90rwkw odd out of a mainline is a damn good effort. They typically read between 10-17rwkw LOWER than a dyno dynamic dyno. Drivetrain loss is typically a fixed figure + a small percentage resulting from increased load/friction with greater torque/rpm. My R32 GTST when it was bone stock 160kw at the flywheen made 115rwkw on a dd dyno. A mates R33 GTST dead stock 187kw at the flywheel made 125rwkw on the same dyno. Another mates RB25DET made 580hp (432kw) at the flywheel on an engine dyno made 338rwkw on a DD dyno Shoot6F. According to that approx 98rwkw drive train loss. Apparently (from some one else who had their motor on an engine dyno) a mildly modified 450hp skyline losses approx 75kw through the drive train.

Quote: Originally Posted by Cubes 90rwkw odd out of a mainline is a damn good effort. They typically read between 10-17rwkw LOWER than a dyno dynamic dyno. Drivetrain loss is typically a fixed figure + a small percentage resulting from increased load/friction with greater torque/rpm. My R32 GTST when it was bone stock 160kw at the flywheen made 115rwkw on a dd dyno. A mates R33 GTST dead stock 187kw at the flywheel made 125rwkw on the same dyno. Another mates RB25DET made 580hp (432kw) at the flywheel on an engine dyno made 338rwkw on a DD dyno Shoot6F. According to that approx 98rwkw drive train loss. Apparently (from some one else who had their motor on an engine dyno) a mildly modified 450hp skyline losses approx 75kw through the drive train. I made 185rwkw on that same dyno (turbo of course) so does that mean I could be breaking the 200rwkw barrier with a T3Hiflo ? Some original photos have not been recovered yet.

wayne no lol

my white NA 5 speed, back in 2003, made 117kw at rears, it was a freak

90 odd kw is pretty good, engine must be in fairly good nick. The usual loss through a manual is 13-19% all dependent on a number of factors. The usual loss through an auto is naturally higher and should be anywhere from 22-30% Most cases will fall in these numbers, if not then either you have a great driveline or a really crap one. BTW the new GT-R has been rated at 7% loss. (but im not sure if thats completely right, that was out of a car magazine from europe) Mainyard

Quote: Originally Posted by RAD-11C 133kw and still counting (hopefully) burned such a big hole in my pocket i was basically down to my undies. well worth it thought, love the sound of the thing, goes pretty hard and its a 5 speed, once it gets painted it will be down at the track on the NOS. we will see what it runs. far out thats alright, sounds like it would of been cheaper to just go turbo though.

well with any car even forced induction you all do the following mods; head work like porting, 3 deg valve grind, larger valves, cam. bottom end gets a balance. larger exhaust and headers, high flow cat. better breathing via KnN filter and larger TB, air plenum to match. aftermarket ECU to manage to run it all. and if you want run some nos. in the end thats pretty much what people do and thats pretty much what i have done.

^^ how much power do you have after all that? Could you even beat a 5 speed VN? (without nos)

When i had 120rwkw i could beat a VN and keep up with a 175 alloytech. mind you this is with a beatup mf5 that should have retired long ago. with the setup im about to install hopefully ill crack the 135rwkw mark out of a single cam setup. why you ask??? its all about having fun doing it. and yes i am having fun building my motor. mind you this is with a factory stock diff gear (3.45).

Quote: Originally Posted by Cubes 90rwkw odd out of a mainline is a damn good effort. They typically read between 10-17rwkw LOWER than a dyno dynamic dyno. Not trying to call you wrong but I ran my old VL on a mainline (BTA) when it had the 3040 and it made 319.2rwhp which was .9rwhp less than it made on a dd (V&E) 6 days earlier. Just my experience.

i ask because if you can beat a vn in an na vl then id be impressed Some original photos have not been recovered yet.

Quote: Originally Posted by airbagsVL i ask because if you can beat a vn in an na vl then id be impressed have u ever driven a vl n/a thats any good ??? lol becuz from what you said there sounds very 1 sided Some original photos have not been recovered yet.

whats so great bout the performance of a vn, its jst a pregnant whale on wheels. Vl with bit mild work on it shud kick ass.

theres nothing great about the performance of a vn but stock vs stock a vn will whipe a vl anyday and i used to own a vn so its a good comparison for me to get an idea of how well NA-jet's car goes. stock auto vns did 15.8 second quarters thats a full 2 seconds faster than auto vls at 17.8 secs, hence if his na vl can beat a vn then it must go well Some original photos have not been recovered yet.

My mates put his na calais on the dyno at power cruise as a joke. lol made 123 rwhp. I thought it was a decent effort. I dont see why anyone would try to get power outa a rb30e. But I guess thats just me.

I'd agree,their painfully slow.

its not a bad engine to start out with and trust me if i could afford a turbo i would have one but the fact is im a first yr mechanic and its not to easy to do up a car on $250 a week while tryin to live to. Ill have a calais turbo oneday... lol

Quote: Originally Posted by airbagsVL theres nothing great about the performance of a vn but stock vs stock a vn will whipe a vl anyday and i used to own a vn so its a good comparison for me to get an idea of how well NA-jet's car goes. stock auto vns did 15.8 second quarters thats a full 2 seconds faster than auto vls at 17.8 secs, hence if his na vl can beat a vn then it must go well well seeing as you live in nsw, sydney then we should meet up, get your vn and lets go. Some original photos have not been recovered yet.

i said i used to own a vn, its long gone now. If you say you can beat a vn then i honestly believe you mate, im not doubting you if thats what you think.

go the vn's!!! paddle away,