Rolling rolling rolling!!!

Renault & Alpine General Discussion

Moderators: eastlmark, BIG_MVS, phildini, Test Moderator, Alpineandy

User avatar
User

peterg

Rank

Non Member

Posts

2501

Joined

Wed Apr 14, 2004 10:26 pm

Location

Cumbria


Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Rolling rolling rolling!!!

Postby peterg » Mon Apr 10, 2006 4:17 pm

Well its back from the rolling road. Had a few problems with the chargecooler....basically it isnt pumping any water, further investigation of this phenomenon is necessary. Despite that it managed 255lbft of torque and showed around the 170bhp at the wheels at 1 bar of boost. He had the car all weekend to sort out the fuelling and the highest power figure was higher than where it is now (think he said he saw 179 but its now at 172) as the torque fell off rapidly with power at 179. He said cooling was the big problem......there wasnt much so he had trouble getting many runs in before results went down hill. He also said that the air intake would function a lot better on the move. The car runs beautifully and has a nice smooth power and torque curve.
The fuelling still isnt perfect, he said it really needs proper mapping as its slightly lean low down and slightly rich on full boost...and that needs the infamous DG ECU!!!!!
User avatar
User

David Gentleman

Rank

Non Member

Posts

3474

Joined

Thu Apr 15, 2004 8:10 am

Location

Colchester, Essex


Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Postby David Gentleman » Mon Apr 10, 2006 4:25 pm

Well, that works out around 235-240 at the flywheel at only 1 bar. If the water isn't pumping then pretty soon it isnt going to be efficient, so there is still more potential yet, and would rectify the running rich on full boost.
Image
no avatar
User

rupert

Rank

Non Member

Posts

1323

Joined

Mon Apr 19, 2004 7:39 pm

Location

Plymouth, Devon


Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 9 times

Postby rupert » Mon Apr 10, 2006 4:36 pm

better to be rich on full boost than lean for sure.... melty piston time.
All sounds very good Peter.
User avatar
User

simonsays74

Rank

Non Member

Posts

1296

Joined

Thu Apr 15, 2004 10:12 pm

Location

Belfast (££££ Zone!!)


Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Postby simonsays74 » Mon Apr 10, 2006 4:41 pm

David Gentleman wrote:Well, that works out around 235-240 at the flywheel at only 1 bar. If the water isn't pumping then pretty soon it isnt going to be efficient, so there is still more potential yet, and would rectify the running rich on full boost.


is that a reasonable loss through the transmission, 60 bhp?? :?

great torque though!
User avatar
User

clee

Rank

Non Member

Posts

10431

Joined

Fri May 28, 2004 11:58 am

Location

Derbyshire


Has thanked: 54 times
Been thanked: 104 times

Postby clee » Mon Apr 10, 2006 4:43 pm

simonsays74 wrote:
David Gentleman wrote:Well, that works out around 235-240 at the flywheel at only 1 bar. If the water isn't pumping then pretty soon it isnt going to be efficient, so there is still more potential yet, and would rectify the running rich on full boost.


is that a reasonable loss through the transmission, 60 bhp?? :?

great torque though!


Thats what I got :evil: :evil:
User avatar
User

David Gentleman

Rank

Non Member

Posts

3474

Joined

Thu Apr 15, 2004 8:10 am

Location

Colchester, Essex


Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time

Postby David Gentleman » Mon Apr 10, 2006 4:45 pm

Lee's seen about that, so have I on my old GTA Turbo

Around 50-60 depending on age, wheels, rubber, roller surface at the RR, binding calipers etc...

The loss increases with power output, Ive seen 47 loss on one of my standard atmo's
Image


  • Advertisement

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 217 guests

Powered by phpBB ® | Renault' and 'Alpine' are trademarks of Renault S.A.S. or its subsidiaries and are used with kind permission of Renault France