I have a 2005 stock C6, A4 with 26K miles. Took it to Tom Wong of Wong's Performance Engineering to get base numbers before doing mods.

Using a Mustang Dynamometer.

Results:

342 HP
336 lbs torque

Seems like good solid numbers to me.

I'll give another update after CAI, Headers, Corsa and a tune.

 

Those are #'s are great!
With a few mods,You'll be at 400 or more!!

 

That's about the most HP reported for a stock AX car since the C6 was released. That's a very strong car or an optimistic dyno. But as long as you continue to use the same dyno any future mods will be accurately reflected. Just be careful if you visit another dyno, you maybe in for a surprise.

Tom

 

I agree completely. In order to keep my "experiment" as scientific and objective as possible, I'll be using the same dynamometer for all of my tests.

Probably be a couple of weeks before I can start putting the mods on, but I'll publish after each.

For info, the mods planned at this point are:

1. Long tube headers w/ high flo cats, into Corsa sports.
2. Vararam intake.
3. Tune

I may add new heads and a cam at a later date.

 

Those are indeed good numbers.....

I will putting the identical car on a "Dynojet" on Saturday Nov 4th. I will try to find this thread and post my numbers. Again base car prior to any mods... C6 2005 A4 with performance axle.

 

I'll look forward to your results!

 

One other item that was really impressive; the torque stayed above 300 ft lbs from 2400 rpm through 6400 rpm.

The curve looks nice and flat with a gradual rise and fall off from 336 ft lbs at 4600 rpm.

The LS2 is really an amazing engine.

 

Why advertise the car at 400hp, when it doesn't really put out that much?

 

It is really just a matter of definition.

Horsepower and torque are generally measured at two locations: the crankshaft, or at the rear wheels.

A crankshaft reading will show power output without accessories and the mechanical coupling to the rear wheels. (ie clutch, transmission etc.) The HP numbers advertised are generally what has been measured at the crankshaft.

A rear wheel reading actually measures the horsepower and torque being transmitted through the complete drive train to the ground.

There is always going to be a loss of horsepower being transmitted from the engine to the ground, from 10 to 20% depending on what type of accessories and transmission are attached to it.

Therefore, an engine can be rated at "X" HP at the crank, but wind up being "X - 10% to 20%" at the rear wheels.

A car manufacturer can legitimately advertise horsepower at the crankshaft. In fact, based upon the variety of options and accessories that one can add to a vehicle, the HP at the engine is the only fair and consistent way to measure. Ideally, this provides an objective comparison that one can use from vehicle to vehicle, regardless of manufacturer.

From a performance standpoint, what occurs "where the rubber meets the road" is what really matters.

Rear wheel HP and rear wheel torque are the true determiners of how a vehicle performs.

 

I don't know of any car that is marketed with the rear wheel horsepower numbers. It's always been the flywheel or "at the engine" numbers that come from the manufacturer.

 

Wow, those are great numbers indeed. Mine (a 2005 M6) just did 363 SAE on a Dynojet, bone stock. The mustang allegedly reads 20 less, so you're right there with me in an A6!

 

The C6 Z06 is rated by RWHP

 

it does seem that way....I think I read here that a stock Z06 with dr's pulled a 11 sec 1/4!! Thats nutty for a production ride.

 

Major Screwup had his Z06 dyno'ed at the same time as mine...

463 HP!! completely stock.

The sound of that engine at 6400 rpm was AMAZING!

 

That is right where you should be....10% parasitic loss for the manual tranny and you have 403 bhp.

On a dynojet an automatic shold run around 342 rwhp.. if one considers 15% driveline loss on the auto to be reasonable....

What I don't get is how we have those numbers on a Mustang Dyno for the auto (he has A4 not A6 to be precise) ....that's like maybe 420 bhp. Was it corrected to SAE?

 

Great numbers... LOL... going to hold off on the Dyno till I know I have over 400!

 

Not quite. The Z is rated using the same criteria as the regular cars. (Mine dyno'd 468btw.)

 

I don't know the answer to that. I don't recall anyone even bringing that question up. Nor is there is anything on the printout that indicates any correction.

When the shop owner gets back from SEMA, I'll ask the question. However, after two runs that gave "carbon copy" results, his comment was that "those are really strong numbers."

 

I agree, just joking with the Z rated at the RWHP. The are definetly underated. Great #s

 

For a really excellent article on "Horsepower: Making it add up"

http://neptune.spacebears.com/opine/horsepwr.html

Its ALL about correction my friend... even though dyno's vary, horsepower numbers would be meaningless to us gearheads unless they were somewhat comparative... so we factor in the effects of

1/ Temperature (cooler air is more dense and hence oxygen rich)

2/ Elevation ( the closer to sea level the heavier the column of air above our car and therefore more oxygen to combust)

3/ Humidity (wetter air can hold less oxygen)

and then the correction to what type of Horsepower

A/ SAE Net ( the northamerican standard 29.23 in/hg, 77 degrees F and Humidity of 0)
B/ DIN (German)
c/ EEC (Asia and some Europe)
D/ Standard Corrected... I love this one.. 68 degrees F and 29.92 in/hg. Usually see this used by manufacturers of Cold Air and exhaust systems to show how great their products are.

oh yea one other thing...

smoothing.... smoothing..

this setting is done at the dyno shop to control the blips of the dyno and the measuring equipment... when it is set to zero you will see higher peak reading of hp and torque because the blips get read. The usual setting should be around five as it gives a smoother graph and removes the lettle blips that are not necessarily visible on the graph paper...

hope this helps...

gary