Real Colt power figures

[ColtArt]

Big one for you all
some jucy bits and hints on where to take hte car...

i dont know if you guys realise that the power levels they tell you about the R Colt are rubbish.. 113 kw? youll change your mind in a moment

these are some dyno results of my own cars. all figgures are at the wheels (this means after lose of drive train wheels etc which is about 1/4 to 1/3)

my old car, a Mitsubishi FTO with an exhaust, pod air flow mods brembos etc... it pulled 98 - 106 kw depending on 98 or 100 ron fuel and temp. stock the car puts out 144kw at the engine..... this one was more like 150 - 160 after mods.

my parners MR2 pulled 150 with exchaust pod and fuel controller... this car factoy puts out 180 kw....

my R colt put down, and this shocked the mech who does all kinds of crazy things to bikes and cars.. 102kw atw

that means, following the 1/3 1/4 rule that shes putting out between 133 - 150 kw mark

the turbo peaks at 12 PSI and then very quicly drops off around 4000rpm to 10. my mech says a larger intercooler, to maintain the boost at 12psi, and some fuel managment and i should be looking at 120 easy... thats a 160 - 180kw at the engine result!

[Sili]

ColtArt, those findings sound interesting. Do you happen to have a dyno chart you can scan and post up? Interested to see.

[ColtArt]

no i dot but ill do a dodgy with the camera tomorrow, but the print is of the air fuel ratio not the boost if thats what your interested in.

[|2colt]

:) hey coltart...nice figure. I dynoed mine a while ago and got 92kws atw, which i thought was good but after hearing about yours im shamed lol.
be interested to see the results
ive also uploaded my run on utube so here it is
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1oFvZNtXXk

[lovecolt]

I will be interested to see the dyno chart too. As far as i know (plus just done a research to comfirm), FWD has a average of 15% - 20% drivetrain loss, therefore the factory with "at engine 113KW" should end up in between 96.05fwkw or 90.4fwkw.

Have you done any mods to your car, ColtArt? If no, then i would have to say, your colt might be a unique beast from factory :D

I will dyno my rcolt after i put on another few K on the clock.

[rukboy11]

hey coltart were u ever in the fto club? i had a yellow fto back in the days when my mate senri ran the club....

[ColtArt]

here you go

yeah i was a FTO australia memeber for aobut 2 years till i saw this baby!

you can clearly see where hte boost drops off and te fuel mixture starts going really rich mid range... larger intercooler = longer boost = better fuel ratio = much better performance ! i cant wait for someone to make a kit or maybe ill need to get jake to make me one

15/20 %... i used the other two cars as examples becaus A the FTO was a FWD and B the MR2, although rear wheel drive is rear engine and has simular loss.... 15/20% loss, if you could achive that you would be worht millions

addiotnal:

my car was babyed for the first 1500kms and the car was dynoed at 4000kms (remember that the engine will losen up and generate more power around 10k kms)

[Sili]

Very nice. What is the general rule for bedding in the engine anyways? I only really drive mine on weekends and so far only just done 1000kms since late september. At about 500kms I'd already started flogging the little beast. :D

[lovecolt]

Traditional Bedding Method is to babysit the car for a few km before attempt to redline it. But some argued that the new generation engines like the ones we had, don't need to baby. Instead we should thrash it in the first few Ks.

As i don't know who to believe, hence i do half half nowadays. (but still not going pass 5000 rpm) Plus, its so nice to hear the MIVEC comes on around 4000rpm. (Or is it the exhaust :D)

And coltart.....i can't really argue with you about the percentage loss as i'm not sure myself. I guess, we will have to wait for more rcolt to be bedded in and maybe do a group dyno day (which i can definitely organize)

[ColtArt]

:) hey coltart...nice figure. I dynoed mine a while ago and got 92kws atw, which i thought was good but after hearing about yours im shamed lol.
be interested to see the results
ive also uploaded my run on utube so here it is
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1oFvZNtXXk

did you remember to take off traction control by any chance?

[|2colt]

yeh we did turn it off.

[Raymond6]

Common sense should prevail with bedding in your engine and transmission if you are to take the example of F1 and V8 Supercar Race teams they have an low speed drive that turns the engine in a bath of lubricate for 8 to 12 hours. Then they flog the hell out of their engine's and tranny's.

Now let think about what’s happening in a new engine.

All the parts are at their tightest tolerances and the engine is very tight, the piston rings have not bedded into the cylinders and max compression has not been achieved so there is a lot of friction and if your oil is not forming a layer between these close fitting parts damage can occur so a little care is required until everything beds in.

So what did I do for the 1st 1200 kms I kept it under 4000rpm then last week I went for a long drive down the M5 to Historical Berrima then turned off to go through a few twisty bits to Moss Vale stopped to talk and say hi to the Moss Vale Highway petrol ( only a RBT thankfully ) then back through Mittergong and the blast back up the M5 to South West Sydney with my little lady. A tip stop and have meal at a walk at Berrima very relaxing!

It’s about a 220k round trip most of this naturally doing the 110kmph M5 speed limit.

What I did was to drop it gently drop it down to 4th gear and hold it their for about 20 seconds then riding the clutch drop it down to 3rd and take it all the way to 6500rpm red line.
Then back to 5th gear and the speed limit ?????????? I do have trouble reading sometimes according to my better half. The Colt rides wonderfully at high speed!!

I repeated this 3 or 4 times along the M5 when we got back into Moorbank I soon noticed that my Little Buzz box was a lot quieter and the tire noise was a lot lower.

I said nothing to my partner after all women are supposed to know nothing about cars. (Wrong again Ray) She said " Je it's a lot quieter and the tyres are not as noisy". Just what I had observed. Plus as a bonus it is lot easier to drive more torqee.

In the round trip I used an average of 7.0L per 100kms, That’s with some city driving included. Compared to my second tanks average of 9.57 L per 100kms and my third tanks of 9.07 L per 100kms City Cycle, It will be interesting to see what happens with the next tank.

[shaneth]

|2 colt i have a question.

|2 colt wrote:
Have some results of my dyno run,
Stock Ralliart Colt
92kw@122kph, 388.7nm @ 67 kph


Can i ask how the car got 388.7nm @ 67 kph when the brochure says it has "Maximum torque 210Nm @ 3500rpm". Can you post up the torque sheet.

[|2colt]

hey...i have no clue lol......ill post the sheet up once i scan it...
i thought it was a bit high as well but thats what the paper said:)
Dyno printouts are never wrong :p

[Pete]

|2 colt i have a question.

|2 colt wrote:
Have some results of my dyno run,
Stock Ralliart Colt
92kw@122kph, 388.7nm @ 67 kph


Can i ask how the car got 388.7nm @ 67 kph when the brochure says it has "Maximum torque 210Nm @ 3500rpm". Can you post up the torque sheet.

its Nm at the wheels so you got to remember about gearing

[shaneth]

its Nm at the wheels so you got to remember about gearing

Correct me if im wrong but the Ralliart site say MAXIMUM TORQUE. to me that means no matter what gear you are in the maximum you should get is 210Nm. And that is at the flywheel i will add so it would be less at the wheels. Just as the KW figure quoted in the brochure says 113KW but at the wheels you have to take 15% off for loss thru different variences. SO the wheel kilowatts should be around 96. What are your thoughts.

[Duke]

I totally agree with shaneth, there should be some kind of dyno calibration error or something.
210 and 380 are totally different. Even with bonalume kit it is out of question.

I also have a question about the intercooler, what is the relation between intercooler and boost. The boost is just what the wastegate lets the turbo to fill up the intake manifold.

Cooler air doesn't create more boost but more power is there because of increased O2 in the air taken.

Just the ECU or the turbo's mechanical limits decides the boost. I can't see the intercooler and boost level relation :confused:

[shaneth]

Duke the intercooler can have a little to do with the boost pressure. Because the air is smaller in molecule when its cold it can then compress more and allows higher boost reading. i dont think its much but maybe a couple of psi. Now as a disclaimer it is early and i have only just woken up so if im wrong let me know.

[Duke]

Shaneth , I think we partly agree on the subject. Also what is clear that if the intercooler output air temp is less than 60-70 celcius then no need for a change.

However it is obvious that the ECU is dependent on boost read on the intake manifold. If the air in the manifold is too hot and less dense with O2 that means pressure drop, the turbo will spin more and add up more boost until it reaches the value that the ECU says.

Meaning intercooler will have no effect on psi read that you will take.

I have 1.49 bar peak and 0.9 continuous boost with Bonalume kit and having 212 hp with it.
Maybe with a bigger intercooler (ours is 2,7 liter) , may get another +10 and hopefully more enduring performance (air not getting so hot because of continuously spinning red hot turbo):D

[andy]

Correct me if im wrong but the Ralliart site say MAXIMUM TORQUE. to me that means no matter what gear you are in the maximum you should get is 210Nm. And that is at the flywheel i will add so it would be less at the wheels.

Well what you are saying has some truth in it. Mitsubishi's quote of 210Nm of torque is measured at the flywheel, and give or take a few Nm you shouldnt acheive more than that with out mods. However as soon as this is hooked up to a gearbox/driveline the torque figure changes.

The reason why the torque figure changes is because the gearbox is effectively a torque multiplier.

Its important to distinguish Power and Torque. Power is a measure of the total energy the engine is able to produce, whereas Torque is a measure of the turning force. Consider a massive boulder and you've got two iron bars to leverage it and get it moving. One bar is short the other long. We all know the long bar would have better leverage and be more likely to be able to move the boulder. The longer bar provides a greater torque multiplier for the same amount of exertion. A gearbox does similar things. Theoretically when the car is in 1st it would appear to have massive torque on a dyno.

Its a hard one to talk about clearly - if you're interested in a longer, better explanation do a search on autospeed.com.au for an article called power vs torque.

[lovecolt]

I got what you are trying to say Andy. However, no dyno will be done at 1st gear. Most of the time, it will be 4th gear.

[shaneth]

Andy - than you for making me think. its hard to get the old girl going sometimes. :P Have a look at this article, along similar lines to the autospeed one but has a easy to read chart and all the equations to look at. http://www.car-videos.net/articles/horsepower_torque.asp

[andy]

I got what you are trying to say Andy. However, no dyno will be done at 1st gear. Most of the time, it will be 4th gear.

Yeah thats right, dyno'ing in 1st would be rather problematic/pointless. It was just a theoretical example of how torque changes depending on the gear selection.

[Pete]

Correct me if im wrong but the Ralliart site say MAXIMUM TORQUE. to me that means no matter what gear you are in the maximum you should get is 210Nm. And that is at the flywheel i will add so it would be less at the wheels. Just as the KW figure quoted in the brochure says 113KW but at the wheels you have to take 15% off for loss thru different variences. SO the wheel kilowatts should be around 96. What are your thoughts.

yes 210nm at the motor but think about what a gear box does it adds gears into the equation it changes gears it can give more or less torque at the wheels. so yeas there should be a loss due to friction but if the motor is spinning at 6000rpm and the wheels 1000 there will have to be more torque

[shaneth]

yes 210nm at the motor but think about what a gear box does it adds gears into the equation it changes gears it can give more or less torque at the wheels. so yeas there should be a loss due to friction but if the motor is spinning at 6000rpm and the wheels 1000 there will have to be more torque


Thanks mate. If you look at the link in my last post it has it all spelt out. I stand corrected.:D

[Toker]

sorry, havent had time to read the full topic, but I thought I'd just throw some info in for you guys.. of the euro cz turbos that have been dyno'd, theres been varient figures from 140bhp to around 156bhp.. on stock cars!

personally i think its down to the way you drive it, run it in, humidity conditions on the day of the rolling road, how your cars running that day, petrol octane.. etc etc theres lots to consider, but generally from the tales I HAVE heard the euro cz turbos have mostly been over an above the stock book figure.. only one that I can think of was running 140bhp ish and he had had his colt since it was first launched, and, I have a feeling, thrashed it! ;)

[break]

Can i ask how the car got 388.7nm @ 67 kph when the brochure says it has "Maximum torque 210Nm @ 3500rpm". Can you post up the torque sheet.Dyno's will produce what is called 'tractive effort'

Because of the gear/diff ratio's, the torque at the flywheel and the torque at the wheels will almost never be the same. The whole idea of having gears/diffs is to allow the car to put more torque onto the ground than they could otherwise produce.

Once you take into account the diff ratio and the ratio of the gear the car was dyno'd in (usually 4th), then you can work out the torque at the flywheel... but we already know that so whats the point.

[ecac]

stock rim weigh 9.6kg.

[Chipokae]

:) thanks ecac. been wondering what the stock rcolt rims weigh.