Volkswagen Passat Forum banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,186 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I own a APR chipped 1.8T and love it. But like most of us here, I'd like more power. For whatever reason, I've always thought a V6 4-mo w/ the PES supercharger would be great. Point being, I've was roaming around the PES site yesterday. I noticed 2 things.

1.
On the site they have a dyno graph...

http://www.pes-tuning.com/Merchant2/graphics/dyno/g2_dyno.jpg

Can anyone spot the problem?

Here's a hint, its in red.

I hope the guy putting the site together is not the engineer designing the system. I know it may be a small mistake but still, its pretty simple math done wrong. They appear to be using a 15% drivetrain loss.
They dynoed 256.3 whp and tell you in red to multiply by 1.15 to get crank power - 256.3 x 1.15 = 294.745hp at the crank. Now that matches the claim of 295 but do the math backwards - 294.745 x .85 = 250.5xxxhp at the crank. The math is wrong. It should be 256.3/.85 = 301.5. They are losing out on advertising power. They could claim 300 horspower. I know I'm nitpicking at math thats based on a guess at best anyway but oh well.

2.
Probably the more important part. The dyno shows a stock dyno of 179.6whp. Do that math and you get (gestimating the same 15% loss) 211.29xxxhp at the crank. Is the V6 underated from the factory at 190? Does anybody else have a dyno run of a stock V6?

My last question is for anybody with a V6 and PES supercharger (Julian and anybody else). Does the supercharged V6 feel "peaky" like the 1.8T with a chip. I.E. the low end is OK and then the engine just takes off. Or does it feel pretty smooth.
 

·
Retired PassatWorld Staff
Joined
·
6,164 Posts
They are not actually wrong, but you are assuming there is a "15%" drivetrain loss. They simply state that you should multiply 1.15... so when working from engine to wheel horsepower what they had you calculate is for a 13% drivetrain loss. It's all academic anyways... heaven forbid they are conservative in their claims

They don't mention wether it's a A4 or A6. The A6 is advertised as 200 hp, so 206 ain't that far off... well within the range of stock. Who knows though.

As far as being peeky... that's one darn flat tourguw curve from 2k, so I'd guess not too peeky.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,538 Posts
Dyno numbers can vary widely from dyno to dyno. Heck, even running on the same dyno on different days will yield different results. Dynojet numbers a bit higher than mustang dynos.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
Anyone know how much boost the stock pulleys on that kit produce? Also, anyone with this blower using bigger pulleys? The 2.8 V6 has a CR of 10.6:1 so I would expect that much more than about 7psi boost would start putting you into the red zone.

Also is this the only supercharger available for the :b5: ?

Incidentally, when these V6's die from overboosting, anyone know what usually gives? I know that in Corvette/Camaro/Firebird V8's usually the ring lands start breaking off (non-forged pistons). The CR of those engines is also in the 10.5:1 - 10.8:1 range.

I'm interested in sparking some discussion about forced induction on the V6, as it's one of the more interesting performance topics to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,186 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
pass-variant said:
They are not actually wrong, but you are assuming there is a "15%" drivetrain loss. They simply state that you should multiply 1.15... so when working from engine to wheel horsepower what they had you calculate is for a 13% drivetrain loss. It's all academic anyways... heaven forbid they are conservative in their claims

They don't mention wether it's a A4 or A6. The A6 is advertised as 200 hp, so 206 ain't that far off... well within the range of stock. Who knows though.

As far as being peeky... that's one darn flat tourguw curve from 2k, so I'd guess not too peeky.
I see your point. It just cuaght my eye because every time the subject of calculating (or as I like to call it, "guessing") your crank horsepower from your wheel horsepower, a lot of people think that to calculate lets say a 20% loss you simply multiply by 1.2. I suppose it was a stupid assumption on my part. Oh well :p :p. Like I said it was nit picking at the minimum.
Just from a purely academic standpoint, where do they come up with the 295hp. I assume (perhaps incorrectly) that they have not dynoed the engine alone outside of the car. Which brings me to another point. Why not just give wheel HP instead of engine HP. And I mean for all cars. Wheel HP and Wheel TQ is all that matters in the end anyway, correct? It matters very little if the engine can make 400 hp out of the car if it can only make 200 in the car at the wheels (yes, thats a big exageration). Of course wheel horsepower wouldn't look as impressive. Obviously its a sales technique. Correct me if I'm wrong but back in the day the HP and TQ numbers for cars where given without the engine accesories (water pump, alternator, etc. I.E. just the engine alone). Then again, even giving wheel HP numbers could be varied by using different dynos. I know , I'm waaayyyyyy over thinking this one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,186 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
julianfang said:
for those that are really interested in discussing the blower, head over to www.superchargedaudi.com and join, read, ask questions.

I have dyno charts around somewhere, but all of you will be immensely disappointed since I ran it on a dyno dynamics machine. :oops:
Not that it matters that much, but what did you put down? You didn't happen to do before and after dynos did you? Those seem to be the most useful. Get a baseline, install the mods and (making sure you go back to the same dyno) see the increase.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,337 Posts
The dyno's are here (pages 1-4, the rest is vag charts). I'll leave the number off of here as to not completely shock anyone. :oops:

I didn't get a chance to baseline pre SC. The closest reputable AWD dyno is 2.5 hours from my place, so I didn't do it when I did the install.

This dyno was done after driving 2.5 hours in 90 degree weather. :(

One of the charts shows the EVO vs. the BMC-CDA. The BMC had more torque, but a drop at the high end.

and a reference point for the other cars dyno'ed at the same place: http://www.ktrperformance.com/services/Dyno_Graphs/graph_main.htm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,186 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:

Ahhhh, its all pointless when it comes down to it. From you're past posts the car feels fast as hell to you. :thumbup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,063 Posts
I'm not at all suprised if a stock V6 puts out 180 fwhp. As said already, the 15% is only a ballpark anyway, and it's a very big ballpark. There is no constant that can accurately be applied to crank power to come up with wheel power. The factors that cause the differences are mostly not constant: drag increases with the squared of velocity and inertia does as well. Also, the drag and inertia on a 4Motion is going to significantly higher than on a fwd B5, so the 15% is even more off base for it.

Also, all Dynoject and other inertial should read exactly the same. All they are doing is measuring power based on the acceleration of a known mass, and then deriving torque from that with some math. If (big "if") the dyno is set up and operated correctly, and if they are quoting SAE corrected power, then weather and altitude won't make a difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,116 Posts
V-MANN said:
:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:

Ahhhh, its all pointless when it comes down to it. From you're past posts the car feels fast as hell to you. :thumbup:
Considering chipped, 6spd B5 S4's only put down ~10hp more on that dyno, I'd bet it would feel fast to anyone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,050 Posts
Msquared said:
I'm not at all suprised if a stock V6 puts out 180 fwhp. As said already, the 15% is only a ballpark anyway, and it's a very big ballpark. There is no constant that can accurately be applied to crank power to come up with wheel power. The factors that cause the differences are mostly not constant: drag increases with the squared of velocity and inertia does as well. Also, the drag and inertia on a 4Motion is going to significantly higher than on a fwd B5, so the 15% is even more off base for it.

Also, all Dynoject and other inertial should read exactly the same. All they are doing is measuring power based on the acceleration of a known mass, and then deriving torque from that with some math. If (big "if") the dyno is set up and operated correctly, and if they are quoting SAE corrected power, then weather and altitude won't make a difference.
a stock V6 B5 doesn't put down 180whp . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
NYC4ever said:
Just for the record my FWD B5.5 5 speed with the PES SC feels pretty damn fast to me too! The sweet spot seems to be from 4000 to redline, approximately.
Ditto for me. Mine's a B5 though. The numbers don't seem impressive but there's plenty of power when you want it
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,063 Posts
a stock V6 B5 doesn't put down 180whp . . .
How much does stock a V6 B5 with manual transmission actually put down at the wheels? I'd be curious to know what actual dyno runs have shown, since I don't think I've ever seen any.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,591 Posts
IMHO, VW under-rates the hp of the V6. If you compare the dyno graph to that of supersprints, they also found the actual hp to be above 200 at the crank. These two companies are pretty reputable in my book. Good enough source for me. Honestly though, it doesn't really matter the exact hp. Take it up against a 220 hp Mazda 6, or a Grand Am GT. I know it's no match for a Nissan Maxima, but it'll compete with some cars that have a good 20+- hp.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top