All finished! - Page 2

_Nathan_ · 03-04-2012, 12:31 AM

Lovely curve!

The Gorilla · 03-04-2012, 02:37 AM

Hi,

I am a little confused and might
be reading this incorrectly.

Dyno shows 268 lb Torque with
380 BHP ?

Std S54 according to BMW which
is more than likely Bench Dyno figures,
nothing attached so very little parasitic loss,
is quoted at 343 bhp with 269 lb Torque [365 Nm].

CSL is 360 Bhp and Torque goes up to 370Nm]

However many S54'S /CSL's do make the quoted figures.

How did you gain near on 40 BHP, over a 10%
engine power gain, but nothing in real terms
on the engine Torque ?

Just very curious.

Regards,

The Gorilla.

_Nathan_ · 03-04-2012, 11:02 AM

There is no mathematical requirement for the peak torque figure to increase to gain higher peak bhp figure though, just need to increase torque in the higher reaches of the rev range?

DuncanR · 03-04-2012, 11:36 AM

Popcorn time !

The Gorilla · 03-04-2012, 12:55 PM

Hi,

Quote-

''There is no mathematical requirement for the
peak torque figure to increase to gain higher peak bhp figure though,
just need to increase torque in the higher reaches of the rev range?''

Nathan- Agreed there is no 'Mathematical Calculation'' but the
figures are showing less Torque for more power.

The Dyno Print out as I am reading it and I could
be wrong, is that the engine in question makes
Less Torque yet More Power than a CSL's ''std figures'',
and I am very curious how you do that on a S54,
given the Torque figures in question and the fact
that the S54 is an Under Square engine ?

Got it this is an April 1st Engine thats how `!!!!!!!

Duncan- Got to try and get the ''Share'' price
up somehow !!

Regards,

The Gorilla.

Ha! Ha! Ha! Very Good ,CantFind1

_Nathan_ · 03-04-2012, 01:31 PM

Is it showing less torque at 8100 rpm though? Peak torque figure is meaningless, if you can make more torque higher up the rev range with cams for example you'll get more power without having to increase the peak torque figure in the lower rev range?

We know that:

power = (torque * rpm) / 5252

Therefore

(power * 5252) / torque = rpm

Looking at that graph at max power torque looks to be around 245 therefore

(380 * 5252) / 245 = rpm = 8145 which seems a sensible RPM - enough to suggest that the power figure is accurate for the measured torque and that the power figures on screen shot haven't been doctored (not saying that the torque has been accurately measured though, but the rolling road debate is one for another time

)

Having met CantFind1 I don't think he is the type to claim silly figures for a simple remap for example but I know this engine has had more work than that...

The Gorilla · 03-04-2012, 02:35 PM

Hi,

Quote-

'' if you can make more torque higher up the rev range....''

Nathan- that was my original point its making the 'same'
Torque as a std S54, so where does the
Power come from ?

Regards,

The Gorilla.

_Nathan_ · 03-04-2012, 03:06 PM

My CSL doesn't make 245 lb/ft at 8150 rpm, if it did then it'd have 380 bhp

The Gorilla · 03-04-2012, 04:14 PM

Hi,

Quote-

''My CSL doesn't make 245 lb/ft at 8150 rpm, if it did then it'd have 380 bhp''

Exactly.

The Dyno is showing an Under square engine making
circa 250 lb Torque from 1800 rpm to 8150 rpm,
How ?

Attached is the S65 Torque Curve.

Short Stroke Oversquare V8 making 414 BHP @ 8400 RPM,
so how does the S54 engine almost match it ?

Regards,

The Gorilla.

_Nathan_ · 03-04-2012, 04:26 PM

Maybe I'm missing something but the RPM scale isn't shown, it is missing off the bottom of the photo?

250lb ft at 1800 RPM would be 85 hp and that isn't shown on the graph below...

The point on the graph where there is 150bhp and 245lbft must be 3215 rpm, on the graph you posted the S65 is making 290lb at the same point.

03-04-2012, 12:31 AM	#11
_Nathan_ Driving it like I nicked it Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 2,099 Casino cash: $13060	Lovely curve! __________________ Nathan

03-04-2012, 11:02 AM	#13
_Nathan_ Driving it like I nicked it Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 2,099 Casino cash: $13060	There is no mathematical requirement for the peak torque figure to increase to gain higher peak bhp figure though, just need to increase torque in the higher reaches of the rev range? __________________ Nathan

03-04-2012, 11:36 AM	#14
DuncanR CSL Register Uber-poster! Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Olney, Bucks Posts: 3,735 Casino cash: $9984	Popcorn time ! __________________ " I use Gleaming Kleen.... for that new car look " I wish I had used - Race Data Systems - Motorsport Data Loggers forgive me Nathan !

03-04-2012, 12:55 PM	#15
The Gorilla S5, Sport Off, DSC M-track Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 740 Casino cash: $14401	Hi, Quote- ''There is no mathematical requirement for the peak torque figure to increase to gain higher peak bhp figure though, just need to increase torque in the higher reaches of the rev range?'' Nathan- Agreed there is no 'Mathematical Calculation'' but the figures are showing less Torque for more power. The Dyno Print out as I am reading it and I could be wrong, is that the engine in question makes Less Torque yet More Power than a CSL's ''std figures'', and I am very curious how you do that on a S54, given the Torque figures in question and the fact that the S54 is an Under Square engine ? Got it this is an April 1st Engine thats how `!!!!!!! Duncan- Got to try and get the ''Share'' price up somehow !! Regards, The Gorilla. Ha! Ha! Ha! Very Good ,CantFind1 Last edited by The Gorilla; 03-04-2012 at 01:03 PM. Reason: April Fool

03-04-2012, 01:31 PM	#16
_Nathan_ Driving it like I nicked it Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 2,099 Casino cash: $13060	Is it showing less torque at 8100 rpm though? Peak torque figure is meaningless, if you can make more torque higher up the rev range with cams for example you'll get more power without having to increase the peak torque figure in the lower rev range? We know that: power = (torque * rpm) / 5252 Therefore (power * 5252) / torque = rpm Looking at that graph at max power torque looks to be around 245 therefore (380 * 5252) / 245 = rpm = 8145 which seems a sensible RPM - enough to suggest that the power figure is accurate for the measured torque and that the power figures on screen shot haven't been doctored (not saying that the torque has been accurately measured though, but the rolling road debate is one for another time ) Having met CantFind1 I don't think he is the type to claim silly figures for a simple remap for example but I know this engine has had more work than that... __________________ Nathan

03-04-2012, 02:37 AM	#12
The Gorilla S5, Sport Off, DSC M-track Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 740 Casino cash: $14401	Hi, I am a little confused and might be reading this incorrectly. Dyno shows 268 lb Torque with 380 BHP ? Std S54 according to BMW which is more than likely Bench Dyno figures, nothing attached so very little parasitic loss, is quoted at 343 bhp with 269 lb Torque [365 Nm]. CSL is 360 Bhp and Torque goes up to 370Nm] However many S54'S /CSL's do make the quoted figures. How did you gain near on 40 BHP, over a 10% engine power gain, but nothing in real terms on the engine Torque ? Just very curious. Regards, The Gorilla.

03-04-2012, 02:35 PM	#17
The Gorilla S5, Sport Off, DSC M-track Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 740 Casino cash: $14401	Hi, Quote- '' if you can make more torque higher up the rev range....'' Nathan- that was my original point its making the 'same' Torque as a std S54, so where does the Power come from ? Regards, The Gorilla.

03-04-2012, 03:06 PM	#18
_Nathan_ Driving it like I nicked it Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 2,099 Casino cash: $13060	My CSL doesn't make 245 lb/ft at 8150 rpm, if it did then it'd have 380 bhp __________________ Nathan

03-04-2012, 04:26 PM	#20
_Nathan_ Driving it like I nicked it Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 2,099 Casino cash: $13060	Maybe I'm missing something but the RPM scale isn't shown, it is missing off the bottom of the photo? 250lb ft at 1800 RPM would be 85 hp and that isn't shown on the graph below... The point on the graph where there is 150bhp and 245lbft must be 3215 rpm, on the graph you posted the S65 is making 290lb at the same point. __________________ Nathan Last edited by _Nathan_; 03-04-2012 at 04:30 PM.