Looks like a stout car, but for comparasons sake why not post a graph with hp and tq compared to engine speed instead of mph. What's the A/F of this car? Impressive numbers for sure but I do t understand posting that doesn't show anything but a peak HP that isn't even being measured in a standard scale.
IMO that's like stating distance between 2 points is 5. The question then is 5 what? Inches, meters, miles, killmeters. That is the reason dyno graphs are shown in SAE with a smoothing of 5. And shown on a graph with torque vs RPM. It's the industry standard set by the society of automotive engineers thus SAE.
Like I said your car makes impressive power but that dyno graph is useless for comparison sake
Standard is just that "a standard" - SAE is @ 77F, STD is @ 60F, plus a minor baro correction which leads to a total of 2.5% difference. Saying that STD correction is useless - is like saying that metric system is useless because you are not used to it.
For future reference so you don't sound so ignorant on the subject here is a simplified formula.
SAE = STD*0.975
No RPM reading truly sux - but the car made around 550 peak tq.
As far as AFR - we don't disclose them. There is no magic AFR number just like there is no magic total advance timing. Every car is different and every curve is different. Comparing those really makes no sense.
What makes Chris' car impressive is the displacement of whooping 159ci running $1.60/gal fuel.
810 (STD) * 0.975 = 790 (SAE)
__________________
ABEL Racing 405.455.3505
10.9@123 stock 346ci NA
9.46@146 2.0 on E85
That last run sounded pretty wicked, need that .81 A/R though! Should be fun!
__________________
1997 Dodge Viper GTS Completely Stock.. for now - 410.42 RWHP 464.62 RWTQ 2000 A4 WS6 Trans Am 396ci - D1-SC - Stalled Auto - 3966lb - 808.65 RWHP 729.95 RWTQ - 9.98 at 130 MPH SOLD 11/09 2001 A4 Trans Am H/C - Stalled Auto - 3650lb - 442 RWHP 403 RWTQ - 11.6 @ 117 MPH (hitting the limiter) SOLD 1998 A4 Trans Am Very mild H/C - Stalled Auto - 3550lb - 396 RWHP 390 RWTQ - 12.0 @ 113 MPH SOLD
^ I don't think there is any confusion between SAE and STD. Lets keep this on topic.
That last run sounded pretty wicked, need that .81 A/R though! Should be fun!
Was hoping I'd find the new exhaust housing on the doorstep, but not today. Hopefully tomorrow, I plan to call them tomorrow to ensure delivery before the weekend.
Did mount up the new wheels and tires today, hate to get rid of the current wheels, but I needed a setup that would hook 800+ whp...and that's no easy task in a chassis this lightweight.
Found the wheels at Discount Tire for $125/each for 16x8, and they only weigh 18 lbs!
Bought the MT ET Street Radials in a 255/50/16. I'm limited on tire options, as my rear fenders are factory. May end up having to go widebody in the future, but for now, this will have to work.
Standard is just that "a standard" - SAE is @ 77F, STD is @ 60F, plus a minor baro correction which leads to a total of 2.5% difference. Saying that STD correction is useless - is like saying that metric system is useless because you are not used to it.
For future reference so you don't sound so ignorant on the subject here is a simplified formula.
SAE = STD*0.975
No RPM reading truly sux - but the car made around 550 peak tq.
As far as AFR - we don't disclose them. There is no magic AFR number just like there is no magic total advance timing. Every car is different and every curve is different. Comparing those really makes no sense.
What makes Chris' car impressive is the displacement of whooping 159ci running $1.60/gal fuel.
810 (STD) * 0.975 = 790 (SAE)
__________________
Brett XP-Racing.com Home of the Fastest LSx Cars in Oklahoma.
405-721-2940
Linear Mode
