otherhand, a 5 spd tranmission (NV3500) experiences only a 18-20% loss
(some claim 15%, but from my testing, that was a little low). So for a
5.2L with 230 at the crank with a 5 spd, you'd expect around
184-188 hp. Very close to that of a 5.9L with the auto tranny. Now, a
5.2L auto vs. a 5.9L auto will be
a bit further apart than the NV3500 was. Even with that close figure,
the 5.9L still will out perform based on it's higher torque figures.
Taking it a step further, the 5.9L seems to 'uncork' better than the
5.2L with similar mods, which makes the comparison widen for the 5.9.

My '95 SLT 5.2, w/NV3500 ran a best of 15.321 @ 90.8 mph, and put down
216 hp & 289 ft... My '99 RT weighs in about 200# lighter than my '95
did, yet does the 1/4 mi about 6/10th quicker, and 2.5 mph faster.
Guess I'd better get it dyno'd to see where the numbers are with it (to
the ground).

Sam '99 RT x 2

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:14:30 EDT