A couple of more pics fromm AAM, sill waiting on my friggin Dyno charts to be emailed.
Quote:
congrats, Scott!Originally Posted by ScottR
A couple of more pics fromm AAM, sill waiting on my friggin Dyno charts to be emailed.
Registered User
What is the obsession with RWHP. Is it your conclusion that the car that has the most RWHP will always be faster? Lets do a little math children.
In a comparison between a 401whp Vortech and a 329whp HKS SC.
Calculations are under the curve, or "mean" hp/torque. Basically the avg. hp and torque each unit makes under Peak power.
The Vortech avg. HP = 268
The HKS avg. HP = 264
The Vortech avg. Torque = 286
The HKS avg. Torque = 297
What does this mean? That measly little HKS SC that everyone rags on.. Makes more torque under the curve and is down on PEAK power by 72whp...
Short answer. HKS makes more useable power. And does so more efficiently. The power curve is better.
Take NOTE 410whp VORTECH will be slower than a 329whp HKS Z uh oh i have more than 329whp.........
Not to mention the Gs are a little fatter when it comes to getting on the scales.
In a comparison between a 401whp Vortech and a 329whp HKS SC.
Calculations are under the curve, or "mean" hp/torque. Basically the avg. hp and torque each unit makes under Peak power.
The Vortech avg. HP = 268
The HKS avg. HP = 264
The Vortech avg. Torque = 286
The HKS avg. Torque = 297
What does this mean? That measly little HKS SC that everyone rags on.. Makes more torque under the curve and is down on PEAK power by 72whp...
Short answer. HKS makes more useable power. And does so more efficiently. The power curve is better.
Take NOTE 410whp VORTECH will be slower than a 329whp HKS Z uh oh i have more than 329whp.........
Not to mention the Gs are a little fatter when it comes to getting on the scales.