Notices
Evo General Discuss any generalized technical Evo related topics that may not fit into the other forums. Please do not post tech and rumor threads here.
Sponsored by: RavSpec - JDM Wheels Central

the evo ix fq320 and BHP

Old Aug 15, 2007 | 05:44 PM
  #1  
awr's Avatar
awr
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
From: tucson az
Question the evo ix fq320 and BHP

so the qwestion is that if this car is 320 bhp what is perspective hp loss all the way to the wheels or what would the whp be? im at like 307whp and 304 tq so is my car going to be as fast as an fq 320?

also i realize bhp is what is at the crank but is the method for calculating this done by a water brake hence the bhp?
Reply
Old Aug 15, 2007 | 05:49 PM
  #2  
hytek369's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (81)
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 952
Likes: 0
From: Boston, MA
what have you done to your car? are your numbers at the wheels?
Reply
Old Aug 15, 2007 | 06:08 PM
  #3  
awr's Avatar
awr
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
From: tucson az
yes those numbers are at the wheels on a mustang dyno
tbe walbro hallman mbc ia performance custom tune
Reply
Old Aug 15, 2007 | 06:13 PM
  #4  
cssaddictm4's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (13)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
From: Cape Cod, MA
Originally Posted by hytek369
what have you done to your car? are your numbers at the wheels?
He said 307whp so we would assume he's talking about wheel horsepower. For AWD cars you could assume a fudge factor drivetrain loss of 23ish%. So your 307whp would be about 400hp to the crank.

crank hp = whp/.77 (figuring 23% loss)

Edit: Who's faster depends on the driver as well


Blake
Reply
Old Aug 15, 2007 | 06:21 PM
  #5  
awr's Avatar
awr
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
From: tucson az
driver mod always a big advantage
Reply
Old Aug 15, 2007 | 07:57 PM
  #6  
hytek369's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (81)
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 952
Likes: 0
From: Boston, MA
Originally Posted by cssaddictm4
He said 307whp so we would assume he's talking about wheel horsepower. For AWD cars you could assume a fudge factor drivetrain loss of 23ish%. So your 307whp would be about 400hp to the crank.

crank hp = whp/.77 (figuring 23% loss)

Edit: Who's faster depends on the driver as well


Blake
oops, i oversaw that whp. in that case, i would assume you can compete with a FQ400
Reply
Old Aug 15, 2007 | 07:59 PM
  #7  
evobeatsti's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,117
Likes: 1
From: Los Angeles, CA
what i dont understand about the fq400 is that on top gear when they reviewd it they said it had the most unbearable turbo lag ever. did mitsu put in a bigger turbo like a 20g in it?? if so shouldnt it have well over 400 bhp? it seems like it is pretty simple to have an evo with 400bhp with simple bolt ons but i dont see those evo's doing 0-60 in 3.5 seconds or killing lambo's
Reply
Old Aug 15, 2007 | 08:33 PM
  #8  
awr's Avatar
awr
Thread Starter
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
From: tucson az
somethin seems off can anyone else help
Reply
Old Aug 15, 2007 | 08:44 PM
  #9  
cssaddictm4's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (13)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
From: Cape Cod, MA
Originally Posted by awr
somethin seems off can anyone else help

What seems wrong? It's a fairly direct calculation based off an estimated factor.

>The lag issue came from accelerating in top gear from like 30mph. Try going into fifth or sixth gear at 30mph and go WOT, watch as N/A Honda's pass you

Last edited by cssaddictm4; Aug 15, 2007 at 08:47 PM.
Reply
Old Aug 15, 2007 | 09:21 PM
  #10  
BBS's Avatar
BBS
Evolved Member
iTrader: (18)
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,337
Likes: 0
From: Philadelphia, PA
I'm pretty sure BHP = brake horse power. So alil more than whp, but less than flywheel hp.
Reply
Old Aug 16, 2007 | 01:00 AM
  #11  
Evildead's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
From: Sweden
There is noway you have 23% drivetrain loss, between 8 to 15% tops on our evo:s (Rototest measured 9%)

Last edited by Evildead; Aug 16, 2007 at 01:05 AM.
Reply
Old Aug 16, 2007 | 05:41 AM
  #12  
Bonestock!'s Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
From: Panama City, FL
All the FQ's are rated at the flywheel.

FQ300 305ps @ 6950 / 297lbft @ 4400

FQ320 326ps @ 6700 / 305lbft @ 4300

FQ330 335ps @ 6800 / 315lbft @ 5000

FQ340 345ps @ 6200 / 320lbft @ 4985

FQ400 410ps @ 6700 / 355lbft @ 5400

I dont have the numbers for the FQ360


You can convert HP to PS and NM to lbft etc
http://www.locost7.info/converter.php

Last edited by Bonestock!; Aug 16, 2007 at 05:47 AM.
Reply
Old Aug 16, 2007 | 07:42 AM
  #13  
mrdevo's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
From: Ct
The fq400 had a gt3071 or something along those lines. Anything bigger than that and the lag would be too much for a stock car(even though it is a modified production car) Anyone else think the turbo was bigger than that?
Reply
Old Aug 17, 2007 | 07:38 PM
  #14  
cssaddictm4's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (13)
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
From: Cape Cod, MA
Originally Posted by Evildead
There is noway you have 23% drivetrain loss, between 8 to 15% tops on our evo:s (Rototest measured 9%)

I believe you may be mis-informed.

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/driving-techniques/7672-power-loss-ratio-awd.html

EDIT: FQ400 Parts List

http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/cars/lancer_fq400.asp

Last edited by cssaddictm4; Aug 17, 2007 at 07:40 PM.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
IXEvolutionIX
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain
10
Sep 3, 2009 06:11 AM
tim85851
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain
17
Jun 25, 2008 10:18 PM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:04 PM.