[DMCForum] Re: performance engine specifications (Rick G)

["twinenginedmc12" <twinenginedmc12@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Bill.


I did not know that my rear engine has more torque at idle than a 
turbocharged PRV would have at full throttle.  That's a fun little 
statistic.  Thanks for that.  I know it has enough torque to be scary.

Yup, I included the front engine in the calculations. 

135hp net front, 315hp net rear,

160 brake front, 400 brake rear.

My net figures are a little conservative.  I suspect the brake 
figures are not.

There is a lot to be said for light engines that rotate faster, too.  
I expect that when that Lotus V8 twin turbocharged equipped Delorean 
is operational, I will no longer have the fastest accelerating 
Delorean in existence.  I believe that lighter and faster is better, 
but I designed my car for bulletproofness, which is also better, I 
guess.

Rick.


--- In DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "content22207" <brobertson@xxxx> 
wrote:
> 
> SAE change was made in 1971, I think (about the same time 
compression
> was dropped across the board).
> 
> If Houston simply bumps compression up to Euro spec 9.5:1, that 
alone
> yields 15+ NET horses.
> 
> I believe their dyno graph shows the red line moved closer to 7,000
> RPM, which would indicate some sort of change in the valve train.
> 
> Freer flowing exhaust should be worth 5 or 10 HP.
> 
> Don't forget: HP calculation depends on engine speed -- all Houston
> has to do is figure out a way to get 500 more RPM out of the PRV, 
and
> HP goes up 10% on that basis alone.
> 
> BTW: are you including the Prelude engine in your claculations? The
> high compression 500 should be ~390 gross HP. That's 390 HP @ ~3,500
> RPM (which could almost double if you modified the valve train to 
spin
> even faster). You do realize your 500 is producing more torque at 
IDLE
> than even a turbocharged PRV will ever produce at throttle.
> 
> Bill Robertson
> #5939
> 
> >--- In DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "twinenginedmc12"
> <twinenginedmc12@xxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > I'm sure the DMCH performance engine is a fine engine, but it 
should 
> > be noted that the power specification they publish does not 
> > accurately compare to the stock specification.
> > 
> > The OEM stock engine was rated 130 hp "NET", by law, which means 
the 
> > reading is taken with all accessories like water pump, 
alternator, 
> > air conditioning, intake, exhaust, etc, connected. 
> > 
> > The DMCH performance engine is rated 197 hp "BRAKE", meaning the 
> > reading is taken with no accessories connected.  There doesn't 
even 
> > have to be coolant in the passages.  In the nineteen seventies, 
the 
> > Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) abandoned specifying brake 
> > horsepower (BHP), because it does not accurately reflect the 
power 
> > available to move the car.  
> > 
> > Unless Delorean in Houston starts specifying their performance 
engine 
> > in NET horsepower, it's not possible to intelligently compare the 
two 
> > engines.  I consider DMCH specifying their horsepower in BHP 
either 
> > misguided, or somewhat deceptive, depending on their motives, in 
that 
> > it leads people to believe the performance engine is more 
powerful 
> > than it is.  This is precisely why the SAE stopped specifying 
power 
> > this way.
> > 
> > 
> > Rick Gendreau 11472 
> > twin engine Delorean, 560 brake horsepower, 450 net horsepower, 
Gosh, 
> > what a fun car.

---

Yahoo! Groups Links

• To visit your group on the web, go to:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DMCForum/
   
• To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  DMCForum-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   
• Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.