Look what popped up today,
http://www.lonestarstangs.com/showthread.php?67420-96-12-sct-sf3-tuner-for-sale
Lol. And that price is way to high.
Look what popped up today,
http://www.lonestarstangs.com/showthread.php?67420-96-12-sct-sf3-tuner-for-sale
Seer are you saying that the math always works out like that for torque and hp?
Seer are you saying that the math always works out like that for torque and hp? Seems like the math rarely works out like that with the dyno graphs I've seen.
Do you have a graph where it works out because I wasn't able to? Maybe I'm just doing it wrong. LOL
Maybe I don't have the right formula. What's the formula if you're dealing with lb ft from a graph?
Seer are you saying that the math always works out like that for torque and hp? Seems like the math rarely works out like that with the dyno graphs I've seen.
This is how i did it...
I *feel* you are using the wrong HP number. You can't say peak torque at 4175 rpm = peak HP at 6275 rpm.
You have to look on the graph and state how much torque is needed to create the amount of HP at peak torque. At 4175 rpm, his car was making ~305 hp.
I'm using the formula: TQ = (HP*5252)/RPM
I just used the information given from the dyno chart and plugged it into the formula. I assumed the HP@RPM=TQ@RPM all values being equal and given, and we all seem to agree the TQ numbers are off. But hey, we all passed algebra in high school...
it's not far off.. but that dyno is wonkey lol.
I had a run when I plugged in my ghost cam tune, that it shook the tach read off mid run, so for some odd reason it showed me making 415rwhp at 16,000 rpm. So, it couldn't give me an accurate TQ calc.
What's "wonkey" about it?