2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992) 1986-1992 Discussion including performance modifications and technical support sections.

BHP vs RWHP, rule of thumb relationship?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 02:26 AM
  #1  
HOZZMANRX7's Avatar
Thread Starter
Driving RX7's since 1979
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 6,096
Likes: 9
From: So Cal where the OC/LA/SB counties meet
Question BHP vs RWHP, rule of thumb relationship?

The other night I was reading a thread where a posted response gave a relationship of listed Brake HP to Rear Wheel horsepower. Something like stock S5 160 HP actually resulted in something like 104 hp at the wheels.

Does anybody have a chart (or care to take a shot at estimating one) along the following:

S4 NA Stock BHP 146:

RWHP Stock flywheel= ???
RWHP Lightened Steel Flywheel= ???
RWHP Aluminum Flywheel= ???

Same for a S5 NA, S4 Turbo, S5 Turbo

Heck, I'd be happy with answers (or even partial answers of any kind) with a stock flywheel just to get an idea what hp is loss between the flywheel and the rear tires.

Come on, I know somewhere in the Wankle brain trust there is an answer to this with some level of detail.


Last edited by HOZZMANRX7; Nov 5, 2002 at 02:39 AM.
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 06:33 AM
  #2  
dvls-7's Avatar
Sick & Twisted
Tenured Member 20 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,993
Likes: 0
From: FT Lauderdale, Fl
Im no mathematician but the general rule of thumb is ~15-20% loss through the drivetrain so whatever it makes at the wheels add ~20% and thats what it makes at the flywheel. Hope this helps u out.
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 07:00 AM
  #3  
hIGGI's Avatar
Moderator
Tenured Member: 25 Years
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,988
Likes: 18
From: Czech Republic [www.rx7cz.net]
for older VW there is generally about 25% loss on drivetrain, my friends Ford S200 or something like that does show same 25% drivetrain loss.....

so i assume 20-25% is what u could count on with most cars out there.....
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 07:17 AM
  #4  
DaleClark's Avatar
RX-7 Bad Ass
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (56)
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,622
Likes: 2,725
From: Pensacola, FL
IMHO, if you want to know flywheel horsepower, put the engine on a flywheel dyno. That's the ONLY way to know. The only number that really matters otherwise is rear wheel horsepower.

To give you a ballpark -

A stock NA will make around 110-120 to the ground. A stock TII will make around 150-160 to the ground. A modded NA with intake and full exhaust will make around 140-160 to the ground. A modded TII with full exhaust and intake can easily make 200-220 to the ground.

Flywheel horsepower numbers that are estimated from rear wheel numbers are fish stories. It's just a way to make the numbers seem bigger. Stick with and compare rear wheel numbers, and you'll always be good.

Considering most if not all of the 2nd gens out there aren't performing at stock levels any more, most of them aren't putting out stock power. Tired motors, clogged cats, stuck 6-port actuators, tired turbos...this all adds up. That's another reason why you can't figure backwards from what your car was making stock to what it's making at the rear wheels - the only way to know is to put it on the dyno. Heck, I've seen NA's that didn't break 100hp, mostly due to worn engines, plugs, stuck 6-ports, you name it.

Dale
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 10:37 AM
  #5  
HOZZMANRX7's Avatar
Thread Starter
Driving RX7's since 1979
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (43)
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 6,096
Likes: 9
From: So Cal where the OC/LA/SB counties meet
Just to clarify.....

A stock NA will make around 110-120 to the ground. A stock TII will make around 150-160 to the ground.

Is this in reference to a S4 or S5, given that S5 stock are factory rated about 20 hp higher?
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 10:58 AM
  #6  
DaleClark's Avatar
RX-7 Bad Ass
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (56)
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,622
Likes: 2,725
From: Pensacola, FL
Really, those numbers are what I've personally seen and experienced. Those are safe numbers to expect on a stock car, regardless of year.

There isn't as big of a difference, stock, between the earlier and later cars. Probably on the order of 10hp. With mods, that all starts to change .

Dale
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 12:57 PM
  #7  
dre_2ooo's Avatar
...
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
From: Twin Cities, MN
I know this isn't stock but this is someone's dyno of a 1990 NA with Headers and K& N Intake:
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 01:30 PM
  #8  
Dvst8's Avatar
Going for the win
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 950
Likes: 21
From: Vancouver
wow....143 with headers and filter....thats 17hp less than the specs...

http://2ndgenrx7.freeservers.com/specsmaster.html

sometimes i wonder if headers actually make a difference in + hp or just make them go lower.
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 01:46 PM
  #9  
silverrotor's Avatar
Moderator
Tenured Member: 20 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,592
Likes: 5
From: Toronto, Corporate Canada
I'd be pissed If my na came off the dyno to not even reach 100rwhp.
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 01:59 PM
  #10  
Felix Wankel's Avatar
Super Newbie
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,398
Likes: 1
From: Birmingham, AL
Originally posted by Dvst8
wow....143 with headers and filter....thats 17hp less than the specs...

http://2ndgenrx7.freeservers.com/specsmaster.html

sometimes i wonder if headers actually make a difference in + hp or just make them go lower.
160 stock is bhp, not RWHP.
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 02:16 PM
  #11  
skold's Avatar
Full Member
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
From: columbus,ohio,usa
a all stock s4 n/a will dyno right around 120 rwhp.
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 02:25 PM
  #12  
dre_2ooo's Avatar
...
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
From: Twin Cities, MN
Originally posted by Dvst8
wow....143 with headers and filter....thats 17hp less than the specs...

http://2ndgenrx7.freeservers.com/specsmaster.html

sometimes i wonder if headers actually make a difference in + hp or just make them go lower.
Yeah, Like Felix said, this is RWHP not bhp. Stock RWHP may be somewhere around 130 for a stock S5 (128 if you use 20% loss in drivetrain).

Using that 20%, 143 to the groud is ~180bhp.

Last edited by dre_2ooo; Nov 5, 2002 at 02:28 PM.
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 03:39 PM
  #13  
silverrotor's Avatar
Moderator
Tenured Member: 20 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,592
Likes: 5
From: Toronto, Corporate Canada
How do you define Brake Horse Power, exactly?
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 04:53 PM
  #14  
Full Member
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
From: Long Island, NY
Brake horsepower is measured with an engine removed from the car and put on an engine dyno. The engine is then run against a brake until it can no longer accelerate (increase RPM) and the amount of brake force is used to calculate horsepower. Please correct me if I am wrong.

All the numbers quoted in the US by auto manufacturers are SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) NET horsepower numbers. This means that the engine is test on the dyno with the full exhaust system, alternator, power steering, air pump, waterpump, air conditioning, etc on the engine.

In the 60s, horsepower numbers were SAE Gross, so the engine was test with no accessories on it and full open exhaust. So, to compare 60s horsepower numbers to modern numbers, you need to subtract at least 30-40 horsepower from the 60s number and you might get a ROUGH estimate.

From what I have seen, a healthy stock S5 non turbo should put at least 13o hp to the wheel with a net rating of 160 at the fly wheel. A healthy stock S5 TII should put 170-175 hp to the wheels with a net flywheel rating of 200 hp. A S4 TII about 160 to the wheels with a net flywheel rating of 182 and a S4 non turbo about 115-120 with a net flywheel rating of 146.
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 04:56 PM
  #15  
vaughnc's Avatar
knowledge junkie
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 5,595
Likes: 6
From: Atlanta, GA
Rx-7s seem to have some of the lowest drivetrain loss

NA - 15%
TII - 18%
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 06:59 PM
  #16  
CANRX7GX's Avatar
PREDATOR
Tenured Member 15 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 966
Likes: 1
From: Canada
damn that 1990 dyno is amazing for headers and a k&n filter... i dynoed my car... and i have apexi intake/racingbeat headers back..... and i was rated at 140hp/115 torque..... there must be something wrong there?!?!?!? plus the dyno guy had no idea how to set up an rx7 for a dyno...or is it cause im just in canada lol j/k
Reply
Old Nov 5, 2002 | 09:20 PM
  #17  
silverrotor's Avatar
Moderator
Tenured Member: 20 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,592
Likes: 5
From: Toronto, Corporate Canada
With the Brake Horse Power determained, Isin't the Dyno called a "donkey Dyno" or something like that to find BHP?

Last edited by silverrotor; Nov 5, 2002 at 09:25 PM.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Turblown
Vendor Classifieds
12
Oct 17, 2020 03:25 PM
zyph3r
Canadian Forum
10
Sep 16, 2018 07:14 PM
Snook
Single Turbo RX-7's
18
Oct 8, 2015 10:09 PM
jim_chung
1st Gen General Discussion
10
Oct 4, 2015 09:09 AM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:18 PM.