Jump to content

Welcome to 205GTIDrivers.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
 
 

Photo

Bhp Levels


  • Please log in to reply
107 replies to this topic

#1
vickiw106

vickiw106
  • Drivers
  • 146 posts
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
  • Location:Wolverhampton
I have just had my 205 rally car on the rolling road

The spec is

1.9 standard bottom end
Big valve head
grp a piper cam
Ported and polished head
Dellorto twin 40s
Magnex 4 branch manifold

Itís producing 145bhp at the flywheel

I personally thought I would get a bit more bhp

Iím interested if anyone thinks that this is good or bad

Thanks

#2
dirtdog

dirtdog
  • Drivers
  • 459 posts
Joined: 21 Aug 2007
  • Location:Swansea, S.Wales
how much LB-FT?

#3
vickiw106

vickiw106
  • Drivers
  • 146 posts
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
  • Location:Wolverhampton

how much LB-FT?



sorry for being stupid

what do mean by this

Edited by vickiw106, 07 December 2008 - 12:18 AM.


#4
projectpug

projectpug
  • Drivers
  • 591 posts
Joined: 05 Jun 2007
  • Location:Wrexham North Wales
Seems vey low for this spec. Have the webers been jetted correctly? Could be many reasons for the low figure but you should be good for 150 + .
Whos big valve head? Personally you need weber 45's with that sprec.
Any chance of posting up a graph, it could be the operator wasn't revving it high enough.

#5
oli-pug

oli-pug
  • Drivers
  • 752 posts
Joined: 14 Jul 2006
  • Name:Olly
  • Location:Daventry, Northamptonshire
Garage View Garage
I'd say you'd be better off with weber 45's, who built the head too?

Dirtdog means what's the torque figure

#6
vickiw106

vickiw106
  • Drivers
  • 146 posts
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
  • Location:Wolverhampton

.
Whos big valve head? Personally you need weber 45's with that sprec.
Any chance of posting up a graph, it could be the operator wasn't revving it high enough.



dont know whos valve head it is brought it second hand.

the rr people did say that is could do with 45.

i will try and get the graph posted

it was producing 145bhp at 5792 revs and it looks like it was still climing ( so it maybe more bhp)

#7
projectpug

projectpug
  • Drivers
  • 591 posts
Joined: 05 Jun 2007
  • Location:Wrexham North Wales
Hi,

If you can post a graph even if its a link to photobucket , that will be a great help.
Any information on your carbs configuration ie chokes and main jet sizing.
Ignoring the rolling road figure you have how does it feel to you to drive? Any significant dips in power or surges?
What fuel? i take it you are using a minimum of super unleaded and that the ignition has been played with on the rollers to optimise hp/torque?

#8
Miles

Miles
  • Pitcrew+
  • 11,683 posts
Joined: 27 Nov 2002
  • Name:Miles
  • Location:Fordingbridge, Hants
Garage View Garage
If it was still climbing why stop, But as said the heads are easy to loose flow to a S/H unknown one is iffy to say the least

#9
vickiw106

vickiw106
  • Drivers
  • 146 posts
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
  • Location:Wolverhampton

Hi,

If you can post a graph even if its a link to photobucket , that will be a great help.
Any information on your carbs configuration ie chokes and main jet sizing.
Ignoring the rolling road figure you have how does it feel to you to drive? Any significant dips in power or surges?
What fuel? i take it you are using a minimum of super unleaded and that the ignition has been played with on the rollers to optimise hp/torque?



on the road is seems supurb no dips in power or anything and it pulls like hell but that could be down to the gearing i am running.

the ingnition was adgjusted on the rollers

dont get me wrong i was happy the the job the the rolling road company did, as they increased the power by 30bhp and it does run good

i was just expecting a little more bhp out of a 1900 as there are 1600 running more power

#10
vickiw106

vickiw106
  • Drivers
  • 146 posts
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
  • Location:Wolverhampton

how much LB-FT?



the maximum lbft it has is 140 @ 5000 revs but when the bhp is at 145 the lbft drops to 130

i will try and get the graph posted later today.

#11
DrSarty

DrSarty
  • Drivers
  • 4,983 posts
Joined: 27 Aug 2006
  • Name:Rich
  • Location:Peterborough
Garage View Garage

the maximum lbft it has is 140 @ 5000 revs but when the bhp is at 145 the lbft drops to 130

i will try and get the graph posted later today.


I believe that's some good torque, as an Mi16 (std) makes 133lbft max, and I believe torque and driveability is where it's at.

I wouldn't get hung-up on horse power Vic, as it's just a figure to sell cars or bits for them. In effect it doesn't even exist; it's just a marketing tool.

Your torque and how it drives and makes you feel is key. :ph34r:

Edited by DrSarty, 07 December 2008 - 09:49 AM.


#12
andy0075

andy0075
  • Drivers
  • 127 posts
Joined: 08 Jan 2007
  • Name:Andreas
  • Location:Linz, Austria
Garage View Garage
Hi vickiw106!

As DrSarty said, the torque is the important value which accelerates your car !
And 140 lbft is really god ! My 8V with 45 Weber produces 130 lbft at 4100rpm and
150hp at 6400rpm. The engine setup is similar to yours.

Andy

#13
weejimmy

weejimmy
  • Drivers
  • 543 posts
Joined: 21 Jan 2008
  • Location:Edinburgh, Scotland
erm what ???? torque is irelivent bhp is what wins races.
torque is for motorway overtaking in 5th, for all other situations drop a gear. ( but lets not go there )
but i would say that power is around what i would expect on that set up.
its very hard to get more power from a 8v gti as they are very good stock,

#14
saveloy

saveloy
  • Veterans
  • 1,437 posts
Joined: 29 Nov 2002

erm what ???? torque is irelivent bhp is what wins races.
torque is for motorway overtaking in 5th, for all other situations drop a gear. ( but lets not go there )
but i would say that power is around what i would expect on that set up.
its very hard to get more power from a 8v gti as they are very good stock,



Torque versus weight = Acceleration.
Power versus aerodynamics = Top speed.

#15
dirtdog

dirtdog
  • Drivers
  • 459 posts
Joined: 21 Aug 2007
  • Location:Swansea, S.Wales
BHP is for pub banter. Torque is what makes me grin.

I've seen 1900cc 8vs running up to 177bhp (Someone from here I am assuming?)

#16
Moz_Goodwood

Moz_Goodwood
  • Drivers
  • 533 posts
Joined: 19 Jun 2007
  • Name:Paul
  • Location:Haverfordwest, Pembrokeshire
bhp for show...... torque for dough :blush:

thats why ive gone for a turbo engine over the mi 16 as turbo's throw lots of torque into the mix :(

#17
boombang

boombang
  • Drivers
  • 2,345 posts
Joined: 13 Mar 2004
  • Location:Essex

erm what ???? torque is irelivent bhp is what wins races.


As BHP is a figure derived from torque, RPM and a constant, how the hell can torque be irrelivant?

#18
weejimmy

weejimmy
  • Drivers
  • 543 posts
Joined: 21 Jan 2008
  • Location:Edinburgh, Scotland
thats exactly why.
because all torque is, is bhp at a certin revs
so bhp is the power of an engine, torque is where on the rev range the power is.
torque = bhp x 5252 divided by rpm
so low torque means you need to rev it more. which is fine, so imo torque figgures dosent mater much, its bhp that wins races,

#19
DrSarty

DrSarty
  • Drivers
  • 4,983 posts
Joined: 27 Aug 2006
  • Name:Rich
  • Location:Peterborough
Garage View Garage

thats exactly why.
because all torque is, is bhp at a certin revs
so bhp is the power of an engine, torque is where on the rev range the power is.
torque = bhp x 5252 divided by rpm
so low torque means you need to rev it more. which is fine, so imo torque figgures dosent mater much, its bhp that wins races,


With all due respect Jimmy, and as you've already started with immense attitude, torque is ALL an engine produces, a rotational moment.

BHP is a product of torque combined with RPM, i.e. it's throwing in the factor of time, it is NOT the other way round. Without torque, there is zero way in which to calculate BHP, which I say again, is a product of torque, not the other way round.

#20
weejimmy

weejimmy
  • Drivers
  • 543 posts
Joined: 21 Jan 2008
  • Location:Edinburgh, Scotland
hey sorry didnt mean to come accross with an atitude.

for me its bhp that counts but for many others its torque, thats fair enough