[urq] Turbocharging & Elevations

[Justin]

"I'm a 1/4mile guy at heart, ..."
couldn't agree more :)
If Javad's car will do 12.25 quarter mile....that says it all!!!....who
cares if it's 415hp or 390whp...etc.
I was just reading the Motor Trend...they put the 911vs. the 2004
Corvette....both do a 1/4 mile is about 12.30.....
If you got a car that could keep up with the big guns...then what's the big
whoop...? :)
cheers and happy tuning,
Justin C.
----- Original Message -----
From: <QSHIPQ at aol.com>
To: <johnkoenig at greennet.net>; <urq at audifans.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 12:31 PM
Subject: Re: [urq] Turbocharging & Elevations


> In a message dated 11/13/2004 12:11:46 PM Central Standard Time,
> johnkoenig at greennet.net writes:
> >My only complaint is that defined standards and recognized units of
> >measurement exist for sound reasons, and "whp" is neither.  It's all bhp,
> >even on a chassis dyno.  I don't even mind "wheel horsepower" 'cause, you
> >know, English works pretty well.  I just hate making up imaginary units.
>
> Er, Wheel Horsepower is WHP, whp, Whp, by definition.  Think of it as
> horsepower measured at the wheels, not at the crank.  As a point in fact,
you and I
> both know that any dynomometer number is an imaginary unit, cuz it makes a
LOT
> of assumptions wrt BMEP and averages many of the inputs.
>
> >Of course, we live in a world of ATM machines, VIN numbers and where
> >"flammable" and "inflammable" mean the same thing.  I even remember when
> >"tuning" meant optimizing performance and efficiency!  I guess I'd better
> >just get over it!!!
>
> Most would argue the 'goal' of tuning or the effect of tuning will either
> optimize Volumetric or Thermal Effieciencies, or it won't.  The WHP is
used as a
> tool to evaluate that.  As such, it's a real world practical application
of
> pretty nerdy SAE and Physics Principles.  Personally, I'd take ATWHPu or
RWHPu
> (at the wheels horsepower or rear wheel horsepower - uncorrected) before
I'd
> take an engine dyno number.  Why, cuz an engine dyno is only a static test
of
> dynamic conditions.  More clearly put WHP is a more accurate number, and
> certainly with enough 'n', is more real world than some SAE engineers
optimizing a
> single engine for a given test.
>
> I'm a 1/4mile guy at heart, several of us old timers (pre gizmo guys) have
> those tables and conversions in their head.  This thread dragged a long
way from
> uncorrected chassis dyno horsepower.  The problem I suspect is that
> uncorrected numbers aren't impressive, I suggest that they are useful
tools/numbers
> unto themselves.  Trying to 'correct' it, IMO/E means that it's no longer
the
> right tool, or one is trying to change the purpose and intent for using
it.
>
> Put it on the chassis dyno, whiskey straight up.
>
> Scott J
> _______________________________________________
> Audifans urq mailing list
> Send posts to: mailto:urq at audifans.com
> Manage your list connection: http://www.audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/urq
> Have an urq question?  Check the Audifans Knowledgebase!
> http://www.audi-quattro.org/cgi-bin/twiki/view/Audi/UrQuattro
> Have an urq answer? ... Please help others by adding to the KB ... all
contributions welcome!