Honda Prelude Online banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Offtrack excursion expert
Joined
·
19,043 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
If we are FWD, why do we lose so much hp? Its like 40% between crank and wheel. RWD cars I've heard don't even lose that much.

If you figure the average lude dyno's in at 160 whp and is rated at 200 bhp, isn't that kinda of a large drop?
 

·
Offtrack excursion expert
Joined
·
19,043 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Well maybe if the Prelude had some form of forced induction and could claim that kind of power, maybe they would. :p

Is that really the only reason though? They overrate the engines? So basically our lude is like 180-190 hp at the crank? Because I thought you were supposed to lose only like 20% with FWD cars to the wheels.
 

·
Offtrack excursion expert
Joined
·
19,043 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Doh. Lol. I just got owned. :laugh:

I started that post right after I woke up this morning, so obviously I wasn't thinking clearly. Actually, I don't think I was thinking much at all... lol. :eek:
 

·
Just say NO to euro-rice
Joined
·
3,569 Posts
this post is teh funny. i can see you making a calculation mistake, OK, but other people gave their "theories" without thinking about the calculation....
 

·
Drives a used Dodge
Joined
·
24,594 Posts


I would think rear power loses more because there is an extra driveshaft to transfer power to? :confused: Instead of power going straight to both halveshafts in FWD
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
PreludePowerR said:


I would think rear power loses more because there is an extra driveshaft to transfer power to? :confused: Instead of power going straight to both halveshafts in FWD
Yeah, that's actually what I heard too. I heard RWD cars lose more power than FWD since they have to go through the long driveshaft, all the way to the rear. It's just a lot more mass to have to power, and so you get less power to the wheels.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,595 Posts
silverbullit2K1 said:
They do, so they say. I think FWD loses between 20-25% and RWD loses 25-35%. Longer distance for it to travel.
I don't think it is a linear power loss like that. I mean, if you have a cherry V8 with tons of torque, I doubt you are going to lose 20-25% of your power through the drivetrain.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
JakeTheSlayer said:


I don't think it is a linear power loss like that. I mean, if you have a cherry V8 with tons of torque, I doubt you are going to lose 20-25% of your power through the drivetrain.
Please explain why it won't. We figure it would lose more power because it has more mass in the drivetrain to go through. Being a V8 with tons of torque doesn't mean it still won't lose a larger percentage goin to the rear wheels than it would if it was going to the front wheels.
 

·
`\ (^_^) /`
Joined
·
2,991 Posts
heres more food for thought. my friend just got a 2003 wrx and had been following it up on their forums. it makes 227hp to the flywheel, but when dynoed (didnt remember what type dyno they used), it produced only 160 whp. this is with awd.thats almost a 30% lost there, but it has to spread that power over to 4 wheels.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,595 Posts
axio said:


Please explain why it won't. We figure it would lose more power because it has more mass in the drivetrain to go through. Being a V8 with tons of torque doesn't mean it still won't lose a larger percentage goin to the rear wheels than it would if it was going to the front wheels.
I don't think I made myself clear. I was speaking of how I don't think you will lose an "X" percent of horsepower/torque in the drive train. A motor with more torque is going to lose less percentage than a motor with less torque will lose.

As for fwd losing less power than rwd, I bet it is probably true. However fwd isn't too appealing when you are putting more than 175 horsepower to the ground, the weight transfer isn't good at all.



Girl n-a Lude said:
heres more food for thought. my friend just got a 2003 wrx and had been following it up on their forums. it makes 227hp to the flywheel, but when dynoed (didnt remember what type dyno they used), it produced only 160 whp. this is with awd.thats almost a 30% lost there, but it has to spread that power over to 4 wheels.
It may only have 160 whp at each end, but it has that power at both ends. Anyone seen the AWD tiberon video (2 motors)?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
JakeTheSlayer said:
As for fwd losing less power than rwd, I bet it is probably true. However fwd isn't too appealing when you are putting more than 175 horsepower to the ground, the weight transfer isn't good at all.
Yup, I agree. RWD's accelarate much better do to that fact...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,895 Posts
Girl n-a Lude said:
heres more food for thought. my friend just got a 2003 wrx and had been following it up on their forums. it makes 227hp to the flywheel, but when dynoed (didnt remember what type dyno they used), it produced only 160 whp. this is with awd.thats almost a 30% lost there, but it has to spread that power over to 4 wheels.
That is why a lude can beat them from a roll. We have the same whp and are lighter, just dont race it from a stop or you will get owned unless you have some mods.
 

·
On the 2nd Prelude
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
JakeTheSlayer said:
It may only have 160 whp at each end, but it has that power at both ends. [/B]
briefly there is sounded like you were trying to say that since it makes it at both ends, its producing twice as much as our 160. I sure hope that's not your claim, that'll get you slapped.

and an AWD drivetrain is usually the least efficient of any layout, due to the extra clutches and viscous couplings it uses. more things to turn, viscous shear losses, more friction.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top