View Single Post
Old 25-04-2008   #17 (Post Link)
marko
AO Silver Member
 
marko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: northeast uk
Posts: 2,715

Member car:

MG TF160 Sprint

Re: BMC sports filter V BMC CDA V K&N

esh i dont know, you ask for proof of the gain, i give it to you, you still complain. how does one win?!!

stock the car pulls at the MOST 157bhp and 128ftlb torque, as you can see this chart shows with an otherwise stock car that the bmc has added 4.4bhp and 13ftlb torque.

anyone who says that 10% more torque is unnoticable or not worth having obviously doesnt drive properly

sorry - missing the point - the rolling road isnt sensitive enough to be able to realy pick up such low bhp / lb/ft differences IMO. a slight temperature change / atmospheric change can give +/- 10bhp no probs. The other thing is that the RR can be 'influenced' by the operator to give good results of his tuning!
i disagree with that in so many ways. firstly, dynodynamic rolling roads are PROVEN to be accurate to within a tolerance of 1bhp/1ftlb. a slight temp or atospheric change? that is accounted for by the sensors on the RR that monitor atmospheric pressuer and temperature so you ALWAYS have the same end result. any garage that 'influences' the results should be shut down. also, the dynodynamic rollers are set in such a way that for the garage to do this they would pretty much have to rewrite the entire software program for the rollers. some dodgey back ally garage may do this but any respectable garage will not. simple as.

Last edited by marko : 25-04-2008 at 09:03. Reason: add more
marko is offline  
Reply With Quote