Solis#1730
ScarFace#1730
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2017
- Threads
- 12
- Messages
- 524
- Reaction score
- 593
- Location
- Miami
- Vehicle(s)
- Civic hatchback
Sponsored
Honda knows what it can make, they are purposely saying it makes less than it does.Is that was true then they would have amazingly achieved 5% drive-train loss, and VW would have achieved negative drive-train loss based on the GTI, and so has Nissan based on the Sentra NISMO dyno.
Either that or somehow everyones dynos have started to read high.
Thats my point.Honda knows what it can make, they are purposely saying it makes less than it does.
Honda knows what it can make, they are purposely saying it makes less than it does.
You are not allowed to underrate by more than 1% by SAE net standards.Thats my point.
Tell that to the 2003-04 Cobra, and all the new turbo Civics, and the GTI..... If they are all making at the wheel the same as their rating then how do you explain that other than they are rated at the wheel?You are not allowed to underrate by more than 1% by SAE net standards.
who knows? It depends on how you measure. If you do it at steady state, then it should be in the <5% range. I don't want to pay for SAE papers but this guy did:ok, so how much drivetrain loss would you say there realistically is? as low as 5%, or closer to the older losses at around 10-12%?
It could be hard to tell in my eyes, as I am not an "engin"eer, (LOL, that worked out) but transaxles should have less losses than an AWD or RWD system. Maybe they are using technology that is like a direct drive system, but that could be hard on an engine.
So, assuming a 15% drivetrain loss, if it was putting out 350hp at the crank, drop 15% is 297.5 at the wheels. But I read that usually no more than 1% for that SAE standard?The dyno numbers are really impressive. Honda is typically a conservative company, but that much difference in HP/torque surprises me. Hats off Honda
It isn't that there is less drivetrain loss. The CTR is simply making more power than the 306 HP rating from Honda. You can safely assume 12%-18% drivetrain loss on a FWD vehicle. That's why the normal benchmark is 15%.
I'll let you guys know Sorry for the babbling history lessons.
Admittedly, I know nothing about the SAE ratings and no more than 1 % standard you mentioned. What I do know: How much HP/Torque was actually measured on a dyno!So, assuming a 15% drivetrain loss, if it was putting out 350hp at the crank, drop 15% is 297.5 at the wheels. But I read that usually no more than 1% for that SAE standard?
It isn't wrong. You can do the math either way. Your numbers are just higher and I was trying to be more conservative Normally you come up with around 5 HP at the flywheel difference. If the bigger numbers is your style, why notI measured the opposite way, so I was wrong. But I would have figured that you start at the flywheel, yes it is unknown right now. But isn't losses measured from the higher number, then you subtract the losses. But if you have gains, you start at the lower number?
so lets say you had 350 at the FW, 15% loss