Notices
RX-8 Discussion General discussion about the RX-8 that doesn't fit in one of the specialty forums.

From R&D

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rating: Thread Rating: 6 votes, 4.50 average.
 
Old 08-21-2003, 05:39 PM
  #301  
Certified track junky!!!
 
Speed Racer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lebanon, NH
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Graph showing HP over the full run.
Speed Racer is offline  
Old 08-21-2003, 06:29 PM
  #302  
Registered User
 
Rotor_Newbie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Cali
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Those are nice graphs. And now we have two different numbers to deal with. Which is correct? Dyno or G-tech?! =-] I'm putting my money on the g-tech cuz I know mazda wouldn't lie to us about something as important as this. :p

By the way, how much did that g-tech cost? Can you try it out on another vehicle to see if its accurate? Thanks for all the work that you've put into this with your OWN vehicle. =-]

-John
Rotor_Newbie is offline  
Old 08-21-2003, 06:42 PM
  #303  
Registered User
 
TurboSE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: oklahoma
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Firstly, I am quite sure the G-tech comp unit is very very accurate. Secondly, my 146 Hp rx7 once reached 140 mph so the argument of x amount of hp needed for y amount of speed is nonsense. Having said this there is a distinct possibility that a certain batch of rx8s might have the HP problem. Damn Mazda, make a statement for heaven's sake!
TurboSE is offline  
Old 08-21-2003, 07:33 PM
  #304  
Registered User
 
Elak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Mountain View CA
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I know I probably should spend more time in the corner wearing the stupid hat, but the two graphs posted by Speed Racer, are very interesting:

Look at the max hp in his first and third graphs (page 19 and 21): The first tops out at 157hp, but the second (ignoring the noise on gear change) tops at about 175hp (after 10.5s).

To estimate the hp, Gtech takes the measured acceleration multiplied by weight and multiplies it with the speed. The speed is calculated as the time integral of the previously measured acceleration. What if the jerkiness of the acceleration caused a systematic error in the speed estimate? That would explain the 10% difference in the two hp numbers. It would also mean that the 1/4 mile time is underestimated because the GTech believes more distance covered than in reality, and the 0-60mph time is underestimated because the GTech believes the speed is higher than in reality.

I don't doubt that the momentary acceleration reading from a GTech is very accurate, but time integration over a jerky acceleration could build up a significant error.

Then again I could be wrong

/Elak
Elak is offline  
Old 08-21-2003, 07:46 PM
  #305  
Registered User
 
Rotor_Newbie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Cali
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You guys are too scientific... I need to go back to school or just hang out with a different crowd...:D

-John
Rotor_Newbie is offline  
Old 08-21-2003, 08:00 PM
  #306  
Registered User
 
rpm_pwr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisvegas, Aust
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't doubt that the momentary acceleration reading from a GTech is very accurate, but time integration over a jerky acceleration could build up a significant error.
Without knowing anything about a GTech, surely if he can plot RPM then the unit must have a tach input therefore it's correcting speed on the fly.

BTW speed racer -> on your gtech dyno why is the selected area purely decelleration between 1st and second? Can you select the part that it uses to calculate the curves? Because I would have selected second if I were you.

-pete
rpm_pwr is offline  
Old 08-21-2003, 08:10 PM
  #307  
Registered User
 
Elak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Mountain View CA
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by rpm_pwr

Without knowing anything about a GTech, surely if he can plot RPM then the unit must have a tach input therefore it's correcting speed on the fly.
That wouldn't work very well as soon as you have a wheel spin, which I assume is common in these situations. It also requires the GTech to know gearing and wheel radius.

/Elak
Elak is offline  
Old 08-21-2003, 08:44 PM
  #308  
Forum Vendor
 
canzoomer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 1,223
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Enough BS already

Obviously ( at least to me) it is the case that until somebody pulls out their engine and sticks it on an engine dyno, it is all simply SPECULATION

However, one thing to consider:
On the European sites, such as Mazda UK and Mazda Germany, the power claimed is 231PS ( that's 227.8 HP)

So, why would ones sold here in Canada make 250HP?

Don't believe me?

Look here:
http://www.rx8.de/de/advance_sale/default.asp


Or here:
http://www.mazdarx8.co.uk/upclose/specs/default.asp
canzoomer is offline  
Old 08-21-2003, 08:55 PM
  #309  
Registered User
 
zerohour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: So Cal
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Its good to have your knowledge on this board again Church!
zerohour is offline  
Old 08-21-2003, 09:13 PM
  #310  
Pure Gold
 
pelucidor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Bucks County, PA
Posts: 763
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Enough BS already

Originally posted by canzoomer
Obviously ( at least to me) it is the case that until somebody pulls out their engine and sticks it on an engine dyno, it is all simply SPECULATION

However, one thing to consider:
On the European sites, such as Mazda UK and Mazda Germany, the power claimed is 231PS ( that's 227.8 HP)

So, why would ones sold here in Canada make 250HP?
In Europe the cars have different (more strict) emissions requirements. In fact originally the cars were to have 240PS, but a few months ago Mazda decided to aim for the next generation of emissions standards (over a year away) instead of the current one and so ended up with a lower than expected power of 231PS. Read some of the threads in the European Forum for more info.
pelucidor is offline  
Old 08-21-2003, 09:24 PM
  #311  
Registered User
 
5Gen_Prelude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re: Enough BS already

Originally posted by canzoomer
However, one thing to consider:
On the European sites, such as Mazda UK and Mazda Germany, the power claimed is 231PS ( that's 227.8 HP)

So, why would ones sold here in Canada make 250HP?
Simple, different emissions standards.
5Gen_Prelude is offline  
Old 08-21-2003, 09:24 PM
  #312  
Registered User
 
rpm_pwr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisvegas, Aust
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Elak


That wouldn't work very well as soon as you have a wheel spin, which I assume is common in these situations. It also requires the GTech to know gearing and wheel radius.

/Elak
It is common and it's in his graphs. You're wrong about the Gtech needing to know the wheel diameter and radius though. I mucked around with this with my own accel. but basically, you can use the accel. to estimate speed, and check that against the known rpm. Once you have 2 or more points in the same gear, you can calculate the line of best fit and get the gearing pretty much spot on. It works out to be pretty accurate. From then on you get speed from the RPM and gear. You only need the accel, to keep estimating what gear you are in and for instantaneous readings.

...that's enough sidetracking!

-pete
rpm_pwr is offline  
Old 08-21-2003, 09:32 PM
  #313  
Moderator
 
BlueAdept's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: London (England)
Posts: 813
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Errr... looking at that HP vs Time graph... if you exclude the noise at the gearchanges (probably due to clutch dumping), surely the HP looks like about 180 at best??

What are you guys seeing?
BlueAdept is offline  
Old 08-21-2003, 09:55 PM
  #314  
Forum Vendor
 
canzoomer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 1,223
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Re: Re: Enough BS already

Originally posted by 5Gen_Prelude

Simple, different emissions standards.
For about 25HP??
That's over 10%!

I am dubious..
canzoomer is offline  
Old 08-21-2003, 09:57 PM
  #315  
Registered User
 
Elak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Mountain View CA
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by rpm_pwr


It is common and it's in his graphs. You're wrong about the Gtech needing to know the wheel diameter and radius though. I mucked around with this with my own accel. but basically, you can use the accel. to estimate speed, and check that against the known rpm. Once you have 2 or more points in the same gear, you can calculate the line of best fit and get the gearing pretty much spot on. It works out to be pretty accurate. From then on you get speed from the RPM and gear. You only need the accel, to keep estimating what gear you are in and for instantaneous readings.

...that's enough sidetracking!

-pete
I think you are wrong. Read here:
http://www.gtechpro.com/gtechprocomp_howitworks.html

The rpm is used to estimate torque.

The two graphs show an 18hp discrepancy on the same car. Why? We all seem to agree that the accelerometer has only a small momentanious error - however integrate that error over time and it could explain the hp difference. With this explanation the "fast" GTech run becomes consistent with both other runs and the dynos.

However much I want it to be otherwise, I believe the 0-60mph and 1/4mile times are wrong in this case.

/Elak
Elak is offline  
Old 08-21-2003, 10:09 PM
  #316  
factory phil
 
akrx8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: alaska
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
well guys,as long as no rain on sunday i will have time slips and will have a better idea if there is any missing ponys.i have a red gt that has 1200 miles and has been great thus far.ill post slips if anyone is intrested.going to go to the last street performance/import event for the season and run test and tune and maybe race but the classes are 4 6 & 8 cyls,dont know if i can run or not.
akrx8 is offline  
Old 08-21-2003, 11:31 PM
  #317  
Registered User
 
rpm_pwr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisvegas, Aust
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Elak


I think you are wrong. Read here:
http://www.gtechpro.com/gtechprocomp_howitworks.html

The rpm is used to estimate torque.
How do you propose it does that without knowing the gear ratios?

-pete
rpm_pwr is offline  
Old 08-22-2003, 12:09 AM
  #318  
Registered User
 
Elak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Mountain View CA
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by rpm_pwr


How do you propose it does that without knowing the gear ratios?

-pete
P(hp) * 5252 / RPM(1/s) = TQ(lbft)

/Elak
Elak is offline  
Old 08-22-2003, 12:25 AM
  #319  
Certified track junky!!!
 
Speed Racer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lebanon, NH
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Elak


I think you are wrong. Read here:
http://www.gtechpro.com/gtechprocomp_howitworks.html

The rpm is used to estimate torque.

The two graphs show an 18hp discrepancy on the same car. Why? We all seem to agree that the accelerometer has only a small momentanious error - however integrate that error over time and it could explain the hp difference. With this explanation the "fast" GTech run becomes consistent with both other runs and the dynos.

However much I want it to be otherwise, I believe the 0-60mph and 1/4mile times are wrong in this case.

/Elak
Chill out a little bit with the nay saying. I've just given you guys proof that the car is capable of meeting the claimed performance specs and the only thing that you are interested in is discrediting my info. What's wrong with this picture?

There is an 18 HP discrepancy between the two runs because the second run was dramatically slower. If you read the Gtech page that you linked to then you should understand that the HP figures are calculated from the measured G forces (acceleration) / time = speed, speed * acceleration * vehicle weight = HP. Looking at this general formula you can see that time is inversely proportional to HP (i.e. if the time increases the HP decreases). For that reason alone, the Gtech is not an accurate tool for measuring HP or torque for that matter which is determined from the HP and current RPM as measured by the voltage through the cigarete lighter. The HP and torque numbers will not match those of either a chassis or engine dyno but the general shape of the curves should match them when done properly (i.e. smooth shift at low RPMs into preferred gear and hold until redline).

As for the recorded times to 0-60 and 1/4 mile, they should be accurate to 0.01 seconds (manufacturer's spec). Real world accuracy should be about 0.1 seconds. So I don't think you should be so quick to discredit the times. Would it really be the end of the world if it turned out that there was no major Mazda conspiracy surrounding the RX-8's performance? More likely it would just be an end to this run away thread.

P.S. I apologize for taking this out on you , it is nothing personal. I just feel that all of the speculation is getting a little out of hand and its time for all of us to have a reality check.

Last edited by Speed Racer; 08-22-2003 at 12:36 AM.
Speed Racer is offline  
Old 08-22-2003, 12:28 AM
  #320  
Registered User
 
rpm_pwr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisvegas, Aust
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Elak, d your formula doesnt work. You can't substitute in RWHP and FW RPM and get FW torque!

Unless you're suggesting that it's only calculation RWTQ and then I ask, how does it get the WHEEL RPM?

-pete
rpm_pwr is offline  
Old 08-22-2003, 12:36 AM
  #321  
Certified track junky!!!
 
Speed Racer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lebanon, NH
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by rpm_pwr
Doesnt work. You can't substitute in RWHP and FW RPM and get FW torque!

Unless you're suggesting that it's only calculation RWTQ and then I ask, how does it get the WHEEL RPM?

-pete
When you setup up the Gtech it requires you to calibrate its tachometer with your car's tach. This is done by reving the car to two known RPMs and recording the values on the Gtech. From that point on it can measure the current RPMs. It is pretty slick setup but even with that I wouldn't trust the calculated torque values because the HP is suspect (see previous post for explanation).
Speed Racer is offline  
Old 08-22-2003, 12:52 AM
  #322  
Certified track junky!!!
 
Speed Racer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lebanon, NH
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Rotor_Newbie
Those are nice graphs. And now we have two different numbers to deal with. Which is correct? Dyno or G-tech?! =-] I'm putting my money on the g-tech cuz I know mazda wouldn't lie to us about something as important as this. :p

By the way, how much did that g-tech cost? Can you try it out on another vehicle to see if its accurate? Thanks for all the work that you've put into this with your OWN vehicle. =-]

-John
Thanks, I'm just trying to putting this whole debacle into perspective by adding some real world performance numbers (0-60, 1/4 mile). I think the Gtech is an acceptable tool for that and it is definitely better than a "butt dyno" but it is really not a very good tool to measure engine performance. At this point I'd really like to see one of the rotary tuners put their engine on an engine dyno as that is the only way that we are going to know for sure if there really is a problem with the engine's output. Until then we should all be out on the road enjoying our RX-8s.

I picked up my Gtech Pro Competition directly from the manufacturer for $250. Its a little pricey but it has given me a little piece of mind, in that I now know that my car is not a total dud. :P

Last edited by Speed Racer; 08-22-2003 at 12:56 AM.
Speed Racer is offline  
Old 08-22-2003, 12:53 AM
  #323  
Registered User
 
Elak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Mountain View CA
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by rpm_pwr
Elak, d your formula doesnt work. You can't substitute in RWHP and FW RPM and get FW torque!

Unless you're suggesting that it's only calculation RWTQ and then I ask, how does it get the WHEEL RPM?

-pete
Do a Google on horsepower and torque and you'll find the information.

/Elak
Elak is offline  
Old 08-22-2003, 12:55 AM
  #324  
Registered User
 
Elak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Mountain View CA
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Speed Racer

P.S. I apologize for taking this out on you , it is nothing personal. I just feel that all of the speculation is getting a little out of hand and its time for all of us to have a reality check.
No worries, I am sure many with me appreciate the effort you (and your car) made.

I wish I was wrong for the second time today, but I fear I'm not.

/Elak
Elak is offline  
Old 08-22-2003, 01:52 AM
  #325  
Registered User
 
Rotor_Newbie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Cali
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just a thought... if the car is capable of the claimed performance (0-60 times and top speeds), why do we care what the hp is?! We paid for the 0-60 times and the top speed, we knew what it will do, why do we care how much hp it really produces?!

Just my pennys into this bucket of speculation.. :p

I can't wait to get my car, put 3 friends in it and scare the crap out of them as I carve some corners .. muhahahahhaha

-John
Rotor_Newbie is offline  


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 6 votes, 4.50 average.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:18 PM.