ClioSport.net

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.

Rolling road result

Car  Clio 182 Cup
So I bought a 182 for track days and thought before I start spending money on it I'll stick it on the rolling road see what it's making...

The car to my knowledge just has a decat and full miltek system.

It rolled 203 Bhp

I'm not sure what's actually average and where it should be? I've been told to be pushing 200bhp in a clio 172/182 is where the ITB's and cams etc are so?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_8501.webp
    IMG_8501.webp
    192.3 KB · Views: 282
  • IMG_8503.webp
    IMG_8503.webp
    224 KB · Views: 272
Place in bromsgrove TTP performance, it was done for me as a favour as he doesn't usually dyno just random cars.
 
If the car has just got what you say, it won't be 203. If it is then you need a thread (sticky) just for your car.
 
C5EDC703-79F6-4E36-A33C-1551D20FE139_zpsulytmww1.jpg.html

This is why I'm saying it may have had previous stuff done then perhaps.. if it's that rare/ridiculous to get near the dyno run I did with what I have on it.. ‍♀️
 
Don't wish to piss on your chips but I have seen many 1*2s on rollers and with just those mods you will be nowhere near 200 ! did he give you a wheel figure that will be more accurate and if it makes more than 150 atw that's a great result .
 
Am I reading the graph right?

It's making 180-200lb/ft torque through a good deal of the rev range???
 
Its m

Its more than 20%...
If we assume 15% then the figure is actually 187bhp which is a little more realistic.

163 vs 203 BHP

40BHP difference

20% of 200 is 40

I'm sure you see how I came to my conclusion
 
Yes but your conclusion is wrong because you are working the wrong way.

Whilst I see what you're getting at there (20% of 203 (162.4 to be precise) as apposed to 120% of 163 (195.6 to be precise))

My point still stands that it's a grossly over inflated figure for a transmission loss on a FWD car. You're just being pedantic and trying to make it appear that i have an inferior intellectual capacity vs yourself, over a minor approximation.

I can do maffs, me mush
 
only just looked at the pics and i don't know what's worse, the way it's strapped down or the cement mixer in front of it??
 
We're in 2017 and there are still people saying their near standard 1*2 made 200hp+ on the rolling road. Strewth.
 
Back
Top