200: Corsa VXR v Clio 200

[Kazumz]

I'm glad someone he's pointed that out, saves me saying it lol. it hardly runs out of puff, the torque peak is lower down the range. But it still holds constant up until 6500-7000rpm:

thats probably the the over boost mapped in that you see at the start.

The Meg does keep pulling right through the range up until the limiter, but it is a 2.0 bigger turbo: that's a different ball game, that's Mk2 Rs territory.

The corsas engine responds to tuning VERY well, much better increases on that engine over the Astra Z20LEH 2.0 turbo engine.

just by putting the K04 turbo off the Astra onto the corsa makes it a bit of an animal for a 'tiny turbo' car

Do you want a K03s ? I'm selling one. I believe it's the K03 housing with a K04 turbine. I didn't do much research in to it though, so forgive me if I'm incorrect.

 

[GrumpyTwig]

I'm glad someone he's pointed that out, saves me saying it lol. it hardly runs out of puff, the torque peak is lower down the range. But it still holds constant up until 6500-7000rpm:

thats probably the the over boost mapped in that you see at the start.

The Meg does keep pulling right through the range up until the limiter, but it is a 2.0 bigger turbo: that's a different ball game, that's Mk2 Rs territory.

The corsas engine responds to tuning VERY well, much better increases on that engine over the Astra Z20LEH 2.0 turbo engine.

just by putting the K04 turbo off the Astra onto the corsa makes it a bit of an animal for a 'tiny turbo' car

Well at least it's a group hallucination, I'll let my pet elephant know we were right. He loves a good bit of internet bull****.

 

[Kazumz]

Well at least it's a group hallucination, I'll let my pet elephant know we were right. He loves a good bit of internet bull****.

Hey man, no need to be like that. I was only stating what I've seen from dyno diagrams. How was I meant to know that it had overboost mapped at the start?

We're all learning here.

 

[GrumpyTwig]

Hey man, no need to be like that. I was only stating what I've seen from dyno diagrams. How was I meant to know that it had overboost mapped at the start?

We're all learning here.

But you posted a dyno graph that showed your comments of them 'running out of puff' was wrong :\ even a layman (I'm no expert for sure) can see that's not true from the graphs you posted yourself.

I'm all for slating Vauxhalls, I've always dream of owning an exclusive limited edition Corsa myself. But at least lets mock them on a factual basis.

 

[Kazumz]

But you posted a dyno graph that showed your comments of them 'running out of puff' was wrong :\ even a layman (I'm no expert for sure) can see that's not true from the graphs you posted yourself.

I'm all for slating Vauxhalls, I've always dream of owning an exclusive limited edition Corsa myself. But at least lets mock them on a factual basis.

Just stating what I can see mate that's all.

No worries.

 

[GrumpyTwig]

I recommend an eye test then.

 

[Kazumz]

Just to clarify. I'm talking about the torque drop on the dyno diagram. Just letting other people know if they have a laugh at this.

 

[TB Rich]

Ignore the torque, look at the power and that is flat til the limiter. Power is a function of torque (and rpm) so if it's still rising or flat, you're all good. Ignore all this torque is everything malarky, without the context of rpm it means ****, which is exactly what power does in providing that context.

 

[Kazumz]

Ignore the torque, look at the power and that is flat til the limiter. Power is a function of torque (and rpm) so if it's still rising or flat, you're all good. Ignore all this torque is everything malarky, without the context of rpm it means ****, which is exactly what power does in providing that context.

Isn't BHP derived from Torque though?

 

[TB Rich]

Yes, Power - what I said..... you sure you don't need your eyes testing mate lol!!

 

[Kazumz]

Yes, Power - what I said..... you sure you don't need your eyes testing mate lol!!

wat

Yeah I got you man, sorry; I just read it wrong. It's been a rough day. Appreciate the tidy reply.

 

[TB Rich]

Also BHP is a unit (measurement) of Power by the way. Which is why I refered to it as Power.

 

[Kazumz]

Also BHP is a unit (measurement) of Power by the way. Which is why I refered to it as Power.

Okay cool. So what you're saying is that even though the torque is dropping, the revs are rising which makes up for it and produces a flat bhp line?

Just to clarify, 'm not a car mechanic by the way; I get my oil changed by someone else lol!! I just know bits and bobs.

 

[GrumpyTwig]

This is a dyno of the new Mustang Ecoboost which has had a lot of comments on drive tests of it running out of enthusiasm at high revs.
Notice the power rising and then tailing off after 5200rpm? Now THAT is 'running out of puff', or has just been mapped that way.

 

[TB Rich]

Yeah pretty much, i'm no maths guru but essentially that's as I understand it.

That graph also probably looks worse because it has different scales for torque and power, typically the scales match and this is why torque and power always cross at 5252rpm (power is torque x rpm / 5252) - as long as the scales are equal of course.

 

[Foxspeed]

engines produce torque which is then calculated via revs to arrive at power etc - units of doing work or how quickly you can do that work...

as the saying goes "torque is what you feel and power is what you pay for"

majority of modern petrol turbo cars drive like diesels - why - more to do with the nedc fuel/co2 figures...and some do "run out of puff" at the top end as that's how they are mapped - just look at a modern turbo engines torque curve - peaks at low revs and then stays flat over a large rev range then sharply tails off - that's all ecu controlled to give them low emissions but still drive well with a small turbo spinning up fast at low rpm only thing is its no good for high top end torque/power as it becomes a restriction in the engine

 

[Kazumz]

So you're all saying that this is technically running out of puff?

If so, I've got ya.

 

[Willis]

All engines run out of "puff" as the revs rise. Some will continue to produce or record "power" in BHP to the redline however the ones that do will most definitely have their torque declining by then.

If you look at a 197/200, peak torque is what, 5500RPM or thereabouts? At what, 140 lbFt or something like that? It then tails off to around 100 lbFt or maybe less by around 7400RPM, but, at this point the engine will be making peak BHP due to how BHP is calculated from revs and torque. By comparison, a turbo engine will generally not rev as high as an NA engine and it's powerband will be a lot sooner or lower in the revs, like on the VXR it peaks at just past 2000RPM (180 lbFt-ish) and should hold near enough flat to around 5500RPM where it'll then drop off steadily before the limiter at around 7000RPM. The graph you put up of the VXR had massively different scales for torque and horsepower and so the decline in torque looked drastic when in fact it's the scale of the graph that's exaggerated it, believe me.

On a graph, you look at the area under the line. The more you have under the line, the more poke the car has at any given point. That's a way I was told to understand them and it's very simple. For example, compare a 197 and VXR rolling road graph (using the same scale increments) at say 3000RPM and the VXR will have a lot more "under the line" than the 197 will. So if you were in the cars and in the same gear (or as close as you could be the same ratios at least) and both at 3000RPM and put your foot down then the VXR would pull away. I hope that makes sense, if you look past the first graph on Google and see one with decent scales for a VXR and the same for a Clio then you'll see exactly what I mean then and what others have been trying to explain too.

Example of how a graph with decent scale should look for a VXR...



Also, be mindful of graphs that mix metric and imperial figures. The one you posted has the torque in NM (metric) and the power in BHP (imperial). That skews things, it should either be NM with KW or PS or lbFt with BHP, our brains aren't set up to mix metric and imperial easily. We're generally taught one or the other at school and only learn basic conversions like mm to inches, we use imperial here where as the continentals prefer metric.

It's early and my brain hurts but I hope that helps. (y)

 

[Willis]

Here's a 197 one pulled from Google, scale doesn't match the VXR one I posted above but you'll see what I mean about where the engines produce and "run out of puff" compared to each other on this, it's as close as scale as I could find.

Note the torque as mentioned in my example above. At 3000RPM the Clio is producing around 85 lbFt, where as at the same revs the VXR is producing around 180 lbFt (use the lower graphs as the cars have similar peak BHP figures on those so that makes a fair comparison)...

 

[Chris197F1]

lol thats Mine