.:HSTuners::

nonovurbizniz · 05-23-2003, 02:14 PM

the math is right... it's just not taking into consideration the parasitic loss at higher rpms... it's just a simple use of hp= torque X rpm... which is a more than valid equation...

the reason the numbers are a LITTLE screwy is because I rounded to thousandths...

but overall that is a VERY accurate display of the hp of both engines through the rpm range. at most it's +/- 3hp. the upper and lower numbers are a little off due to mechanical loss differences...

05-23-2003, 02:14 PM	#1
nonovurbizniz Registered User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: ECUSA Age: 48 Posts: 2,693	the math is right... it's just not taking into consideration the parasitic loss at higher rpms... it's just a simple use of hp= torque X rpm... which is a more than valid equation... the reason the numbers are a LITTLE screwy is because I rounded to thousandths... but overall that is a VERY accurate display of the hp of both engines through the rpm range. at most it's +/- 3hp. the upper and lower numbers are a little off due to mechanical loss differences... __________________ I am an A$$hole... take anything I say to heart at YOUR OWN RISK...

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode