Torque drive train loss

[JvKintheUSA]

Anyone know what the drive train loss is for torque? Is it the same as for horsepower? I had my 2013 gt500 dynoed and it pulled 633 ftlbs with just a 93 octane tune. If you use the 10% loss that these 13s seem to have on horsepower, I come up with 703 ftlbs. A 70 ftlbs increase seems an awful lot for just a 93 octane tune. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmZpGMV_qKg&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

 

[mullens]

12% seems to be the benchmark for these cars. Yes drivetrain losses are the same for hp and torque . Usually rw torque numbers are in the 580 range so that must be a great tune.

 

[san6279]

I thought Ford made a claim of like 8% for the '13, which was lower than previous years. Read that somewhere.

 

[rwboring]

Anyone know what the drive train loss is for torque? Is it the same as for horsepower? I had my 2013 gt500 dynoed and it pulled 633 ftlbs with just a 93 octane tune. If you use the 10% loss that these 13s seem to have on horsepower, I come up with 703 ftlbs. A 70 ftlbs increase seems an awful lot for just a 93 octane tune. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmZpGMV_qKg&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

they are the same percent... hp is a calculation from torque... nothing real crazy

12% seems to be the benchmark for these cars. Yes drivetrain losses are the same for hp and torque . Usually rw torque numbers are in the 580 range so that must be a great tune.

12% is a bench mark but i bet most engines would dyno well over 662... i think typically a loss is closer to 15-18 for a manual. so the motor probably puts out more like 700... there is no way it is 8... not with the technology we have today...

 

[MNCobra]

what strut tower brace are you running?

 

[SVTKen]

Anyone know what the drive train loss is for torque? Is it the same as for horsepower? I had my 2013 gt500 dynoed and it pulled 633 ftlbs with just a 93 octane tune. If you use the 10% loss that these 13s seem to have on horsepower, I come up with 703 ftlbs. A 70 ftlbs increase seems an awful lot for just a 93 octane tune. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmZpGMV_qKg&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

All dynos are different, and some dynos are more "generous" with the power/torque than other dynos. Plus a lot to the time, the people doing the tuning give you numbers that are exaggerated, so it looks like you are really getting what you paid for. What were the baseline numbers before the tune? Was the baseline done on the same day by the same operator under the same conditions using the same paramters? I personally wouldn't get too caught up with the dyno numbers. There are so many variables involved with operating a chassis dyno that it is difficult to gauge and compare results. A better test of performance is to take it to the track and compare timeslips, 60 fts, etc, and do a simple DA correction on the numbers. I like to have handfuls of timeslips before I do any mods or tuning at all.

 

[JvKintheUSA]

Steeda

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Chris!]

Like Ken said- every Dyno is different.

My car did 603hp 598tq stock on a dynojet. After doing 549hp 530tq on a dynodynamics.