| Prowler Products By Gary | Tom Mills / Jefferson Auto |
 |
 |
| Home Page | Owners Registry | Discussion Forums | ProwlerMall | Event Scrapbooks | About |
| Prowler Products By Gary | Tom Mills / Jefferson Auto |
|
|
| Bottom of Page | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: Prowler Horse Power... |
C5 Frank Prowler Junkie From:Palm Beach Gardens, FL. |
posted 03-11-2002 08:27 AM
    
I was doing a little figuring as far as the Prowlers hp. I ran 14.69 at 91.39. Which I was told was the fastest stock time ever posted here. It got me to thinking. These cars really dont make anywhere near their advertised Horse Power. I weighed my Kat at 2818 with 1/2 a tank.... so if you add my weight to that... it comes out to 3050 or so.... You plug in that weight with the car advertised power to any 1/4 mile calculator and you come up with 13.30's.... Now if you use your weight and 1/4 mile mph to figure out hp.... my 1/4 speed was 91.39.... it brings up 182 hp...... Either the tranny is soaking up a ton more power then usual, or these cars don't even have 200hp. Does it bother me.... not really, I didnt buy this car for speed. My Mustang is my modded up fast car... but thought I would share it with all. You know in 99' the Mustang Cobra was found to not deliver hp as advertised... and Ford recalled all the cars and fixed them. ------------------ This message has been edited by C5 Frank on 03-11-2002 at 08:29 AM |
|
WPG Prowler Junkie From:Orlando, Florida |
posted 03-11-2002 08:46 AM
I think it has been mentioned before that there is a 25-30% driveline loss in the transmission in our cars. The engine is the same as the ones in a couple other Chrysler cars, and they are also rated in the 250 hp range. I think what kills our cars is the transmission and the 20 inch wheels in the rear just kills the effective ratio. That is why I sometimes joke with my friends that if I put 17 inch wheels on the rear of my Prowler, I would be blowing their cars away (one of them has a 600+ hp Supra). ------------------ MTD Prowler Intake System 2.2 |
Rich Tilden POA Site Supporter Prowler Junkie Personal ScrapBook From:Punta Gorda, Florida |
posted 03-11-2002 09:27 AM
I've always felt the engines were overrated! Using my calculations, and your numbers, I get some low numbers also - unless you bump up the drivetrain loss. The most accurrate calc for HP is using MPH in the quarter mile traps instead of E.T. Using your 91.39 mph and 3050 pounds, you would have to experience a whopping 38% drivetrain loss to yield a flywheel HP of 254.97 and 158.08 HP at the wheels. I feel that the drivetrain loss is above normal in our cars because of the transaxle and it's location/layout. But 38% is just plain huge! |
cmblockhus       POA Site Supporter Prowler Junkie From:Citrus Heights CA. |
posted 03-11-2002 09:42 AM
your correct, the hp is a SAE figure at the flywheel not the rear wheel ------------------ |
butchcee POA Site Supporter Prowler Junkie From:Lake Ariel, Pa. |
posted 03-11-2002 10:19 AM
C5, most people that dyno'd the stockers came up in the low to mid 170's at the rear wheel. It is about 30% loss using the stock HP rating as a base. ------------------ |
|
C5 Frank Prowler Junkie From:Palm Beach Gardens, FL. |
posted 03-11-2002 10:49 AM
Guys 30+% sounds very high. My girlfriends Trans Am Ram Air is an Automatic and is rated at 320 hp... it made 302rwhp 100%stock!!!!! Now I understand our cars me have a higher drivetrain loss... but 38% sounds wacky.... I say over rated! ------------------ |
All times are CT (US) Top of Page Previous Page |  Return to Technical Questions & Answers next newest topic | next oldest topic |
  |
|
All material contained herein, Copyright 2000 - 2012 ProwlerOnline.com
E-Innovations, LP
