# I got a '03 Spec V dyno sheet.....



## Mr SEntra (Oct 7, 2002)

Jason Kolasa's completely stock '03 Spec got on the dynojet today and look at the chart:










What does everyone think? I see the torque curve, and it looks sick! Do the WHP numbers look kinda low? I think they're about right. All the pulls were in 4th and he has 4300 miles on the car. Today and tomorrow we'll be installing I/H/E on the ride. Numbers with all that should be here by February 22nd at the team's dyno day at Abacus Racing.


----------



## Fast91SER (Jul 2, 2002)

Those are decent numbers if the car is stock. BTW, why did you do the runs in 4th gear?


----------



## Guest (Jan 27, 2003)

You do 4th because its the closest to a 1:1 gear ratio.

The dyno looks about right, thats about what my stock 02' did.


----------



## SentraXERacer (Oct 7, 2002)

How the heck does Nissan advertise the Spec as having 175 Hp when in reality it gets around 155hp?


----------



## SentraXERacer (Oct 7, 2002)

What are the 0-60, quarter mile, and 70-0mph times for the stock V?


----------



## diggler39 (Jan 23, 2003)

SentraXERacer said:


> *How the heck does Nissan advertise the Spec as having 175 Hp when in reality it gets around 155hp? *


Just about every car company on the face of the earth does it. The reason is that the dyno measures hp at the wheels (where it counts). The manufacturers measure it at the flywheel. Alot of the loss between the flywheel and the pavement is in the gearbox. Manual transmissions arent that bad. Auto's lose a substantial amount, however. I (unfortunately) drive a Focus ZX3 with an auto. Many of these with auto's dyno around 90-100hp, compared to the claimed 130hp. That's probably more than you needed to know, but at least it gives you an idea. If you want to know more, it was either SCC or Super Street did an pretty good article on it about a year ago.


----------



## Guest (Feb 6, 2003)

the reason it loses so much hp at the tires than rather in at the flywheel is b/c the pulleys and the hlsd takes power. im sure there are other things that take away from that number aslo.
not sure though


----------



## Mr SEntra (Oct 7, 2002)

Here on the 22nd, the team will be dynoing 4 Spec's. All of which will be modded, but I'll post all the results and all the mods for us to talk about.


----------



## eatdirt (Feb 10, 2003)

Those sneaky biznitches at the companys tryin to tell us that the spec v's have 175, when they actually have 155... sheeet that's effed up!


----------



## Mr SEntra (Oct 7, 2002)

eatdirt said:


> *Those sneaky biznitches at the companys tryin to tell us that the spec v's have 175, when they actually have 155... sheeet that's effed up! *


Dude, WHP is much different to what is rated from the factory flywheel.


----------



## CrazyTalon (Sep 30, 2002)

Mr SEntra said:


> *Dude, WHP is much different to what is rated from the factory flywheel.  *


The limited slip also doesnt help matters.


----------



## Mr SEntra (Oct 7, 2002)

CrazyTalon said:


> *The limited slip also doesnt help matters. *


Maybe the HLSD, but the SR20 stock has less tranny loss than the QR stock, and I'm running VLSD. The most important thing to note is the QR responds very well to the standard bolt ons. I'll be posting a bunch of dyno sheets here in two weeks with QR's that have mods, so everyone stay tuned.


----------



## myoung (Apr 15, 2002)

eatdirt said:


> *Those sneaky biznitches at the companys tryin to tell us that the spec v's have 175, when they actually have 155... sheeet that's effed up! *


It is 175 Hp at the crank, All car makers do it.... Dyno's measure at the wheels... its normal to lose 10% to even 25% in the drivetrain... 

We get some goofy mail to NPM from people complaining about this and the numbers on our projects... I have a pre-made form letter for this...lol


----------



## BIGBULS (Sep 24, 2002)

I would actually estimate the stock CRANK hp on a Spec V to be around [email protected] (close to the advertised 6K on the not perfectly accurate stock tach) and 180lb/[email protected] (also close to the advertised 4K). This gives you an entirely reasonable ~16% power loss to the wheels.

The other side of this is that Nissan is rating the horsepower CORRECTLY at 175 crank hp, but underrating the torque by about 5 lb/ft (more like 185lb/ft)......this is also quite possible, but means that the tranny is even LESS efficient.......with around a 18-19% power loss to the wheels. The reason I'm more apt to dissbelieve this one is because GM AUTOMATIC transmissions only lose around 19-22% of their power to the wheels (although Honda's and Chryslers lose close to 30%), and I don't think the MANUAL in the Spec V is quite THAT inefficient.

Still....even option 2 IS possible.......Ford Probe GT's/Mazda MX-6 LS's (5 speed) lose around 18% power to the wheels (they dyno around 133-136whp stock vs a claimed 164 CRANK hp).

Like MYoung said and others said.....ALL cars (Neon SRT-4 excluded ) lose some of their power to the wheels........15% is a good benchmark for a nice efficient manual tranny, and 20% for an efficient auto.

Still....it's not unknown for maufacturers to underrate cars (overrating them is semi-rare......they get into too much trouble if they get caught.......anybody remember the Miata a couple years back, or Hyundai last year?). Anybody ever seen the dyno chart for a 2000 Mustang Cobra R? They CLAIM 385hp to the crank.........but yet they dyno around 370-375hp to the WHEELS.......  Or for that matter ANY F-Body LS1 (Camaro's, Firebird's).....somebody tell me how they make 305 CRANK hp, but still dyno 285-300 at the wheels? Like I said....it happens (and who are we to bitch if it does?).


----------

