Why soooooo much BHP from A V6

[Slimshady]

Ok this question has been asked a lot over the past years (main problem is that I state my dyno results under my name)

So why did my car achieve 194.7BHP a couple of years ago at the Silverstone club meet?

Although I am an engineer and have a slight understanding of cars I might be wrong so take the following with a pinch of salt – any comments welcomed.

Please do not read this incorrectly the V6 is a good car and the VR4 should be a lot better – not that I have driven a VR4 but I am still taken with the V6 because it is front wheel drive and puts all the power there – this is a good thing if you can get the power down. I have recently brought eagle F1’s all round and I can still wheel spin in the dry in 1st and 2nd gear – in the wet I can wheel spin in 3rd – not good..... but fun.

The only upgrades I have installed is replacing the standard air box with a cone filter and using two 1.5” air pipes from the front of the car to the cone.

Mitsubishi clam the V6 has 120KW of power at 5750RPM this equates to 161BHP at 5750 RPM this is not far off when you look at the dyno graphs but my V6 has a bit more because it has been slightly modified as stated above – my V6 has approximately 180BHP at 5750RPM a bit up on Mitsys statement.

The VR4 has 4WD, AYC and a compression ratio of 8:1, on top of this most VR4’S are automatic this will lose a lot - 25% for 4WD and a further 7% for automatic transmition. If you look at my graph you will see that I am pulling 145.2KW or 194.7 on my second run, this is about 127.91BHP at the wheels, a standard VR4 pulls 110BHP at the wheels. A modified VR4 with say a Blits boost controller will pull 150BHP at the wheels.

The V6 is obviously a normally aspirated car and therefore has a compression ratio of about 10:1 – subsequently it is a very rev’y car and I challenge any VR4 owner to rev as fast as a V6.

Once again I am not putting the VR4 down in any way theoretically speaking the V6 should be faster in a straight line drag if the V6 can get the power down – (it can’t do it I have tried many times so the VR4 will win hands down) the VR4 has 4WD and AYC so the V6 has no chance keeping up through the bends on a track.

I enclose a Dino of my car for the non believers, the other car shown is the vee’s VR4 front wheel drive V6 to VR4 engine modification – note the 10:1 compression ratio over the VR4’s 8:1 i.e. the revs – a Normally Aspirated car will rev higher and quicker but the VR4’s turbo helps to get the air in quicker when spooling up (that is the difference – Compression ration V unnatural / forced air injection into the engine block.

Please note 200 BHP is about the maximum recommended for any front wheeled drive car and Mitsubishi has achieved this with the V6 – the VR4 is the answer to achieving much more i.e. 4WD and a turbo to propel the car faster / around bends faster / and to provide better traction.

Actually this could be a good start for a REV’s sound competition.


Slim

The Mov files can not be uploaded so I can only offer the stills

[Kenneth]

I can't view the PDF files, can you upload as JPG or something?

Not sure you have your figures correct though, a standard VR-4 puts down anywhere between 185BHP and 225BPH to the wheels. My modified VR-4 put down around 245BPH to the wheels.

The more important figure is the torque, the VR-4 can put down almost peak torque between 3000 and 5000 RPM. As I said, I cannot view your PDF files, so cannot compare the torque, I would think however that the VR-4 puts the V6 to shame. This btw is where the acceleration comes from and why a VR-4 will leave a N/A V6 behind.

Take a look at my dyno graph.
attachment.php?attachmentid=21320&d=1204874974

No doubt about it though, your car does do well for a N/A V6. :)

[bradc]

Carsten got 92.8kw at the wheels in his 4wd V6, you had 123kw at the wheels which is quite impressive really, even if his is 4wd.

Have any other V6 owners dynoed their cars out there? My ST-R does feel quicker than it's power figure would make you beleive, and it is a heck of a lot quicker than Carsten's one (sorry bud!)

Might have to get the ST-R dynoed at some point and see what it makes

[Subaru ETA]

dyno day anyone?

[mpau009]

dyno day anyone?

Soon:)

[Robotnik123]

Could a previous owner have installed a performance chiop, reprogrammed the ECU or something like that?

[Davezj]

I can't view the PDF files, can you upload as JPG or something?

Not sure you have your figures correct though, a standard VR-4 puts down anywhere between 185BHP and 225BPH to the wheels. My modified VR-4 put down around 245BPH to the wheels.

The more important figure is the torque, the VR-4 can put down almost peak torque between 3000 and 5000 RPM. As I said, I cannot view your PDF files, so cannot compare the torque, I would think however that the VR-4 puts the V6 to shame. This btw is where the acceleration comes from and why a VR-4 will leave a N/A V6 behind.

Take a look at my dyno graph.
attachment.php?attachmentid=21320&d=1204874974

No doubt about it though, your car does do well for a N/A V6. :)



I would have to agree with kenneth, if you do the maths.

on the new car BHP figure.

A/T pre and post facelift:-
260bhp should give 197bhp at the wheels
280bhp should give 211bhp at the wheels

Manual Pre and post facelift:-
280bhp should give 225bhp at the wheels

It would have to be one sick VR4 to give 110bhp at the wheels.

edit:-
Thanks for pointing that out Nev.
yes i am too old to even think "sick" mean anything other than vomit and much illness, with a hand full of fever and chills thrown in for good measure. not working well.

[elnevio]

It would have to be one sick VR4 to give 110bhp at the wheels.
And that's not sick in urban yoof speak either!

Maybe that figure is per axle? ;)

[kamal]

Ok this question has been asked a lot over the past years (main problem is that I state my dyno results under my name)

So why did my car achieve 194.7BHP a couple of years ago at the Silverstone club meet?

Although I am an engineer and have a slight understanding of cars I might be wrong so take the following with a pinch of salt – any comments welcomed.

Please do not read this incorrectly the V6 is a good car and the VR4 should be a lot better – not that I have driven a VR4 but I am still taken with the V6 because it is front wheel drive and puts all the power there – this is a good thing if you can get the power down. I have recently brought eagle F1’s all round and I can still wheel spin in the dry in 1st and 2nd gear – in the wet I can wheel spin in 3rd – not good..... but fun.

The only upgrades I have installed is replacing the standard air box with a cone filter and using two 1.5” air pipes from the front of the car to the cone.

Mitsubishi clam the V6 has 120KW of power at 5750RPM this equates to 161BHP at 5750 RPM this is not far off when you look at the dyno graphs but my V6 has a bit more because it has been slightly modified as stated above – my V6 has approximately 180BHP at 5750RPM a bit up on Mitsys statement.

The VR4 has 4WD, AYC and a compression ratio of 8:1, on top of this most VR4’S are automatic this will lose a lot - 25% for 4WD and a further 7% for automatic transmition. If you look at my graph you will see that I am pulling 145.2KW or 194.7 on my second run, this is about 127.91BHP at the wheels, a standard VR4 pulls 110BHP at the wheels. A modified VR4 with say a Blits boost controller will pull 150BHP at the wheels.

The V6 is obviously a normally aspirated car and therefore has a compression ratio of about 10:1 – subsequently it is a very rev’y car and I challenge any VR4 owner to rev as fast as a V6.

Once again I am not putting the VR4 down in any way theoretically speaking the V6 should be faster in a straight line drag if the V6 can get the power down – (it can’t do it I have tried many times so the VR4 will win hands down) the VR4 has 4WD and AYC so the V6 has no chance keeping up through the bends on a track.

I enclose a Dino of my car for the non believers, the other car shown is the vee’s VR4 front wheel drive V6 to VR4 engine modification – note the 10:1 compression ratio over the VR4’s 8:1 i.e. the revs – a Normally Aspirated car will rev higher and quicker but the VR4’s turbo helps to get the air in quicker when spooling up (that is the difference – Compression ration V unnatural / forced air injection into the engine block.

Please note 200 BHP is about the maximum recommended for any front wheeled drive car and Mitsubishi has achieved this with the V6 – the VR4 is the answer to achieving much more i.e. 4WD and a turbo to propel the car faster / around bends faster / and to provide better traction.

Actually this could be a good start for a REV’s sound competition.


Slim

The Mov files can not be uploaded so I can only offer the stills

Not pissing on your bonfire of anything but I'd try another rr if i were you, http://www.noblemotorsport.co.uk/ have a good track record.

Also have a read hear about calculated or should i say estimated flywheel figures rr's give out.

http://www.pumaracing.co.uk/setup01.htm

[thecustomer]

Not pissing on your bonfire of anything but I'd try another rr if i were you,]

Yeah, they do vary from one place to another
& it would make sense to have some VR4s along for the ride, to benchmark against
/rally

Will

[bradc]

at the place he got that figure from about 10 VR-4's were dynoed on the same day. Most did between 240 and 270hp at the engine, the highest was 321hp, Nick Mann

[Wodjno]

at the place he got that figure from about 10 VR-4's were dynoed on the same day. Most did between 240 and 270hp at the engine, the highest was 321hp, Nick Mann

Yup... And thats Real English BHP /yes

[thecustomer]

yup, & doing a repeat rr, with some of those vr4s along as a benchmark, would tell you whether the V6 was a rogue figure, or it was the rolling road... or *that* V6 contains the secret of hidden bhp - it wasn't running a mix of shell v poower & bp ultimate, was it?/pan

[Slimshady]

I knew I shouldn’t have started this/pan /pan /pan /pan and now is probably a good time to remove my BHP results from my signature when I have a chance

I compiled a spreadsheet with the data on the day – you can find it on this post http://www.clubvr4.com/forum/showthread.php?p=153657#post153657

I will upload the PDFs again when I have a chance

Sorry for getting the maths wrong but the conversions came from the chaps at Silverstone I simply used the data in the spread sheet – once again I am not out to upset anyone, just tired of people asking me why my V6 has 194.7BHP – Simple answer I have no idea. If I could upload MOV files or figure out how to convert them to another format I will. By the way 194.7 BHP on a front wheeled drive car is not so much fun as you think – I cannot put the power down and wheel spin a lot, I thought the brand new Eagle F1’s would fix this but I still have problems.

Sorry to offend

Slim

[Kenneth]

I knew I shouldn’t have started this/pan /pan /pan /pan and now is probably a good time to remove my BHP results from my signature when I have a chance

I compiled a spreadsheet with the data on the day – you can find it on this post http://www.clubvr4.com/forum/showthread.php?p=153657#post153657

I will upload the PDFs again when I have a chance

Sorry for getting the maths wrong but the conversions came from the chaps at Silverstone I simply used the data in the spread sheet – once again I am not out to upset anyone, just tired of people asking me why my V6 has 194.7BHP – Simple answer I have no idea. If I could upload MOV files or figure out how to convert them to another format I will. By the way 194.7 BHP on a front wheeled drive car is not so much fun as you think – I cannot put the power down and wheel spin a lot, I thought the brand new Eagle F1’s would fix this but I still have problems.

Sorry to offend

Slim

You didn't offend mate, just wanted to be clear where I thought your figures were out.

There is no need to take the hp figure off your signature, though you may be better off if you advertise the power at the wheels? That way you don't have to worry about the possibility of misleading transmission loss calculations :)

[Slimshady]

Ok – I have downloaded a freebee converter to convert the MOVs to MPEGs but subsequently you will see a note that I haven’t paid for the full software yet in the middle of the screen.

Pay attention to the second run – in the video this is the first you see on the screen – the actual first run I think was about 196 and a bit but Dyno computer was not set up correctly with the fist run so it doesn’t count because I do not have the graphs.

The other video is I think is the Vee’s (a V6 with a VR4 engine installed – i.e. a VR4 with front wheeled drive)

Note the rev difference between the two engines


Slim

[bradc]

Also possible worth pointing out that the JDM n/a 6A13 was rated at 175hp, so only 20hp from where you are now. I reckon I could probably get there with an exhaust, Ralliart filter and the MAF mod

[Slimshady]

Mmmmmmm that didn’t work perhaps the file size is too large – if anyone has any ideas please let me know

Slim

[kamal]

I knew I shouldn’t have started this/pan /pan /pan /pan and now is probably a good time to remove my BHP results from my signature when I have a chance

I compiled a spreadsheet with the data on the day – you can find it on this post http://www.clubvr4.com/forum/showthread.php?p=153657#post153657

I will upload the PDFs again when I have a chance

Sorry for getting the maths wrong but the conversions came from the chaps at Silverstone I simply used the data in the spread sheet – once again I am not out to upset anyone, just tired of people asking me why my V6 has 194.7BHP – Simple answer I have no idea. If I could upload MOV files or figure out how to convert them to another format I will. By the way 194.7 BHP on a front wheeled drive car is not so much fun as you think – I cannot put the power down and wheel spin a lot, I thought the brand new Eagle F1’s would fix this but I still have problems.

Sorry to offend

Slim

You didn't offend man, it's just that we don't want to get our hopes up before further proof.

[Slimshady]

Ooopps I have just re-read my initial statement and I can now see how I have upset everyone so much, I state the power at the wheel BHP and I actually meant the power to weight ratio at the wheels (i.e. BHP per ton). Sorry I am such a muppet, the VR4 power at the wheels averaged on the day at about 195.2 (if you use the data in the spreadsheet) the power to weight BHP is the figure above. Note the VR4 will lose 25% for 4WD and 7% for Auto and in the case of power to weight ratio the VR4 is slightly fatter weighing in at around 0.2 ton heavier.

If anyone knows how to upload video files let me know – I think you will enjoy them.

Sorry again, if I had not spent the whole day at Ninja training today and could still move my body without functioning like Frankenstein I would throw myself onto one of my swords for my errors.


Slim

[Slimshady]

Ok now on YouTube on this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urJR_0-ESfE

Slim

[kamal]

Nice torque curve.

[Kenneth]

Ooopps I have just re-read my initial statement and I can now see how I have upset everyone so much, I state the power at the wheel BHP and I actually meant the power to weight ratio at the wheels (i.e. BHP per ton). Sorry I am such a muppet, the VR4 power at the wheels averaged on the day at about 195.2 (if you use the data in the spreadsheet) the power to weight BHP is the figure above. Note the VR4 will lose 25% for 4WD and 7% for Auto and in the case of power to weight ratio the VR4 is slightly fatter weighing in at around 0.2 ton heavier.


Ok, but I still think your math needs some work.



The VR4 has 4WD, AYC and a compression ratio of 8:1, on top of this most VR4’S are automatic this will lose a lot - 25% for 4WD and a further 7% for automatic transmition. If you look at my graph you will see that I am pulling 145.2KW or 194.7 on my second run, this is about 127.91BHP at the wheels, a standard VR4 pulls 110BHP at the wheels. A modified VR4 with say a Blits boost controller will pull 150BHP at the wheels.

Based on your estimate of 127.91BHP at the wheels and that your car is 200Kg lighter than a VR-4 (VR-4 weight we will say is 1600Kg)

Your car at 127.91hp at the wheels
127.91 / 1.4 = 91.4 hp per ton at the wheels

VR-4 at 187.74hp at the wheels (this is the lowest properly functioning VR-4 dyno result I have seen)
187 / 1.6 = 116.9 hp per ton at the wheels

This puts a VR-4 at 25.5hp advantage at the wheels. This is at 4 wheels compared to the V6's 2 wheels, so not only does the VR-4 have a power advantage, it also has a grip advantage.

I also thought the V6 had 9.5:1 compression over the VR-4s 8.5:1... Though someone might correct me on that one.

Basically I can see a good result for the V6, one you should be proud of.
However I cannot see any ability for it to compete with a VR-4.

[bradc]

V6 = 9:1 compression.

Also he got 165hp at the wheels, 194.7hp calculated at the engine. You are right on the weight Kenneth, a 2wd V6 is about 1400kg.

[Kenneth]

Also he got 165hp at the wheels, 194.7hp calculated at the engine.

Cool, thanks for the correction.

That being the case then, it looks like Slimshady does indeed have a V6 that has a better HP per ton than a very under powered VR-4.

Should be fun for surprising a fair few other vehicles :)

In saying all this, didn't Ian's GLS have a rather surprising amount of acceleration/speed? I remember reading a few posts about it.

[Kieran]

In saying all this, didn't Ian's GLS have a rather surprising amount of acceleration/speed? I remember reading a few posts about it.

Yes.... When I first got Hordak I went to the Dumfries meeting and remember chasing Ian's car - Hordak being totally standard at that time, and Could I catch him?! Piffle!/pan

Interestingly, I eventually had similar performance Mods to Ian's GLS on my V6 (Decat + backbox, air filter) and from about 60-90mph, there was nothing in it between Hordak and Ariadne (When she was still standard)!!:speechles

So yeah, the non-turbos seem to respond well to a few basic mods.

[psbarham]

So yeah, the non-turbos seem to respond well to a few basic mods.

what was it you said when we did the resuce SGHOM at the pod the other year??

the v6 for a big car is suprisingly nippy, and i'm convinced that there is another 30-40 bhp lurking in there without going ott on the costs ;)

[bradc]

They are quick from 4000-6000rpm, I'm happy with mine.