Jonathan_HPA
Passed Driver's Ed
- Location
- Canada
- Car(s)
- Audi TTRS / VW Atlas
They typically measure from the crank, so I would assume this is the same. Maybe Jonathan can add to it when they're back from the break.
I know the argument will obviously be made that sure there are other ways to make the same power and torque. It's just a number on a chart, and does not speak to the delivery of power across the whole RPM range. Everyone chases power, and the emotions their vehicle makes to their own taste. This was exactly what I wanted.
550HP / 550 ft-lbs. This is a crank number as measured on our superflow AWD dyno under SAE standard conditions. These are comparable to wheel numbers you might get if you were to run the car on the more common Dynojet - there's more to it though...
Comparing dyno numbers on the internet is a futile task. They are a a diagnostic tool and best used for before and after measurements under the same conditions. If any of your want a reall in-depth read, this is a fascinating analysis that compares the difference between the superflow and dynojet and explains why Dynojet numbers are always overstated. In the pdf it quotes an interview with Mark Dobek the creator of the Dynajet:
"Dynojet's final number fudge—which would eventually be applied to every vehicle strapped to a Dynojet chassis dyno—was arbitrarily based on a number from the most powerful road-going motorcycle of
the time, a 1985 1200-cc Yamaha VMax. The VMax had 145 advertised factory horsepower, which was far above the raw 90 horsepower number spit out by the formula. Meanwhile, existing aftermarket torque-cell engine dynamometers delivered numbers that clustered around 120.
Always a pragmatist, Dobeck finally ordered his chief engineer to doctor the math so that the Dynojet 100 measured 120 horsepower for a stock VMax. And that was that: for once and forever, the power of
everything else in the world would be relative to a 1985 Yamaha VMax and a fudged imaginary number that was close to the'agreement reality' of the average of some other imaginary numbers."
Anyways analysis is worth a read and really wild that this correction factor based on an '85 Yamaha VMax has been baked in to every Dynojet number you see.
As a builder, tuner, and parts manufacturer it was our highest priority to base our engineering on a dyno tool we could trust. We can nail OEM published HP numbers within 1-2% at SAE on our Superflow. We advertise this crank number because when you are buying a car, this is the only meaningful number you're looking at, as such you can have a good idea of how our VR550T would stack up against OE published numbers.
Time to get off my soapbox. Sorry if this was a long post. In the end, the most important thing is: Does the VR550T deliver on our goals of creating a new era modern VR6 golf R? I'll let Gerald give you that feedback
*edited for clarity
Last edited: