How to get 500hp?

[nightrider28]

Thank you!

[eastwoodisme]

Originally Posted by nightrider28

It appears if 18% is a close enough conversion. Then I will be able to hit 500hp (~410rwhp) if I upgrade my k&n intske to a CAI, add Apex scoop, and a SLP pulley.... Thoughts?

Manual Transmission= about 16.5% (BUT IT VARIES! based on dyno, location, etc.)

Auto Transmission= about 18.5-19% (BUT IT VARIES! based on dyno, location, etc.)

What a lot of people don't realize is the "426" Horsepower number is an SAE corrected number. It is impossible, implausible and impractical that every stock vehicle is putting out 426 HP at the crank while on these dynos. That being said, we are only left to use approximates. If you are big on numbers, I would use 15% for manuals and 18% for autos. Using that math, your crank numbers wont be inflated.

SO:

If you are at 400RWHP in an LS3 I would estimate you are at about 470 Crank Horsepower.

[Spartan01]

Uh, No, I am not a bit off here.
The LS3 at maximum stock efficiency is rated at 426 HP.
That means with an UNRESTRICTED (read NONE) intake, and unrestricted (read NONE) exhaust.
That is the engine, alone, by itself, without being linked into the drivetrain.
The drive train produces parasitic loss, which increases with every moving part, this is basic physics and thermodynamics, as I have already said.

The mods I have, specifically NOT including the UD Pulley, DO NOT ADD HP.
What they do, is let the engine run more efficiently. However, even the best headers are not as good as NO headers, (from a restriction stand point.)
The same goes for the Intake.
You will never get beyond 426 RWHP unless you modify the stock parameters.
So, if you increase the intake volume and or density, and or increase the amount of fuel input, reduce the overal friction and or entropy, then you can go beyond the original number of 426.

But as you said, these mods have nothing to do with the parasitic drag caused by the drivetrain, but they do help to offset it.



This magical number of 426 is of course just an estimate. The engine could be underrated, or it could be a freak that just runs stronger.

Originally Posted by eastwoodisme

Um... you are a little bit off track here. Your mods: a CAI, MAF, VMax, Headers, cutouts, cats and exhaust have NOTHING to do with drivetrain loss. The only thing that would come close to a parasitic difference is your underdrive pulley swap. All of the other mods increase your horsepower, not reduce drivetrain loss. 426 is not the most you could get at the wheels under any circumstance, the 426 number itself is the result of a mathematical equation.

The only things that you could do to reduce drivetrain loss would be of course to make modifications to the drivetrain. This would include the transmission, driveshaft, rear end, axles, wheels and tires. A common way to think about it is any moving parts. I include your UD Pulley because although minute, it allows the engine to work less or as you put it "frees up" HP.

I mean think about it, if your method of thought were true, 426 would be the maximum ever able to be produced at the wheels? No. When you increase horsepower, you increase both wheel and crank horsepower. Their relationship remains at a mathematical distance until something is done to the drivetrain.

[honor first]

Originally Posted by nightrider28

Here you go for all you jokers... Even included a video so you can follow along

http://chicago5thgen.com/showthread.php?t=6288

no one is a joker. youre the joker talking about crank HP without saying youre referring to crank. unless specified, its a given youre talking about wheel

[eastwoodisme]

Originally Posted by Spartan01

Uh, No, I am not a bit off here.
The LS3 at maximum stock efficiency is rated at 426 HP.
That means with an UNRESTRICTED (read NONE) intake, and unrestricted (read NONE) exhaust.
That is the engine, alone, by itself, without being linked into the drivetrain.
The drive train produces parasitic loss, which increases with every moving part, this is basic physics and thermodynamics, as I have already said.

The mods I have, specifically NOT including the UD Pulley, DO NOT ADD HP.
What they do, is let the engine run more efficiently. However, even the best headers are not as good as NO headers, (from a restriction stand point.)
The same goes for the Intake.
You will never get beyond 426 RWHP unless you modify the stock parameters.
So, if you increase the intake volume and or density, and or increase the amount of fuel input, reduce the overal friction and or entropy, then you can go beyond the original number of 426.

But as you said, these mods have nothing to do with the parasitic drag caused by the drivetrain, but they do help to offset it.



This magical number of 426 is of course just an estimate. The engine could be underrated, or it could be a freak that just runs stronger.

"The LS3 at maximum stock efficiency is rated at 426 HP.
That means with an UNRESTRICTED (read NONE) intake, and unrestricted (read NONE) exhaust.
That is the engine, alone, by itself, without being linked into the drivetrain.
The drive train produces parasitic loss, which increases with every moving part, this is basic physics and thermodynamics, as I have already said."

For one, production engines are not tested without an intake or exhaust. It is under the ever-watchful eye of SAE, these engines are rated. Where in the world are you getting your information that the LS3 used in the Camaro was certified at 426HP without an intake or exhaust?

"That is the engine, alone, by itself, without being linked into the drivetrain.
The drive train produces parasitic loss, which increases with every moving part, this is basic physics and thermodynamics, as I have already said."

Yes, you are correct here, but this does not support your original statement that mods "free up" horsepower robbed by the drivetrain since these mods were not improvements to the moving mass of the drivetrain.

"The mods I have, specifically NOT including the UD Pulley, DO NOT ADD HP.
What they do, is let the engine run more efficiently. However, even the best headers are not as good as NO headers, (from a restriction stand point.)
The same goes for the Intake."

Efficiency is the difference in MP and IP. Not an increase in HP.

Also, running an engine with "NO headers" is not the best method for exhausting an engine. Period.

"You will never get beyond 426 RWHP unless you modify the stock parameters.
So, if you increase the intake volume and or density, and or increase the amount of fuel input, reduce the overal friction and or entropy, then you can go beyond the original number of 426."

You are absolutely and COMPLETELY wrong here!!!! You seriously need to do some studying on SAE J1349 and J1995. You are contradicting yourself all in one sentence!!!! Increasing intake volume or (air) density and reducing friction/entropy are completely unrelated! One adds crank horsepower, the other decreases drivetrain loss that results in the REAR WHEEL HORSEPOWER NUMBER! Without a drivetrain, there is no rear wheel horsepower number. This is absurd!

I see how you have come to these conclusions as several other people have in the past, but, they are inaccurate.

"But as you said, these mods have nothing to do with the parasitic drag caused by the drivetrain, but they do help to offset it."

These mods do NOT help offset drivetrain loss. A modded LS3 at 500 Crank Horsepower will result in drivetrain loss in the same faction that a stock LS3 will... without changing a part of the drivetrain, drivetrain loss will remain the same. It does NOT offset, nor does it "free up" lost horsepower to add mods. Remember you can't increase rear wheel horsepower first with mods!!! It all STARTS at the crank! HP is an equation! The constant 5252 is the rounded value of (33,000 ft·lbf/min)/(2π rad/rev) you can NOT forget about the science behind it!!!

And I am sorry but you are way in left field to believe you can't add horsepower by adding an aftermarket Cold Air Intake. But then again, you contradicted yourself and said increasing the intake volume (what a CAI does) you can achieve more than 426HP. Which is it in your head? Sheesh.

[TOYMARO]

Originally Posted by nightrider28

400rwhp with rougly 18% lose at rear axel so 475. Go read the V8 dyno results buds.. And everyone with these mods has that or more horsepower. Extremely useful comments though so way to bring no help to the table.

Math is backwards. 400hp was at crank, minus 18% is 400*.82=328rwhp

Originally Posted by nightrider28

The statement clearly states "~475hp" ..... So I know typically go by RWHP.... However, I left the RW out and specified horsepower. Also, that little squiggly symbol before 475 represents error. Because the standard of entropy (uh oh just learned this in Freshman Chem) for the conversion is not an exact science. Re read the post before commenting.

I am 19 years old and know next to nothing about cars lol no need for bashing when I come on this site seeking information from whom I believed would contain intelligent responses, and not so concern about putting everyone down.

For those who are giving me good ideas, thank you very much! I will start researching!

Take er easy man!!! YOUR math was backwards. And since this is a public forum, there are all types here. And ppl will be ppl. And as stated by others, always use RWHP, crank HP numbers dont mean that much, at the wheel is where it counts! Unless its a boat, then care about crank.

Originally Posted by nightrider28

So everyone on this thread is wrong??! According to the comments on this thread. When they say anout 15-20% losss.......

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=213259

was this the right link? I didnt see any posts by you or littl88.

Originally Posted by nightrider28

No READ THE ENTIRE thread. I was under impression of 18% loss at rear axel but then everyone started commenting saying I am completely wrong and that there is no relationship. So i am trying to figure out who is right lol because there are mixed answers that is all

i still missed right link....

Originally Posted by nightrider28

It appears if 18% is a close enough conversion. Then I will be able to hit 500hp (~410rwhp) if I upgrade my k&n intske to a CAI, add Apex scoop, and a SLP pulley.... Thoughts?

crank HP numbers confuse me

[LS3 SS]

Wow, my head is starting to hurt. Does anyone have some Aleve?

[TOYMARO]

Originally Posted by nightrider28

Because I had my car dyno and got 400rwph. So with 18% loss I thought about ~475hp crank. So I asked how to get to 500hp, then people started ripping on me lol

because you reversed the math....its only math.

[eastwoodisme]

Originally Posted by TOYMARO

because you reversed the math....its only math.

Originally Posted by TOYMARO

Math is backwards. 400hp was at crank, minus 18% is 400*.82=328rwhp



Take er easy man!!! YOUR math was backwards. And since this is a public forum, there are all types here. And ppl will be ppl. And as stated by others, always use RWHP, crank HP numbers dont mean that much, at the wheel is where it counts! Unless its a boat, then care about crank.

:

How was his math wrong? He dynoed at 400 REAR WHEEL HORSEPOWER. His estimation was that at the time of the dyno results he was at about 475 CRANK HORSE POWER. That's at 18.75% drivetrain loss...

He wants to hit 500 CRANK HORSEPOWER so he wants to add approximately 25 more CRANK HORSEPOWER (21RWHP) and wants to know how to do it!

[nightrider28]

Originally Posted by honor first

no one is a joker. youre the joker talking about crank HP without saying youre referring to crank. unless specified, its a given youre talking about wheel

"Um no one is a joker... You're a joker"..... Um .. Like me think about this.... Yes, that is contradicting .... Interesting. Thank you for the valuable input.

So when I specify "hp" do you automatically see an imaginary rwhp? Because, I thought (can be wrong) eventhough this forum typically goes by rwhp... HP= horsepower(generally coordinated with meaning crank) or RWHP- rear wheel horsepower(as in axel back)????.....

[eastwoodisme]

Originally Posted by nightrider28

"Um no one is a joker... You're a joker"..... Um .. Like me think about this.... Yes, that is contradicting .... Interesting. Thank you for the valuable input.

So when I specify "hp" do you automatically see an imaginary rwhp? Because, I thought (can be wrong) eventhough this forum typically goes by rwhp... HP= horsepower(generally coordinated with meaning crank) or RWHP- rear wheel horsepower(as in axel back)????.....

HP is Horsepower. You are correct. People ASSUME rear wheel horsepower and that is their own issue. I don't understand the big deal sometimes. If you want to tell someone your Crank Horsepower as opposed to your Real Wheel Horsepower, more HORSEPOWER to you!

Also, check my above post and tell me if I am correct in what you were wanting...

[nightrider28]

Originally Posted by TOYMARO

Math is backwards. 400hp was at crank, minus 18% is 400*.82=328rwhp



Take er easy man!!! YOUR math was backwards. And since this is a public forum, there are all types here. And ppl will be ppl. And as stated by others, always use RWHP, crank HP numbers dont mean that much, at the wheel is where it counts! Unless its a boat, then care about crank.



was this the right link? I didnt see any posts by you or littl88.



i still missed right link....



crank HP numbers confuse me

My math is right??????? So if you lose 18% from crank to rwhp...... Then..

400rwhp= xHP x 0.82

OR

400rwhp x 1.18= x HP

[nightrider28]

Yes, that is all I wanted! Lol wasnt expecting this rampage to arise... But I believe I got my answer (someone PM'd me). Talking RWHP he claimed that if i upgrade my intake to CAI, add an Apex scoop, and a throttle body it will add 25rwhp.... Not saying its accurate... Just saying what I was told.

[eastwoodisme]

Originally Posted by nightrider28

My math is right??????? So if you lose 18% from crank to rwhp...... Then..

400rwhp= xHP x 0.82

OR

400rwhp x 1.18= x HP

The easiest way to go from RWHP to HP would be 400RWHP/ .82. (That is divided by...) so 400/ .82 is approximately 487. Like I metioned above, with a manual transmission I use 15% so numbers are never inflated. so. 400/ .85 and that is 470 CRANK Horsepower (for you out there that assume RWHP in a post).