Horse power outputs in 2006

[MikeDutsa]

I was just wondering what the horsepower predictions are for this years cars. Who is going to post the best power to weight this year?

[MikeDutsa]

I was just wondering what the horsepower predictions are for this years cars. Who is going to post the best power to weight this year?

[SpdRcr]

we go to the dyno tomorrow. we'll see how it goes.

[MikeDutsa]

we did some field testing with our DL1, it backed out the horsepower at the wheels to be 84.4. we still have some testing to do, we'll see what we can pull out of it.

[james17]

Mikey D lies, it was 84.6, and theres, to my best guess, two or 3 more in it. The torque was the big story though, we have one of the flatest and longest torque curves I've ever seen on a FSAE car. Our engine is all about area under the torque curve and thats what we got. We went with smaller primaries and a shorter intake runner along with a longer tailpipe all aiming to get torque. Any other teams do the same?

[pengulns2001]

slightly different approach we just slap a turbo on and call it good.

we thought we had wiring problems on the dyno so we gave up. it later turned out to be a faulty spark plug (i know sounds like BS but we spent a week looking for this bullshit) good news was with all the tuning on 3 cylinders i managed 40ft/lbs of tq http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[Blake]

lsu pulled 69.5(n/a) with a dry wieght of 475-490 ish

[Dr Claw]

Our car gave us signs that the sparkplug wasnt working though - Our chassis dyno usually gets a rev signal from cylander one. we got nothing from it and chassis dyno didnt work. Cyl 2? 3? 4? yep!

Our car has the most professional wire job you could think of and somehow we still have electrical gremlins...

[Bill Kunst]

For those having problems...

Two years back on a dyno tuning excursion, we had a unique incident of the silicon booted wires sliding off the plugs. It appears that the little bit of air trapped in there expanded enough to force the wires right off the plugs. Check this if you ever have a problem.
Bill

[ben]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MikeDutsa:
we did some field testing with our DL1, it backed out the horsepower at the wheels to be 84.4. we still have some testing to do, we'll see what we can pull out of it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

OT is that the Race Technology Data Logger? If so how do you like it?

Ben

[KevinD]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MikeDutsa:
we did some field testing with our DL1, it backed out the horsepower at the wheels to be 84.4. we still have some testing to do, we'll see what we can pull out of it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

what does your car weigh?

[Marshall Grice]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Mikey D lies, it was 84.6, and theres, to my best guess, two or 3 more in it </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

how dare he get the tenth of a HP wrong with your +/- 10% calculation.

[Mike Cook]

we have about 81 rwhp and we weighed the car the other night at 437. This was wet, but without a body and a few other little things. Final weight should be 460-470.

[Cody the Genius]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> We went with smaller primaries and a shorter intake runner along with a longer tailpipe all aiming to get torque. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

you may have just misspoke , but that is the other way around. Good torque (I hate using this term as it should simply be specified as low Rpm Power)comes from short exhaust lengths and long intake lengths. Short exhaust as in the first harmonic length, instead of the second or third which allows the flow to more fully develop so that there is less backpressure at the collector.

[Superfast Matt McCoy]

I was about to say the same thing about the intake Cody. It's good to know that I am on par with a genius.

Here in Oklahoma we've got around 75 hp. We were testing near 85, but reduced the size of the intake to increase throttle response, and tuned our intake and exhaust for lower rpm power. It doesn't have the wow factor that comes with 85, but it's fast. We raced it on concrete and i nearly crapped myself.

I'll leave the weight question for kyle to answer, both because it's more his thing and because he knows more accuratly than me.

[MikeDutsa]

Ours as it sits in competition status with everything including the dat aq system weighs in right at 474. we are looking to cut that down a little though.

[drivetrainUW-Platt]

looks like our car is gona be a fat one at comp this year...should be around 520 lbs

[MikeDutsa]

OT is that the Race Technology Data Logger? If so how do you like it?

Ben

Design Analyst (MotoGP) - Dunlop Motorsport
Alumnus of University of Birmingham

we love it. it is very light weight and very simple to wire and use. the software is used friendly and easy to use. the whole system(dl1 wheel speed sensors, tps, brake pressure, steering angle, wideband o2) only cost a little over 2gs.

[B Hise]

We have the DL1 too. Its a great system for what the majority of FSAE teams are doing.

Bryan

[Kyle Walther]

we are sitting just under 440lb. compy ready minus two over flow bottles ( someone needs to mount them &gt;=[ Matt lol ). full data aq. 1/2 tank of gas. we still have a few weight saving tricks(all legal) and parts to put on before detroit. =] I won't be happy till we hit 428

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SoonerMatt:
I was about to say the same thing about the intake Cody. It's good to know that I am on par with a genius.

Here in Oklahoma we've got around 75 hp. We were testing near 85, but reduced the size of the intake to increase throttle response, and tuned our intake and exhaust for lower rpm power. It doesn't have the wow factor that comes with 85, but it's fast. We raced it on concrete and i nearly crapped myself.

I'll leave the weight question for kyle to answer, both because it's more his thing and because he knows more accuratly than me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

[CMURacing - Prometheus]

I wanna see how stupid-light penn state's car is this year. I suspect (based on them selling brand new calipers purchased after FSAE '05) that there's some titanium brake parts coming this year.... 350lbs? 340? with an f4i?

[magicweed]

Right around 80hp and 39-40 ftlbs of torque NA
edit: This is on a chassis dyno

Official numbers will be had at comp on the Land & Sea Dyno

[A Reinke]

What were the results of the 'official' chassis dyno at the competition? Do they post them online?

~Adam

[Chris Davin]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by A Reinke:
What were the results of the 'official' chassis dyno at the competition? Do they post them online?

~Adam </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I, too, would be interested to see the results. I heard from someone on the Cornell team that they made 86 hp (but were having eWastegate issues) and that Helsinki made 87 hp.

[enginemike]

Dartmouth posted 88 hp and 66 ft-lbs torque at 7000 RPM on the chassis dyno at comp this year.

(Turbo-E85 R6)

Mike
Dartmoth Engine Guy

[Johan_siriusracing]

http://bart.sm.luth.se/~ojoeri-1/formulabilder/bromskurva.GIF
That is 90.3 SAE corrected.

This was measured on a donojet 250 on a single motorcycle wheel(because it is a motorcycle dyno)

The confirmed weight is below 180kg fully fueled.

The engine is a Naturally Aspirated Yamaha R6.

[Superfast Matt McCoy]

I think we (Oklahoma) posted a record peak horsepower at the competition this year on the chassis dyno. 138 horsepower.

http://sae.ou.edu/images/06/okdet06.jpg

-Matt

[Chris Davin]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SoonerMatt:
I think we (Oklahoma) posted a record peak horsepower at the competition this year on the chassis dyno. 138 horsepower.

http://sae.ou.edu/images/06/okdet06.jpg

-Matt </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Area under the curve, my friend... :-)

[TG]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chris Davin:
...and that Helsinki made 87 hp. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was at their design judging (first stage) and they had claimed 110 hp, same as last year (http://fsae.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/825607348/m/56710716521/r/53610657521#53610657521). So their has got to be something wrong with one or both dynos I would think.

[repeatoffender]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TG:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chris Davin:
...and that Helsinki made 87 hp. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was at their design judging (first stage) and they had claimed 110 hp, same as last year (http://fsae.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/825607348/m/56710716521/r/53610657521#53610657521). So their has got to be something wrong with one or both dynos I would think.

Tim Gruhl
ASU Motorsports </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There may not be anything wrong with the dyno used at comp. Perhaps their '110' was calculated assuming a certain gearbox mechanical efficiency or by the looks of things assuming a chassis dyno was used, a drivetrain / gear box efficiency.


90HP at wheels - assume 80% eff drivetrain/gearbox loss = 110HP at crank!

The question is, will we see 100 at the WEST comp. I hear UTA will be there, and Wollong too?

[TG]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gOon:
There may not be anything wrong with the dyno used at comp. Perhaps their '110' was calculated assuming a certain gearbox mechanical efficiency or by the looks of things assuming a chassis dyno was used, a drivetrain / gear box efficiency.


90HP at wheels - assume 80% eff drivetrain/gearbox loss = 110HP at crank!

The question is, will we see 100 at the WEST comp. I hear UTA will be there, and Wollong too? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, posted up the wrong page. It's the page before on the thread where they say they got over 100 hp at the wheels.

[KevinD]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
The question is, will we see 100 at the WEST comp. I hear UTA will be there, and Wollong too? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

you wont be seeing huge numbers from us. we are only using a 250cc turbo engine.

expect mid 70's from us. we have already dynoed at 71hp at the wheels on a dynojet, not even running to the point we are at now. we have without question improved upon those results, including having max boost for a range of nearly 10,000 rpm (9000-19000 rpm) (area under the curve: check!)

the only record we expect to set it the highest hp/displacement ratio. making 284 hp/liter http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[57JoeFoMoPar]

Peak horsepower numbers are nearly worthless without torque and a usable powerband. If the competition consisted of merely the acceleration event, then maybe it would mean something. We sacrificed a load of top end power for a loooooong smooth curve across the entire powerband