FAO Ben J - Reply to BHP question

[Lee]

I thought Id start a new thread to reply Ben rather than continue to take over the new member thread.

Quote: Originally posted by Ben j on 23 September 2003


hello there new peeps!



Lee ? ure car only has 158 bhp?

According to the Northampton Motorsport Rolling Road yes. All 172s that ran had between 158 and 162 bhp @FW not just my car, all 172s. Looking at the Rolling Road results in the members section the Wilcox rolling road looks very generous.

Slugger and telford_mike showed 168bhp and 158bhp at the wheels respectively on the Wilcox Rolling road. That was with very minor mods, but I cant see them producing around 190bhp @fw.

I reckon the variation between RRs is pretty dam huge to be honest. No way Renault are THAT bad.

I believe RRs are only useful if, like roamer you are setting a car up and use the same road before and after. Its all relative then.

As Ive said elsewhere, I think the 1/4 mile is a more useful benchmark as far as Im concerned. Of course the driver is a large part of that.

Im sure there will be some other opinions on this, so lets here em guys/girls.

 

[McBunny]

no your right mate i think their figures were a bit pesamistic but hey ho remember the 172 is only supposed to make 166

 

[Lee]

A few silly numbers dont stop the enjoyment of driving the car.

 

[McBunny]

whats more important is the torque curves

 

[Cheeky_Chappie]

Doesnt the Aircon sap a bit of the power, even when it is off?? this may be why all 172s maybe a bit low on the power...

 

[rt172]

We had a Cup, a mk1 172 and a MK2 172 on the rollers on the same day at Nobles in Chesterfield. All put out 162 at the flywheel.

 

[Adams_16v]

yep, and pauls old valver engine put out mailto:127@fly">127@fly. 2 weeks before it pushed mailto:140@fly">140@fly on another set of rollers!

 

[jetsetjimbo]

So basically they all kick out pretty much the same power and its just the RRs thatre inaccurate?

 

[McBunny]

yup but some torque curves are different !!!! so explains why some feel faster than others

 

[Ben j]

i got RR at 2 different far apart places and got same results twice so im happy with that but i got 154 at fly in my valver! and it weighs far less than a 172



then again green is fastest colour

 

[derv]

ive been to 2 rolling roads, first one got 112 bhp at the wheels, second got 99 bhp at the wheels. no changes made to car. dunno if the wheels might have been slipping a bit on the second one, cus they had trouble strapping it down as the tracking is out.

 

[jimbo]

yeah green is faster, but my red MR2 is still gonna wh00p yo arse Ben

 

[Ben j]

ROTFLMAO at jim

 

[Turkish]

ben is jimbo your mate who you were trying to work out what car he was getting ?

 

[1.2Tone]

i thought the 172 meant 172bhp @ the crank not the rear wheel. or am i thinking about bikes again?

 

[Turkish]

lol, 172bhp atrw on a bike means stupid fast

 

[Ben j]

Quote: Originally posted by 172loony on 24 September 2003

ben is jimbo your mate who you were trying to work out what car he was getting ?

yep

 

[jimbo]

so thats how you know what cars were all geting eh ben, you ask ppl on here

and im glad you find it so funny im sure youll be smiling all the way to the garage when we race

 

[Turkish]

nah he didnt put it on here he was trying to suss it out at trax while we were sat watching the nutters in m3s rag round the track

 

[jimbo]

lol ah right, thats the day when i gave him all the clues

i told him "mid-engined, rear wheel drive, 2 seater" which is exactly what MR2 stands for, and he still cudnt guess

 

[Ben j]

Quote: Originally posted by jimbo on 24 September 2003


and im glad you find it so funny im sure youll be smiling all the way to the garage when we race

i take it were racing to a garage? and cus ill be there first ill be smiling?

 

[jimbo]

nah, were racing away from it, the recovery truck isnt tho

face it, your valvers seen its best time to make way for the MR2