Originally Posted by TboneZX3
I do very well in my engineering field, thank you. I'll ask you again: What makes your assumption more accurate than FocusBoy58's assumption?
Or will you just ignore the question?
You both had one and only one truth in your calculations--the FWHP from FocusBoy58's recent dyno. Neither of you knew the true parasitic loss, or the actual crank horsepower from his engine. Due to that fact, you were both calculating with the same degree of accuracy.
I took the facts we have. One SAE certified crank horsepower number for all 2012 foci, and several stock wheel horsepower numbers. (FocusBoys were 148whp as well I believe, could be wrong.) Used that to calculate the parasitic loss, and then applied that to his current whp result. Obviously we have to assume the dynos were sent up correctly, which could be a stretch. I've stated all of this already I believe?
Based on your logic. No stock 2012 owner can say they have a 160hp car, unless they have the engine put on an engine dyno. Assuming the motor makes the SAE certified numbers, isn't a poor assumption I don't believe. At the very least its a conservative one.
From my original post on the subject...
Originally Posted by kylesvt720
How can you say I have it backwards? I haven't shown math. Show me math that states it is 200hp crank?
160 crank horsepower.
148whp = 7.5% parasitic loss.
175whp a the same parasitic loss of 7.5% means the car is making 190 crank horsepower.
Unless you pulled the motor and dynoed the stock crank horsepower, those are the only numbers we have to go on.