2012 with 175whp

[kylesvt720]

Originally Posted by TboneZX3

Right, so why argue the estimated crank numbers as you did in post #53? Your method of calculation is equally as bogus as FocusBoy58s--by assuming that Ford numbers are correct, rather than assuming a typical parasitic loss, as FocusBoy58 was. You were willing at that point to estimate without putting it on an engine dyno.

My point was that he can't really go around saying he has a 200hp focus, because there is no way of proving it. The only proof available based on what facts we have, is that is is making 190chp. End of story.

[amoosenamedhank]

Originally Posted by RonMaiden

I don't want it to be up to the opinion of the service person but I figure an exhaust and intake isn't very intrusive and really isn't altering the mechanics of the car but those mods are a few months away. Rims,tint and a rear spoiler are first.

I can see them coming up with some obscure reason why an intake has caused an issue... the exhaust is a tough one. Especially if it's just a CBE.

[mac.mogul]

Originally Posted by amoosenamedhank

There are A LOT of moving parts going on throughout your drivetrain... please don't concern yourself with whether your alternator is 'engaged' or not.

Sorry, I should point out I'm not an idiot and I realize accessories don't affect drivetrain, I'm just curious if the new Focus is padding its own dyno results by creating an unrealistic environment for itself.

[turbo2300]

I just burned my tounge

[misfire]

Originally Posted by FocusBoy58

Its the Moment of Truth. I really look forward to seeing how much power this car makes.

NICE!!!!


side note:

when did you move to town??

we just had a GTG in philly this past Saturday night

[TboneZX3]

Originally Posted by kylesvt720

My point was that he can't really go around saying he has a 200hp focus, because there is no way of proving it. The only proof available based on what facts we have, is that is is making 190chp. End of story.

If that was your point, you could have just stated that point. You were estimating further than the facts you had, just as FocusBoy58 was until post #67.

[RonMaiden]

I'm just glad others are willing to experiment for us shlubs that are too scared too on a new car and it's nice to see proven ponies and even "just" 190hp in a Focus still raises eyebrows of it's competition.

I do have Cobb tuner on my Subi with 5000 miles but I won't touch (or need to) anything else on this car.

[kylesvt720]

Originally Posted by TboneZX3

If that was your point, you could have just stated that point instead of calculating bogus numbers.

Bogus numbers? I calculated the most accurate numbers possible, based on the facts we have. Can you calculate something more accurate?

[TboneZX3]

Originally Posted by kylesvt720

Bogus numbers? I calculated the most accurate numbers possible, based on the facts we have. Can you calculate something more accurate?

No, I can't. But FocusBoy58 was calculating numbers as accurate as yours, and you didn't like his numbers! Why bother calculating equally inaccurate numbers when you know the only accurate numbers come from an engine dyno? Because, after all, that was you point all along, right?

You are assuming that Ford's stated hp is what you would get in an actual test on an engine dyno.
FocusBoy58 was assuming a % parasitic loss.

What makes one assumption more accurate than another?

[kylesvt720]

Originally Posted by TboneZX3

No, I can't. But FocusBoy58 was calculating numbers as accurate as yours, and you didn't like his numbers! Why bother calculating equally inaccurate numbers when you know the only accurate numbers come from an engine dyno? Because, after all, that was you point all along, right?

That's false. I suggest you avoid practicing law, as you wouldn't fair very well. Also avoid engineering fields, as you would fair poorly on making conclusions based on the facts at hand.