Re: Claims vs. Claims - getting them straight

["Bruce Bell" <bbell@bbell.com>]

I think that 1.5 CFM to HP rule of thumb has some factor
for VE already built in. If not, then the max. hp for a
1781 cc 4cyl VW would be around 115 hp @ 5500 rpm.
Tectonics has built too many of these with more power.  

Also, I don't think VE is a constant for a given motor.
i.e. I expect it goes down as boost pressure goes up
because of the increasing back pressure. 

> Hmmm.  Let's apply some of that to the stock
configuration.
> 
> 1.43 PR, 162 hp.
> 
> 1.5 for airflow gives 240 CFM, or 170 CFM for 1.0 bar. 
Now Eric's
> 2.8 PR gives us 470 CFM - pretty close to that RS2 figure
which would
> indicate to me that the performance ain't going to be
much different
> to the RS2.
> 
> BTW, what VE and RPM are you using to get the 513 CFM
figure?
> Given the stock numbers, I think you may want to reduce
the VE.
> 
> And finally, to get 2.8 with a 2.5 pressure transducer...
well,
> I guess the fuel pump cutoff must be disabled.  Living
dangerously...
> 
> Orin.