|
In Reply to: Re: 96 and up....250hp vs 240hp in 95 nt posted by Harvey on February 02, 2001 at 08:56:46:
Knowing that no two engines are identical, giving each one a unique HP reading would be a mess.
Besides, it's not factory HP rating that matters but Power to the Wheels. From what I've seen, most 95s and 3.2Ls are dynoing around the same HP to the wheels, with a CONSIDERABLE amount of more torque (but way too early, in my opinion). If we use the factory rating, most cars today are losing between %10-%15 to the wheels. And most here are no using %17.5 (I used to as well), with the 1.21 factor. But I am having a hard time believing that M3s dynoing over 213 HP stock to the wheels are making close to 260bhp stock. Plus, 17.5% loss to the wheels is a whole lot. RW HP is the only way to go now. And many (from what I've noticed) US-Spec 3.2s are around 206-211rwHP, whereas the 95s are around 202-213rwHP (more variance with these engines), with the exception of a few higher and lower ones in both engines. CYA>PM3
© 1997 -
2013
Jump Internet Inc. All rights reserved.
