Whos Actually Running 182bhp ?

[Trophy264]

Morning all
just a quick thread to ask a simple question, this might make for an intersting read, if the answers provided are conclusive and factual, as much as i enjoy opinions everyone has one, so facts only please.
For all you who have had rolling road read outs, what do you actaully have to do to get 182 at the wheels?

JMS claim, that with their JMS tunning package including matched top and bottom inlets, a V6 air box and their custom re-map, couppled with a sports cat, the elusive 182bhp that Renault promised is what you'll actually get, and at the cheap price of £540 ( not including the cat) its very tempting.

I know our engines are as differant as their owners and some will produce alot more than others. I've thought about it, but I'm not really into the turbo thing, as sick as dump valvues sound, i'd rather have a car thats set up to handle what it supposed to put down rather than, whoop! tourque steer..... tree!.

Anyway to the point. If any of you are running 182+ what have you done, how did you do it, and if i may ask how much did it cost?
thanks for your help.
Ross

 

[Max]

what do you actaully have to do to get 182 at the wheels?.........

..............the elusive 182bhp that Renault promised

Good morning,

The 182 that Renault quotes is PS, which is 179.5hp. I think some have got close to that at the flywheel, but getting that at the wheels would take some serious nouce and a lot of £s.

Cue someone who knows far more about it than I do....

 

[tallandy]

Mines running 179bhp after....

- ITG Maxogen Induction
- Straight through stainless steel exhaust
- De-Cat
- RS Tuning Remap

 

[T5PHY]

182 at the wheels would have to be 200 + bhp at the fly!

the 182 as mentioned is ps, which is an at the fly figure when bench tested by renault.

Mines running 172.6 BHP ATF with just a stainless cat back system ITG panel filter and RS Tuner Map.

The Cats on the 182's are already "sports cats" as iirc they are 14 cell.

 

[PB.283]

Mine ran 192 at ric wood motorsport!

Interestingly meganes were down compared to running at rs tuning and Clio were obviously up!

So don't say that RR reads over cos it doesn't! What it does imply is that RRs a bollox!

Think about it, most people believe that clios ate down on power compared to renault claims yet they believe that they beat renaults 0-60 claims. Can both be true?

Also my standard 225f1 ran a simply huge 60bhp more than a mates maped 197 yet on runs we do and on the straights the relative perfomace did not imply such a huge difference in power to weight ratios!

RRs are useless, only good for pub ammo, so pick one that reads well for your type of car and you'll get the figure you want!

 

[hoolio]

LOL, I deleted a previous post here as I thought it might prevoke a "debate" that would go wildly off topic but some of the points have appeared above. RR's are not useless but they are if comparing different cars on different RR's, I think they really really usefull to assess a cars progress/lack of when fettling.

 

[j333evo]

I thought I would add some information that some may know, but not all.

When an engine is homologated by a car manufacturer it is done in a test cell or some know it as a dyno cell, a fully environmentally controlled unit. Everything is controlled to ambient temperature to intake temperatures to oil and coolant temps. that figure achieved is then set, BUT and its a bit but car manufacturers are allowed to sell cars that are only to within 10% of that figure. The homologated figure is always flywheel power.

Many, if not all N/A cars use this to there full advantage, this allows for manufacturing tolerances etc etc the Clio's are a point proven, but so too are the BMW M engines as well as the Audi RS engine's. You will never get them to produce exactly what the manufacturer claims.

Forced induction engines are normally pretty much bang, and in fact in many cases over what is claimed. This because their are all controlled by the torque produced by the forced induction, so the ECU constantly changes what is produced in relation to what the wheel speed sensors are saying they can transmit against the logarithmic scales for traction and stability control, it gets all very complicated. They make there power through the forced induction, whereas a N/A cars will make it through engine speed.

Though a very well turbo know engine that was not so clear cut was the VAG 1.8 20V turbo engine, the 225PS engine was homologated with an inlet charge temp of 25degrees, this in reality will never happen on the open road except maybe in arctic conditions, therefore the cars will never make there power.

Rolling roads area a good way of getting a bench mark figure, and as with anything only as good as the operator in question, I've seen some very consistent and pretty accurate information from r/r, yes the flywheel power is a calculated figure so always some error in there, but as long as the operator knows what he is doing and doing it right, some know very well what they are doing is inflating figures and stand to make no finical gain from the posting of there figures, i.e. against the work that they and only they did they can be sued with a certain degree of certainty.

Anyway to answer the original question, find out what your car has now so you have a datum point to work from before you assess what you need to do to get your required power output.

 

[Smokinrubber]

Not been on the rollers yet for my guess-ta-mate but i know that with the mods on my T my mates 206 GTI 180 is way behind on the road in normal conditions on a rolling start he has pipercross panel filter and scorpion cat back.. I have GDI Group N ECU, Maxogen Induction and full zorst from Prospeed... and my T pulls away eeasily give me a corner and it becomes easy....... and someone told me the 180's were setup for rallyin bollox i say lol

 

[hoolio]

A 206GTI! Hang your head in shame Smokin, at least EVO realised it needed to be compared to a proper car :wink:

 

[Smokinrubber]

A 206GTI! Hang your head in shame Smokin, at least EVO realised it needed to be compared to a proper car :wink:

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

 

[Jonc]

Unichip and Scorpion RS192

 

[pete g]

I think you mean 182hp at the flywheel...
To get at the wheels you would need 250 at the crank..
+ a full race engine or a turbo charger!

You could surprise a few imprezas mind :wink:

 

[shiftspark]

Simples buy this and your very nearly there..

http://www.cliosport.net/forum/showthread.php?t=484910

 

[j333evo]

I always use the formula for FWD cars of take wheel power add 10 and then divide by 0.9.

Therefore for the car above its 143.3+10/0.9=170.3bhp. the 183bhp published seems a tad high for the wheels power, a 40bhp lose is inconceivable on a modern FWD car.

So to get 182bhp at the wheels you need 182+10/0.9=213.3bhp.

If I had a FWD car with 250bhp at the flywheel and less than 200 at the wheels there is some serious problems. A 4WD car shouldn't even loose that much.

A number of online sites use same formula as I do

http://www.dyno-power-run.com/dynocalc.shtml
http://www.dyno-plot.co.uk/dyno/calculators.htm

You want a very good write up about flywheel power and coast down figures then read this as it explains it all very well;
measuring engine power http://www.pumaracing.co.uk/POWER3.htm
coastdown loses http://www.pumaracing.co.uk/coastdwn.htm
the "dangers2 of r/r flywheel figures http://www.pumaracing.co.uk/setup01.htm
transmission loses http://www.pumaracing.co.uk/trans.htm

 

[Trophy264]

wow all really interesting stuff. thankyou all very much.

Ok so 182 at the wheels is..... not going to happen, however 182 at the fly seems do-able with a map and a few other easy bits and peices.
servicing wise and stuff that will help keep the power up right?
anyone know of a RR near southampton, and dont say K-Tec i think if i take it there, they'll give me a biased opinion and try and sell me either their Group N map (which ive not heard amazing things about) or a Turbo, or something, just unbiased info from someone reliable, if not ill just google it.

any other little gems of infomation ?

 

[Trophy264]

Mines running 179bhp after....

- ITG Maxogen Induction
- Straight through stainless steel exhaust
- De-Cat
- RS Tuning Remap

at the wheels or at the fly andy?

 

[BenG]

179.9 BHP and 157 Ft/Lb Torque.

ITG Maxogen
Scorpion RS192 Exhaust
Decat
RS Tuning custom map

 

[Cue]

167bph and 141 torque for me with the above plus matched inlets... i think it was hindered though due to fuel tampering....

 

[tom@JMS]

Hi Guys and Girls, as per other thread I just wanted to mention that I am on here - you may have come across us on the Cliosport.net site

Seems there is a lot of confusion about what is, and what is not achievable.

For starters all the standard 182s we have dyno'd at our chosen benchmarking facility return anywhere between 160 to 175ish ATF (130-140 ish ATWs) bhp.

You'll be pleased to know that it is possible to achieve 182 bhp ATF (which equates to about 150bhp ATW) in a 182. In the process of doing this you obtain a great power delivery throughout the RPM range, gone the 5K hunting required to get a standard car moving as you also squeeze a good dollop of torque from a 182, brining them up to about 160ft/lbs ATF.

This 'spread' of power delivery is often unnoticed, or not emphasised enough in my opinion. A car that undergoes a consistent gain of output from 3k to the limiter for instance will be significantly faster and most importantly much more pleasant to drive than a car that obtains a peak gain just short of the limiter.

Anyway enough technical, any questions let me know

 

[j333evo]

A friend of mine put his phase 2 Clio 172 on Circuit Motors r/r at Castle Combe at the weekend as part of a r/r day, he got two runs which were consistent.

All the car has is matched inlets, drop in ITG filter, decat and s/s exhaust system made 156bhp ATW which is 184bhp flywheel. His car also made 157lb ft. This is on a 70+k car which we did a engine and gearbox oil change two weeks ago on and fitted new plugs and ignition leads.

Thanks to JMS for putting up some info from there time spent on Clios, but if i got a 182 Clio only putting out 160bhp it is outside the rules regarding homologation of the car, though of course unless the car was new it's not like you could go back to Renault and say I was sold a dud. Though disappointing all the same.

To put this in perspective, our Fiat 500 Abarth is meant to have 133bhp flywheel, but on our friends (ex-Cosworth college) r/r it made 130bhp ATW 155bhp at the flywheel, some 22bhp more than Fiat quote. Yet torque of 158lb ft was within 3 of quoted 155lb ft. Using DimSport (Italian Company) software and investigating the ECU the Essesse map is all there so we upped boost to 1.15bar from 0.9bar and bhp only went up to 158bhp (155 quoted), but torque was on the money at 180lbft exactly as Fiat quote, and as JMS said, more crucially spread over a much broader rev range making car feel more instant throughout.

But again this all comes back to how the Bosch management systems work with forced induction cars, everything on modern cars are Bosch, fly-by-wire throttle body ECU, engine ECU, ABS, ESP, even brake callipers are Bosch now.