Congrats to DanPl6 on cracking 200bhp (rs2 + 197 cams)

[Flat Eric]

FLOL.

 

[Chip-mk1]

Some smart guys over at geekmapped.com but mostly with evos when it comes to ecu disassembly I have no idea

Yeah evos/scoobys/vauxhall z20let etc are all very well catered for but the F4R is just such a silly little quirky engine used in nothing anyone spends any real money on that it just doesnt interest people enough sadly I think mate!

 

[mi16chris]

Yeah evos/scoobys/vauxhall z20let etc are all very well catered for but the F4R is just such a silly little quirky engine used in nothing anyone spends any real money on that it just doesnt interest people enough sadly I think mate!

If i ever come across any thing il let u know , ps if u ever need hks f con v , v pro ,sz and a software let me know I have some cracked stuff here lol

 

[arctic]

Nice torque figure...

NOT!

 

[Chip-mk1]

Nice torque figure...

Some people can understand a curve, others can only read a peak figure, clearly you are one of the latter I guess mate?

Its not the torque figure itself that is nice mate, its how long it hangs onto it for that is nice.

Although not as long as people who dont like RS2 inlets can hang onto things for of course, dog with a bone and all that.

People who want a high peak figure to flash briefly up at 5 and a bit grand then be dead again by not long after 6k should NOT buy an RS2 ever mate, they are far better with the standard inlet if that is what they are into.

On the subject of metrics for performance I must say though I really cannot see the appeal in a high figure if it doesnt last long enough to be useable, personally I think we should quote the lowest the torque figure gets to anywhere from 5k-7500 as a measure of performance, whoever has the highest for that is the one really winning.

 

[Chip-mk1]

If i ever come across any thing il let u know , ps if u ever need hks f con v , v pro ,sz and a software let me know I have some cracked stuff here lol

Lol, thanks for the offer mate but have plenty of people I know with all that sort of thing anyway. I even have an evoscan knocking around somewhere myself although cant remember where as its so long since I last saw it.

 

[arctic]

Its not the torque figure itself that is nice mate, its how long it hangs onto it for that is nice.

Although not as long as people who dont like RS2 inlets can hang onto things for of course, dog with a bone and all that.

People who want a high peak figure to flash briefly up at 5 and a bit grand then be dead again by not long after 6k should NOT buy an RS2 ever mate, they are far better with the standard inlet if that is what they are into.

On the subject of metrics for performance I must say though I really cannot see the appeal in a high figure if it doesnt last long enough to be useable, personally I think we should quote the lowest the torque figure gets to anywhere from 5k-7500 as a measure of performance, whoever has the highest for that is the one really winning.

Brilliant.

 

[Chip-mk1]

Brilliant.

It is indeed, but no doubt still wasted on the likes of you, lol

 

[arctic]

It is indeed, but no doubt still wasted on the likes of you, lol

What are you presupposing chippy? "Lol."

 

[Russ_16v]

Dan's is the first rs2'd car I've driven and I've always kept quiet about the rs2 for the very reason I've never experienced it.

Now I have, it is a very odd experience - as I've said before in this thread, it is 100% different to a normal f4r, feeling more powerful and delivering power so smoothly - as chip has said, if you like the kick, don't expect it with an rs2 - but what will get you is the pull as the revs get high - it reminds me of a wankel in its power delivery, very linear

 

[Chip-mk1]

What are you presupposing chippy? "Lol."

That no matter how good an explanation of why anything other than a peak torque figure is important you are presented with, you still clearly wont understand it as you are so fixated on what that number itself is, so I'm probably wasting my time trying to educate you on that matter.

 

[Chip-mk1]

Dan's is the first rs2'd car I've driven and I've always kept quiet about the rs2 for the very reason I've never experienced it.

Now I have, it is a very odd experience - as I've said before in this thread, it is 100% different to a normal f4r, feeling more powerful and delivering power so smoothly - as chip has said, if you like the kick, don't expect it with an rs2 - but what will get you is the pull as the revs get high - it reminds me of a w**kel in its power delivery, very linear

The standard cams and RS2 are actually even more linear than the 197s Russ.
To me the 197s actually feel subtley like every extra 1000rpm the engine just pulls harder than the one before relentlessly all the way to the limiter, like the more you rev it the more it wants it, its not a massive effect but is noticeable if you drive the two back to back, where as RS2 and standard cams it just pulls exactly the same from 3k-7K or so without that increased urgency at high rpm.
I think for a pure road car that never sees the track at all, I would recommend just the RS2 and not the cams as well as its at such high rpm that the 197 cams start to outperform the 172 ones anyway (like literally approaching 7K or so)

 

[Michael Woodford MST]

I wonder of the "torque fans" actually know what torque is and how the BHP is calculated using torque.

 

[Chip-mk1]

I wonder if the "torque fans" actually know what torque is and how the BHP is calculated using torque.

Indeed, BHP is a combination of both torque AND rpm, and to make good progress its that combination that is all important.

I love torque, but thats the point I love it so much I dont want it to appear briefly and then f*ck off again

 

[Dan@SJM]

Another way of putting it is I now match an EP3 type R's torque and power

 

[Michael Woodford MST]

Your quicker than one too lol

 

[JonC219]

Brilliant result Dan, so is the plan to enjoy it now or will you be back for more?

 

[R-Sport.]

Does this have the Grp N tool as well that James was working on/developing- to do with timing?

S

 

[Michael Woodford MST]

Does this have the Grp N tool as well that James was working on/developing- to do with timing?

S

No mate.

It has my own figures.

Mike

 

[v16daf]

Excellent result! Always knew the haters would come along in this thread. It's such a shame members **** off such a good product

 

[Aydon182]

Someone let me drive they're RS2 Clio, ill have the final say on this. :lolup:

 

[pbufton]

Needless to say though many will be keen to look into this product further, with a view to buying (including myself) as it produces good gains while still retaining the good mpg figures

 

[Tony Hunter]

Nice results Dan, well done Chippy Chip.

I've always liked the rs2 product.

 

[pbufton]

Someone let me drive they're RS2 Clio, ill have the final say on this. :lolup:

This. :cheers:

 

[Michael Woodford MST]

Mine will be 197/Rs2 till Saturday!

After that the same engine on the same dyno will have 438's and bodies and we can see if the extra £1500-£2000 is worth it!

 

[imprezaworks]

Interesting

 

[cupkiller]

G

 

[imprezaworks]

Lol what?

 

[v16daf]

Mine will be 197/Rs2 till Saturday!

After that the same engine on the same dyno will have 438's and bodies and we can see if the extra £1500-£2000 is worth it!

You sir are a legend!

 

[cupkiller]

Oh nothing..

 

[imprezaworks]

I saw the post lol

 

[cupkiller]

Err..I was mistaken..
Glad you didn't quote it. lol

 

[imprezaworks]

I did think that mate

 

[Michael Woodford MST]

I did think that mate

Going to share it with the rest of us?

 

[imprezaworks]

Nah mate, just a misprint.

 

[v16daf]

Nah mate, just a misprint.

Lol, my little eyes saw it as well

 

[imprezaworks]

Ssssshhh lol

 

[Kelv]

I wonder of the "torque fans" actually know what torque is and how the BHP is calculated using torque.

Mike, one for you then buddy.
if I said one of my cars was 440lbft when it last made it onto a set of rollers, what BHP would you suspect it of vaguely being?

if I have miss-interpreted your comment then im sorry mate.

 

[Sir_Dave]

Mike, one for you then buddy.
if I said one of my cars was 440lbft when it last made it onto a set of rollers, what BHP would you suspect it of vaguely being?

if I have miss-interpreted your comment then im sorry mate.

Found this: http://www.nsxprime.com/FAQ/Miscellaneous/TorqueHPSpeed.htm

And this:

How Rolling Roads Work
Before we consider how a rolling road measures power output, it helps to understand what we are measuring. We often talk about bhp (brake horse power) as if it was something that existed, rather than the reality of it being a convenient number - which we have calculated. Bhp is a rate of doing work and in order to do work you need to put in some effort and then you need to see a result for that effort. The effort is, in our case, the torque generated by the engine. The result is the distance moved by the flywheel (expressed in rpm). The simple formula for calculating bhp is based on 33,000ft lbs of work being done in one minute. This amount of work is regarded as one horsepower. The formula is: HP = Torque x rpm over 5252. From this you can see that when the rpm is at 5252 the HP and the torque are the same. If the power and torque lines do not cross here on the graph then someone is telling you porkies! We use the term "Brake" horsepower because the engine torque is measured on a device called an Engine Brake, or dynamometer as it is more correctly known. Dyno's measure torque at a given rpm and then we calculate the bhp from there. With an engine bolted to a dynamometer we take the torque reading directly from the flywheel and without any form of gearbox.

According to that, if you have the rpm the lb ft was calculated at, you should be able to work out the bhp.

 

[Kelv]

Dave, I know what power it made, I was more curious at how Mike would work it out!?
im not trying to catch him out as I have no idea how you would calculate it, I just hoped Mike would reply and say you should have XXX power figure and shock me by being pretty much correct

ill pull up the graph now.