Clio 172 Rolling Road - BMC CDA Test!!!

[Lagerlout]

People fitting this stuff to a 182 could have saved a few squids and got a 182Cup, and ended up with the same bhp/ton eh?

It's the social stigma that goes with it though Roy.... No onelikes being known as a cheapskate. :clown:

 

[Munson]

Lmfao

 

[Fred@BTM]

the thing with rolling roads is you are running the car at say 100mph in 4th gear STATIONARY

no way can 2 fans simulate the same airflow that you would get at 100mph on the road

 

[Phill1978]

the thing with rolling roads is you are running the car at say 100mph in 4th gear STATIONARY

no way can 2 fans simulate the same airflow that you would get at 100mph on the road

agree, but people dont want extra power at 100mph, they want it accelarating upto that ammount using torque power which conversley the kits lose but gain in BHP terms so top end is fine but low end accelaration which is a slight flaw with the 172 (not so much the 182) is furher blunted by these kits it seems.

proving figures shouldnt be required by manctureres of these kits, they simply should not state any specific gain and should state "posible power gains" as a small side line to the main selling line "awesome race car type noise" etc..

 

[Fred@BTM]

figures sell products


the quickest cups on the 1/4mile all have vipers i believe

Christoper n' nichola 14.1
TimO 13.9
Lanky 13.6 (cheating)

 

[Dave.]

14.5 WITH bmc

 

[lee_cup]

BTW, the absolute value obtained (147.3 whp, 100% standard) is what I should expect for a 172 mk2???

maybe im just stupid, but i thought a 172 had more bhp than that?

 

[Ali]

13.7 With Nitruuus and an e-bay chip.

 

[bx16v]

maybe im just stupid, but i thought a 172 had more bhp than that?

172 hp (engine) - mechanical losses = 147.3 hp (wheels)

~13% losses