had the 172 rrd the other day

[tomtom172]

as above had the 172 rrd the other day and it made 173 bhp the only thing its had done is a panel filter and a caf just wanted to know what is the standard bhp on a 172 at the flywheel cause ive been told they are only like 160 odd cause the car does pull well 2 of my mates have 182 1ns a trophy and the other a cup both with upgraded exhaust and panel filters and i pull on them not much but at least 3 or 4 car lenths

 

[Fred@BTM]

what was the wheel power?

160-165 is about standard

 

[Russ_16v]

And breathe!

 

[Martin_172]

mine ran 173bhp with an ITG filter other wise standard too most that day ran 165ish

 

[mr bognor]

161 BHP @ Sussex R/R that was in std form .

 

[Marv-C]

What does a 197 make on average?

 

[Fred@BTM]

around 180-185 from memory

 

[Guvna!]

around 180-185 from memory

What did Renault do to the 197 that we cannot do to our 172/182's to hit 197ps?

Bit of a silly question but technically I am not sure what the differences between the 182 and 197 are.

 

[Fred@BTM]

different head, higher comp slightly, different VVT setup, different inlet, different exhaust manifold and cats

 

[0-100mphin15sec]

Had mine ph2 172 dynoed. Varied between 171-176bhp at the fly on a few seperate occasions on different rollers. This was with just a cat-back zorst and the removal of the accoustic valve.
Mine does pull well

 

[Marv-C]

different head, higher comp slightly, different VVT setup, different inlet, different exhaust manifold and cats

So assuming 197ps = 194bhp, the 197 is 10-15bhp down. Do you think this is reasonable? I can't understand why Renualt consistantly over estimate the power of their engines.

From a real-world perspective, the car is as fast as it is and the question I ask myself is am I happy with that. Answer is yes, the car is what I expect it to be. I think its quick but have never said it was seriously fast. I didn't buy the car based on its straight line speed.

 

[Guvna!]

Surely 194bhp from a 2.0l naturally aspirated engine is nearing the limit? I can't think of many N/A 2.0l running over 200bhp.

It wouldnt suprise me if they went for a turbo lump next time. Maybe a 1.6 or something.

 

[Marv-C]

Surely 194bhp from a 2.0l naturally aspirated engine is nearing the limit? I can't think of many N/A 2.0l running over 200bhp.

It wouldnt suprise me if they went for a turbo lump next time. Maybe a 1.6 or something.

My CTR did what it said on the tin. My 197 is supposed to have the same power, according to official figures but doesn't. I'm not cross or anything. I bought the car knowing all of this and still love it.

S2000 = 240bhp from 2.0 NA engine

 

[mr bognor]

Just a point but why are Renault power outputs different from what they say ???

 

[Russ_16v]

Its an estimate mate, they cant be sure of every individual engine output

 

[Marv-C]

Its an estimate mate, they cant be sure of every individual engine output

Therefore some engines should be under, some on the money and maybe some over. Reading threads on here suggests that almost all are under by about 5% :S

 

[Tav]

The reason for the 172/182's being under is often the poor quality casting on the inlet manifold. My 182 made 179BHP which is right on the money. That was on an RR day where every other car Honda/VW/Subaru etc. etc either made stock power or was slightly under the expected figures.

 

[tyranical]

if i remember correctly, they call them 172/182/197/200 and that is in PS not BHP, that accounts for some of the difference.