186bhp@wheels and the wee Eunos handles it fine
Discussion
Just had a day of B & unclassified blatting in the Eunos that returned to me from tuning where it produced 186bhp@the wheels, so about 210bhp at the fly.
The car handles it easily, got to say the chassis doesn't even feel slightly stretched. If anything the increase in torque means it actually feels more planted
The car handles it easily, got to say the chassis doesn't even feel slightly stretched. If anything the increase in torque means it actually feels more planted
That's really interesting.
I'm thinking of swapping my stock 1.6 mx5 for an MR2 turbo - as it's much cheaper that upgrading the mx [was gonna do a turbo and get the suspension done]. do you think that's an error?
my other car's a golf 1.8T gti and I always feel safer on a bend in that that in the mx5 which seems to bounce more round the road - this is one of the other reasons I was thinking of swapping it for an MR2
as well as the power increase - have you changed the suspension on your '5?
Cheers
-ace
I'm thinking of swapping my stock 1.6 mx5 for an MR2 turbo - as it's much cheaper that upgrading the mx [was gonna do a turbo and get the suspension done]. do you think that's an error?
my other car's a golf 1.8T gti and I always feel safer on a bend in that that in the mx5 which seems to bounce more round the road - this is one of the other reasons I was thinking of swapping it for an MR2
as well as the power increase - have you changed the suspension on your '5?
Cheers
-ace
yes, its got AGX adjustable dampers & Eibach springs.
Don't get me wrong, the MR2's are good and I always got it round tracks pleasingly fast but it was never as confident on the road as the MX5, my MR2 had H&R adjustable coilovers with topmounts and lightweight 16" RAYS wheels so it was better than standard as well.
Don't get me wrong, the MR2's are good and I always got it round tracks pleasingly fast but it was never as confident on the road as the MX5, my MR2 had H&R adjustable coilovers with topmounts and lightweight 16" RAYS wheels so it was better than standard as well.
No I didn't have a T-Bar, I can't stand the look of them I think they spoil the lines of the car and look very 70's also the buffeting at anything over 50mph is absurb, it's worse at 50mph than at 110mph in the mx5.
I just got tired of the MR2, was the most unreliable car i've ever owned. I suppose its really just down to its age, mine was a 1992 rev2 so 14 years old when I sold it.
I'd have another, but only a 1994 or younger GT-S Tin Top and i'd need to do about £5K's worth of mods and refreshing the day I got it.
I just got tired of the MR2, was the most unreliable car i've ever owned. I suppose its really just down to its age, mine was a 1992 rev2 so 14 years old when I sold it.
I'd have another, but only a 1994 or younger GT-S Tin Top and i'd need to do about £5K's worth of mods and refreshing the day I got it.
steve bowen said:
Just had a day of B & unclassified blatting in the Eunos that returned to me from tuning where it produced 186bhp@the wheels, so about 210bhp at the fly.
The fly estimate seems a little pessimistic to me. I'd expect there to be more like 40bhp+ lost in transmission and tyres. As a general rule of thumb the rx-7 loses about 18% or 55bhp (both numbers work well for translation).
Still a very healthy number for a light car.
iaint said:
steve bowen said:
Just had a day of B & unclassified blatting in the Eunos that returned to me from tuning where it produced 186bhp@the wheels, so about 210bhp at the fly.
The fly estimate seems a little pessimistic to me. I'd expect there to be more like 40bhp+ lost in transmission and tyres. As a general rule of thumb the rx-7 loses about 18% or 55bhp (both numbers work well for translation).
Still a very healthy number for a light car.
Depends very much on the Dyno Iain
vixpy1 said:
iaint said:
steve bowen said:
Just had a day of B & unclassified blatting in the Eunos that returned to me from tuning where it produced 186bhp@the wheels, so about 210bhp at the fly.
The fly estimate seems a little pessimistic to me. I'd expect there to be more like 40bhp+ lost in transmission and tyres. As a general rule of thumb the rx-7 loses about 18% or 55bhp (both numbers work well for translation).
Still a very healthy number for a light car.
Depends very much on the Dyno Iain
I know what you're getting at (I think) but, to be pedantic, the Dyno doesn't have any bearing on the amount of power 'lost' to the transmission and tyres (unless you're talking engine/hub vs rollers...)
How it calculated loss from run-down or whatever is another thing altogether!
From some fairly extensive dyno data over on MRC it's fairly clear that the estimated losses are pretty constant which indicates that mostly they're not to bad (or all equally crap).
Only thing we can say for sure is the wheels fighure is the only known and that it's all pub-talk anyway!
iaint said:
vixpy1 said:
iaint said:
steve bowen said:
Just had a day of B & unclassified blatting in the Eunos that returned to me from tuning where it produced 186bhp@the wheels, so about 210bhp at the fly.
The fly estimate seems a little pessimistic to me. I'd expect there to be more like 40bhp+ lost in transmission and tyres. As a general rule of thumb the rx-7 loses about 18% or 55bhp (both numbers work well for translation).
Still a very healthy number for a light car.
Depends very much on the Dyno Iain
I know what you're getting at (I think) but, to be pedantic, the Dyno doesn't have any bearing on the amount of power 'lost' to the transmission and tyres (unless you're talking engine/hub vs rollers...)
How it calculated loss from run-down or whatever is another thing altogether!
From some fairly extensive dyno data over on MRC it's fairly clear that the estimated losses are pretty constant which indicates that mostly they're not to bad (or all equally crap).
Only thing we can say for sure is the wheels fighure is the only known and that it's all pub-talk anyway!
No, but different dynos read totally differently in the wheels, in particular the American made dynos (such as the Mustang), give much higher wheel figs, hence the smaller loss used here.
vixpy1 said:
No, but different dynos read totally differently in the wheels, in particular the American made dynos (such as the Mustang), give much higher wheel figs, hence the smaller loss used here.
Really??? I guess they must use a different formula for the calculation of power
Silly yanks! steve bowen said:
something interesting regarding dynos, the guy that mapped my car on the road and the powerdyne rollers used to work at Thor and he said thor would have given me about 20bhp more at the wheels...
Not rollers, hubs.. and he's right, no losses through the tyres = higher number at the hubs.
Simple equation we work on which seems to work well:
Take the wheel power your achieve on a Dyno Dynamics
Take the loss given out by the dyno dynamics and split it exactly in half, add that half to the wheel figs and you have the figs that you would achieve on a Dynapack
for for the Mustang/Dynojet, add 10 to 15 % to the dynodynamics wheel fig and you will have an equivilent.
Gassing Station | Mazda MX5/Roadster/Miata | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff