Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Go on then !!!!!  Lets have it

me?  well if I assume I'm down on alleged power (haven't been RR'd yet) at say 150bhp then I'm looking at about 275bhp/tonne wet with driver.

which isn't quite in the nana-man territory, but it felt fapping quick enough to me, and gave me plenty of smiles when I went out for a blat on Saturday, and I guess that's what counts!  :)

moomin

  • Replies 384
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • conibear

    39

  • Nick M

    37

  • Glen H

    30

  • adhawkins

    30

Posted

What is the right calculation for this then.

My old x-flow would be well out from that but if you want to run the figures they are.

200 bhp

478 kgs ( as weighed wet by ACW on Saturday )

:D   all weekend as usual.

Posted

Wet with driver 410bhp/tonne.

All you clever Bar Stuards out there can work out my weight from that... :p

Needless to say 15Kg could be lossed from this equasion by avoidance of Pies etc............ :(

Posted

Power / Weight in Tonnes = PWR

200 / 0.478 = 418.410bhp/tonne

Not bad for xflow... :D

Posted

All you clever Bar Stuards out there can work out my weight from that... :p

:0

HOW heavy?

:D

(Mine comes out a shade under 200 BHP / tonne...)

Andy

Posted
Power / Weight in Tonnes = PWR

200 / 0.478 = 418.410bhp/tonne

Not bad for xflow... :D

But what about the figure that really matters con Pilot  :D  :p  :D  :p   ???

Posted

:D

Cheers Martin

I do keep telling people that X-flows are the way forward.  :D

Posted

I forgot to say we have to factor in specific power output and engine cost too  :D

moomin

Posted

If I remember back to the start of this thread wern't we talking about cars not inclusive weight. :p

Anyway you still can't upset me because Caterham need a fancy Rover engine to make there R400, I only need a X-flow.

Posted

Your is proberbly more reliable too, NOT taking into account the drive of course............. :devil:

Posted

I only need a X-flow

don't remember them producing 200bhp in the Frod Fester though  :D   they probably did them in the same colour though... in 1976  :p

moomin

Posted
Your is proberbly more reliable too, NOT taking into account the drive of course............. :devil:

*cough*

abn.jpg

:D

Andy

Posted

For reasons of comparison that puts 'my' Duratec (Standard) with driver at 290 bhp/tonne.

:D  for now

Posted

Nothing to do with the motor that one mate.

A major issue with the fuel pick up causes that minor glitch :D

Posted

Page 243 of 'The Racing Driver's Book of Excuses (Vol III)' I believe :D

Seriously though Rob, your car did look (and sound) pretty damn good if you ask me...anything putting out 200 BHP is pretty darn good in my book.

:t-up:

Andy

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please review our Terms of Use, Guidelines and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.