FAO All the experts who claim cant get over 220 bhp on standard nozzles..

[Mort]

The closest I got was going to Santa Pod and agreeing to run next to one of the doubters.

But they seemed to have a technical problem on the way and never showed up.

Ahh, but stick me in a 260bhp Fabia at the Pod and I bet you I'd probably be trounced by someone in a stock vRS. If you're arguing figures rather than 'quickness' it'd prove nothing.

[KenONeill]

Optimistic it isn't. Plenty of people already been upset by it.

We don't know what's been done to it for it to make that power. But make that power it did.

No offence intended mate, but you'll find plenty of people who reckon that Jabba's rollers are about 10% optimistic (and across a range of cars, engines and states of tune at that, including one set of runs at Jabba in the morning and Emerald the same afternoon). If you're claiming otherwise on the basis of one run on yours on a different day I'm not sure why you expect people to think your rollers aren't a bit optimistic?

Take note that I fully accept that the "220bhp barrier" has been broken; I'm only questioning the 270bhp claim because that's WTCC TDi country.

[XLBaconDoubleCheese]

Ahh, but stick me in a 260bhp Fabia at the Pod and I bet you I'd probably be trounced by someone in a stock vRS. If you're arguing figures rather than 'quickness' it'd prove nothing.

That's my point with the Santa pod test, it's down to the driver not the car.

Glad to see it made decent power, I'm thinking some people won't believe it whatever though tbh

[shark_90]

If you're claiming otherwise on the basis of one run on yours on a different day I'm not sure why you expect people to think your rollers aren't a bit optimistic?

I don't know about Jabba's rollers, but I have absolute faith in the tool we bought and it's accuracy. I guess it works both ways, from one run we can't claim that it is optimistic either.

[Friggerpants]

Can we see a copy of the graph please?

[shark_90]

The owner of the car has given us permission to post the graph which I will do in the next few hours.

[Friggerpants]

Can we see the WHP figure too as well please? :-)

[shark_90]

All our graphs show WHP

[wilsy7]

Can't wait for this lol

[BossFox]

[TorqueXIsXCheap]

OI!! Save some popcorn for me

[Funky Fab]

C'mon, c'mon c'mon c'mon..

[wilsy7]

Disapointed lol

[shark_90]

Just a quick update, it was late when I left and for various reasons wasn't able to stay even 10 minutes later. Rob will post this up in the morning.

[warwick hunt]

[shark_90]

As requested:

[Jabbasport]

For reference, this is how it read on our rollers in 2009...

*Flywheel power

Tried to scale it similarly to Shark's axis, our roller software isn't good at outputting to a file though so doesn't contain the same kind of detail as the BAPro file.

*Not as far out as everybody thinks.. Our rollers showed 261bhp and 538nm 2 years ago, 10-11-2009 to be precise.

Kev

[faboka vrs]

Nice. Keep it about 2.5K and it should be a hoot to drive So 210bhp at the wheels.

Should all dyno's record the same whp? Then the fly power is calculated on the cost down?

[faboka vrs]

Sorry Kev. Can't see your graph.

edit. can now

[fabdavrav]

So thats both Shark and Jabba posting dyno plots for the same car about two years apart and having results within 1 to 2% of each other.....HHHHHMMMMMMMMMM.........I think that Friggerpants owes some money to the OP or Warwick Hunt.....also alot of Humble pie to be eaten also by others (you know who you are)........unless their are still people who will now say that Jabba's rollers are out as well now!!!!!!...

Edited 2 November, 2011 by fabdavrav

[faboka vrs]

At the end of the day its how it feels on the road.

Question. My old RR from awesome years back show I have about 125bhp stock. If wheel power is always measured the same which I assume it is, then its only a 80bhp increase. I'm guessing fly is a percentage to wheel. So the more you get the bigger the gap between wheel and power.

[Friggerpants]

Here's my graph.

http://www.darkside-developments.co.uk/images/customers/fabiavrs/Fabia%20227.jpg

As we can see, a different correction factor has been used? what difference does that make Ben?

[shark_90]

The correction factor is slightly different due to ambient pressure and temperature changes. It's measured every time a run is done and run through the same conversions to ensure that the runs are comparable.

[Jabbasport]

It's the DIN correction, based on air temperature and atmospheric pressure, you can see this by looking at your printout..

Kev

Edit: ^ Ha, beat me to it

[Friggerpants]

So thats both Shark and Jabba posting dyno plots for the same car about two years apart and having results within 1 to 2% of each other.....HHHHHMMMMMMMMMM.........I think that Friggerpants owes some money to the OP or Warwick Hunt.....also alot of Humble pie to be eaten also by others (you know who you are)........unless their are still people who will now say that Jabba's rollers are out as well now!!!!!!...

I will give the money.

On one condition:

I want Vagcom logs of SOI and duration, as I want to work out why mine's making 30bhp less.