It seems that most the posts in the ecuflash/evoscan thread get lost in the mix so I thought I'd try a more direct approach... For some reason my estimated horsepower is not working correctly with evoscan 2.6. Estimated torque works fine, showing a peak of 304 lbs/ft. My peak HP however, is 10. What am I doing wrong?

 

Just use VDR...

 

+100000000

 

Thanks very much for not answering my question....I want to find out why it's not working in evoscan, I know I can use VDR to get est. HP/Torque, that's not the point.

 

The Evoscan hp estimater is kind of messed up. Usually the peak numbers are half decent, but they're off by about 1000 rpms.

 

Strange, my peak is only 10 hp as stated in the OP...Maybe JohnBradley could give us his .02?

 

Why do u want to use the sorry Evoscan estimated Hp/tq... VDR is proven.. What is the point your trying to make?

 

goto evoscan.com and get the latest copy. and make sure you set the parameters up correctly such as gear used, pressure, wheel diameter etc . . .

hope this helps, yeah i think there's a bug on the older versions but it works well for me V2.7.0046

 

I think he wants to know which one will give him the most powa

 

^MO POWA lol

 

Its only accurate on a MAF with an intake kit thats not throwing the airflow off (calculates off load which is hz dependent)

Doesnt take into account meth or E85 where you can crank the timing.

All in all, I wrote it before I had a dyno to use all the time and could only street tune pumpgas cars to get an idea of what increase I was seeing.

VDR is definitely more accurate since its using time to accell vs weight.

As far as your actual problem with 10whp I am not sure but something in the calc has to be wrong.

 

I thought he was talking about the HP calculator, not the formula based on airflow.

 

Its all related.

It uses load to calculate g/rev, then g/rev to calculate lbs/min.

Load is Airflow/rpm*852, therefore airflow through the MAF can be relative but power can depend on timing. I can run almost any combo at 30psi on straight 92 octane for a pull and see what it makes...at 12-13* timing out the top. Switch to E85 and while the airflow hasnt changed I can add 5-6* of timing and make 50whp more that wouldnt be reflected in the airflow consumption (as measured by the MAF) of the engine combo in question.

aaron

 

Can't mrfred's lbs/min calcs be substituted for all the conversions?

Instead of trying to use load to calculate g/rev, then g/rev to calculate lbs/min you can use lbs/min directly.

 

Mychailo shorthanded it, but you can do the same thing with this. Its only as accurate as the airflow in though in any event.