ClioSport.net
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.
Went to renault today with the 129
- Thread starter Eckascliovalver
- Start date
-
- Tags
- renault
Exige S1 + Honda S1
Astra van,Mk1 nova
Well very pleased with the results
Came out -
185 185 190 175
so i dont think there are any problems there
as i said the back box has made a hell of a differance, they checked the fueling system and its all ok, must be exhaust related
Came out -
185 185 190 175
so i dont think there are any problems there
as i said the back box has made a hell of a differance, they checked the fueling system and its all ok, must be exhaust relatedWell very pleased with the results
Came out -
185 185 190 175
so i dont think there are any problems there
Bet your releived now ?
Heres hoping they never made figures up.
Lol
i would have a look at the 175 clyinder as that (in my eyes) is considerably lower than the others (was it the clyinder furthest away from the TB by chance?)
you don't pull 130bhp because of an exhaust, i still say its timing (highly possible) or a broken rocker (very very rare)
you don't pull 130bhp because of an exhaust, i still say its timing (highly possible) or a broken rocker (very very rare)
Astra van,Mk1 nova
The guy said the first time he did the 175 cylinder it was 180 :S he said it was nothing to worry about:S Had a chat with another guy about it and he said it would'nt be timing as the compession test wouldnt have come out so high, so i really dont know now, ive booked it back on the rollers for the 15th of march to see what differene the exhaust has made, im getting a wee bit p1ssed off now as im wanting it fixed but not willing to pay for it as i bought it like that
for some more referance this was the way the results came out for each cylinder
4 3 2 1
185 185 190 175
As i said before the guys said it was nothing to worry about but now i dont know what to think:dapprove:
R5GTT, 2L turbo
Rolling roads are notoriously innacurate things guys, but agreed, thats a big drop. If you really have regained 40hp then you'll certainly feel it.
When you did your 16.1 SQM, what was your trap speed ? Trap speed and vehicle weight will tell you how much power you have at the wheels, often more accuratly than an RR. Compare you trap speed with the book time for a standard 172. If its substantially slower then there is a problem.
For 130hp I'd expect a standard weight 172 run through at about 85mph, assuming a good clean run. If all's working I think they trap at about 92-94mph, don't they ? Forget how good the launch and ET were, they make very little difference to the trap speed. Trap speed is power:weight pretty much, near as damnit.
When you did your 16.1 SQM, what was your trap speed ? Trap speed and vehicle weight will tell you how much power you have at the wheels, often more accuratly than an RR. Compare you trap speed with the book time for a standard 172. If its substantially slower then there is a problem.
For 130hp I'd expect a standard weight 172 run through at about 85mph, assuming a good clean run. If all's working I think they trap at about 92-94mph, don't they ? Forget how good the launch and ET were, they make very little difference to the trap speed. Trap speed is power:weight pretty much, near as damnit.
Astra van,Mk1 nova
Yeah this is true
i was going thro at the end about 89 mph iirc wasnt giving it big licks of the line,
But there was other 172 cups there doing 15.1 1/4 miles
R5GTT, 2L turbo
unless you drive like miss daisy shifts don't make alot of difference either, they make more difference to ET. trust me please, I've been drag racing for a long time
again, look at the other people's trap speeds, forget their ET's. ET's are about grip and driver ability. Trap speed is about power and weight. (ok, there are other minor variables like drag and such like but its a little beyond the scope of this post).
89mph was down on power then, perhaps now when you return to the strip you'll be greeted with a 90mph+ trap speed
again, look at the other people's trap speeds, forget their ET's. ET's are about grip and driver ability. Trap speed is about power and weight. (ok, there are other minor variables like drag and such like but its a little beyond the scope of this post).
89mph was down on power then, perhaps now when you return to the strip you'll be greeted with a 90mph+ trap speed
R5GTT, 2L turbo
agreed, but perhaps not to the extent of 129hp. 89mph trap indicates to me that he had more power than that. Any seasoned drag racer will usually be able to estimate wheel HP from a vehicle weight and trap, btw
Its a topic I'm very much interested in.
Exige S1 + Honda S1
so basically you are saying the rollers were wrong? but what about everyone else figures?
I dont think trap times are as accurate as putting it on the same rollers as other 172s and comparing them. There is far too many variables like tyre type, shifting(at what rpm and speed), weather conditions (wet and windy compared to hot and dry)
I dont think trap times are as accurate as putting it on the same rollers as other 172s and comparing them. There is far too many variables like tyre type, shifting(at what rpm and speed), weather conditions (wet and windy compared to hot and dry)
R5GTT, 2L turbo
no no really, trap speed is a pretty constant thing, trust me. As I say, shifting makes not alot of difference. Again, tyre type from hard road tyres to full on low-pressure drag tyres makes maybe a few MPH difference max. if not trust me then speak to other experienced racers please
but yes, I've seen lots of RR's that are plain wrong, honestly. My own car used to generate anything from 240hp to 419hp depending on how the tyres gripped in the rollers, how straight the car was sat on the rollers and so on. anyway, they're extreeme cases maybe. I have no doubt power was a bit low but I do not think the car had only 129hp, thats all I'm trying to say
Maybe 150hp, that would explain the slighly low trap speed.Chris
no no really, trap speed is a pretty constant thing, trust me. As I say, shifting makes not alot of difference. Again, tyre type from hard road tyres to full on low-pressure drag tyres makes maybe a few MPH difference max. if not trust me then speak to other experienced racers please
but yes, I've seen lots of RR's that are plain wrong, honestly. My own car used to generate anything from 240hp to 419hp depending on how the tyres gripped in the rollers, how straight the car was sat on the rollers and so on. anyway, they're extreeme cases maybe. I have no doubt power was a bit low but I do not think the car had only 129hp, thats all I'm trying to say
Chris
Car was off the rollers and then retested! So that invalidates your points!
if you went from 240 - 419bhp!!!!! WTF? Who's rollers were they!
M
mini-valver
Lol^^
He's right though, trap speed is far more accurate than any Rolling road.
He's right though, trap speed is far more accurate than any Rolling road.
GDI's?
lol. Even there not 200bhp off.
Astra van,Mk1 nova
everyone has valid points here but imo the rollers cant have been off, my car was tested 3 times with exactly the same results, same curves on the graph etc there were many there to witness that:dapprove:
but its the mixed opinions about the cylinder psi thats confusing me:S some people are saying it might be a problem, some are saying its fine.
As said before in many a post the fueling system was checked it was fine.Psi seems to be fine, and the exhaust was changed, the only other things it could be imo is either the cat being restricted? or the open IK which i will be changing for the next rolling road on the 15th
Im just really stuck here now and dont know who to believe, dont know if the mechanic is speaking sh1t or what
Cant wait until the 15th now and seeing how the clio get on with the airbox back on and the proper exhaust fitted
but its the mixed opinions about the cylinder psi thats confusing me:S some people are saying it might be a problem, some are saying its fine.
As said before in many a post the fueling system was checked it was fine.Psi seems to be fine, and the exhaust was changed, the only other things it could be imo is either the cat being restricted? or the open IK which i will be changing for the next rolling road on the 15th
Im just really stuck here now and dont know who to believe, dont know if the mechanic is speaking sh1t or what
Cant wait until the 15th now and seeing how the clio get on with the airbox back on and the proper exhaust fitted
GDI's?
lol. Even there not 200bhp off.
they can when its turbo'd and keep lighting the wheels up on the rollers
R5GTT, 2L turbo
I'm sorry for airing my opinion, I think I'm likely to get nowhere with it so I'll retire from the conversation after these words.
The inescapable truth is that you certainly had more than 129hp to make an 89mph pass on the drag strip, unless you car is very light weight. I really do not care if people believe the RR or not, *I* know that they are hideously innacurate, often too. just because its repeatable does not mean to say that the RR operator inputted the required data correctly. For example - HP is calculated from torque at the wheels and RPM. Notice how the RR operator held your car at (typically) 3000rpm to calibrate his PC with your tacho ? If this is done innacuratly then the whole curve will be offset and HP readings are useless. Maybe your tacho is a tad off ? or if you were lucky he'd have strobed your ignition for an accurate sync. Then there's the whole transmission-loss guessing game that they do. You think they can really gauge loss accuratly measuring its coast-down ? I can tell you that isn't so accurate either. I've seen 20% transmission loss measured for a working JC5, unsuprisingly it whacked up the flywheel figure something wrotten. But who cares, I don't, but I know drag racing, and I know that it does not lie (often )
Yes, as matty says, turbo motors especially suffer because its pretty hard to be 100% sure you have no wheelspin. Often you can do a pull on a dyno and it'll look and sound great, but compare the RPM log from the car and RPM plotted by the dyno and they can differ, indicating some slip, be it from the tyres or clutch. I've been tuning cars with the help of dyno's for years, I know exactly how they work and hence their pitfalls.
Regarding the variation in my results, most of that is down to wheelspin and some of it down to plain old innacuracy of the dyno.
If anyone cares for my opinion, my advice would be to visit a hub dyno that insists on only dispensing wheel figures, like Thor. Its no accident that they only dispence wheel figures. They went out of their way to remove the flywheel estimation from their software.
Chris
The inescapable truth is that you certainly had more than 129hp to make an 89mph pass on the drag strip, unless you car is very light weight. I really do not care if people believe the RR or not, *I* know that they are hideously innacurate, often too. just because its repeatable does not mean to say that the RR operator inputted the required data correctly. For example - HP is calculated from torque at the wheels and RPM. Notice how the RR operator held your car at (typically) 3000rpm to calibrate his PC with your tacho ? If this is done innacuratly then the whole curve will be offset and HP readings are useless. Maybe your tacho is a tad off ? or if you were lucky he'd have strobed your ignition for an accurate sync. Then there's the whole transmission-loss guessing game that they do. You think they can really gauge loss accuratly measuring its coast-down ? I can tell you that isn't so accurate either. I've seen 20% transmission loss measured for a working JC5, unsuprisingly it whacked up the flywheel figure something wrotten. But who cares, I don't, but I know drag racing, and I know that it does not lie (often
)Yes, as matty says, turbo motors especially suffer because its pretty hard to be 100% sure you have no wheelspin. Often you can do a pull on a dyno and it'll look and sound great, but compare the RPM log from the car and RPM plotted by the dyno and they can differ, indicating some slip, be it from the tyres or clutch. I've been tuning cars with the help of dyno's for years, I know exactly how they work and hence their pitfalls.
Regarding the variation in my results, most of that is down to wheelspin and some of it down to plain old innacuracy of the dyno.
If anyone cares for my opinion, my advice would be to visit a hub dyno that insists on only dispensing wheel figures, like Thor. Its no accident that they only dispence wheel figures. They went out of their way to remove the flywheel estimation from their software.
Chris
Perhaps your inlet cam is not phasing.
With regard to the compression test, this is going to be a dead end. No garage is going to investigate it FOC, and for you to do it will cost ££.
Sure you'd be annoyed if it was a new engine that was just run in and it had a 15psi difference, but realistically, it's within 10%, and seeing as no one seems to know what it should be, what would you be looking for?
With regard to the compression test, this is going to be a dead end. No garage is going to investigate it FOC, and for you to do it will cost ££.
Sure you'd be annoyed if it was a new engine that was just run in and it had a 15psi difference, but realistically, it's within 10%, and seeing as no one seems to know what it should be, what would you be looking for?
Astra van,Mk1 nova
not a bad shout about the 3rd gear run, i will try and find out if anyone can do it, there are a few members in the Aberdeen area
not a bad shout about the 3rd gear run, i will try and find out if anyone can do it, there are a few members in the Aberdeen area
With who ? ?
You'll kill my FF with yer Cup
P.m me your mobile number if your up for it
Astra van,Mk1 nova
never thought of that, would that not be detected on the compression test, sorry if thats a silly question
Astra van,Mk1 nova
not a bad shout about the 3rd gear run, i will try and find out if anyone can do it, there are a few members in the Aberdeen area
With who ? ?
You'll kill my FF with yer Cup
P.m me your mobile number if your up for it
i wouldnt think so mate unless you have 100 bhp :lolup: pm'd btw
Gaz_
ClioSport Club Member
Extreme mode
never thought of that, would that not be detected on the compression test, sorry if thats a silly question
You tool, i told you that ages ago in another thread
Astra van,Mk1 nova
never thought of that, would that not be detected on the compression test, sorry if thats a silly question
You tool, i told you that ages ago in another thread
lol:rasp:
if the timing was out would i not notice it in the way the car drives, I have noticed it in my other cars just thought the clio might be the same?
Astra van,Mk1 nova
Well guys your not going to believe this but................ got my clio cup rolling roaded again at falkland performance
ran a dismal 129bhp before so thats when this thread started, after alot of discusssion i had the back box changed as it was clearly a restriction and the car decatted, checks were done on the engine and it all turned out A ok
so to my delight i ran 170.6 bhp today
who would have thought a dodgy exhaust system could affect a car this much
anyways chuffed to bits now , cheers for all the intrest in this topic
few pics of the much improved results
what a differance there is between the 2 graphs
and the figures
ran a dismal 129bhp before
so thats when this thread started, after alot of discusssion i had the back box changed as it was clearly a restriction and the car decatted, checks were done on the engine and it all turned out A okso to my delight i ran 170.6 bhp today
who would have thought a dodgy exhaust system could affect a car this much
anyways chuffed to bits now , cheers for all the intrest in this topic
few pics of the much improved results
what a differance there is between the 2 graphs
and the figures
