Dyno results: 2.6 liter short block

[illuminaudi at comcast.net]

IIRC, Audi stopped citing driveline losses in its quattro advertisements a year 
or so after it was introduced because the difference between q and 2wd was negligible, a few percent at most.  Of course as the HP numbers go up, so does the difference, but that would only really be important when comparing two different cars...

Just $.02

Matt
'86 5kcstq
 
> Years ago we dyno'd a 5000 Turbo Stock  -- 23% off of Audi's 162 hp

snip

> >the 28% figure comes from
> >http://www.engineersedge.com/calculators/horsepower_automotive.htm
> >I'm not sure what formula they use to get that, something ratio between
> >1/4mile and weight.

snip

> >> >I thought 25% (3/4HP left at wheels) driveline losses were commonly
> >assumed
> >> >for RWD applications. That would mean a 33% (4/3) multiplier to get
> back
> >to
> >> >crank numbers. It might be even higher on quattros. No BTDTs,
> though...

snip

> >> >> make the (overly-simplified) assumption that hp and torque are 25%
> >> >> higher at the crank, then we are looking at around 143 hp and 153
> lbs
> >of
> >> >> torque.
> >> >
> >> >I thought it was more like 28%?