Can anyone give me a rough percentage of drivetrain loss in power from the fly to the wheels?

 

never mind, i think it's around 30%

 

lol 30%. our cars isn't fwd or awd.

drivetrain loss on rwd is very minimal. I believe closer to the range of 15%

 

15-20%

 

Why would it be less than fwd?

 

hm..it was early when i typed that. well i think the fwd has a even less power loss, but still do as well as a RWD since when you launch a car, the weight shifts to the rear, giving it more traction than a FWD would. hence in a way, you lose some power in a FWD

 

actually FWD launch is faster for the launch than RWD. Once weight transfer takes place RWD takes the front.

 

FWD Definetly has LESS loss than RWD, anyways, i just got the info from autospeed

 

~15-17% NA
~17-19% Turbo II (hot dyno intercooler & beefier drivetrain).

 

15% on average is fine.
20% is too high.
I've seen an FD (similar drivetrain) put down 12.5% with all Redline fluids.


-Ted

 

Why do you say that, are you assuming there's more weight over the front wheels in a static situation and you're refering a split second before the car has moved appreciably?

 

because a RWD has a rubber band effect, it takes a moment for the weight to shift rearward before the car begins to move, in a FWD the tires begin to grab instantaneously but lose traction easier because the weight is shifted to the rear.

 

Um. No. The weight shifts rearward when a car is launched no matter what. The difference between the two is that while a FWD car has it's traction pulled up by this weight transition, a RWD cars traction is forced down towards the blacktop. So no, given the exact same car one being FWD and one being RWD, the RWD car will be capable of a lower 60' time.

 

I'm under the impression that drivetrain loss is a function of hp.So it could be something like 15% in a lower hp car and a lessor value in the the same vehicle but putting out twice the hp.Anybody shed some light on this(fact/fiction)?

 

Um. Duh. that's what they're saying. FWD puts power to the wheels faster than RWD because its physically closer to the power plant. The wheels simply can't hook up once the weight begins to shift.

 

dont think FWD cars have it so great my caddy has 300 at the crank yet only 220 at the wheels thats a 27% loss. but then again it has one of the strongest automatic transaxles, so it sucks power

 

My fault on the misquote I was speaking to this guy:

 

isnt the topic about hp loss through friction in the drivetrain? what does the weight distribution have to do with it, your going to have the same rwhp whether you get traction or not

 

I think its even worse on automatic transmissions. And FWD is good for the little umph right off the line but thats it. FWD is more efficient however. But RWD is funner and is more practical for racing.