Response to a "Callaway on a Dyno" question - (the B2K 4 sale @ DTE)

[*89x2*]

I had asked what the Automatic B2K convert. had pulled on the dyno (since it was advertised on DTE's Dyno site)

I got a rather interesting reply - Check out these numbers :eek

89x2-
We are not selling the Callaway car, the owner is, so we don't know how many people have asked about it. We're just hosting those photos for him as a gesture of customer service since he is a very good client of DTE with his other cars.

I managed to find those power numbers for the Callaway you were asking about. It made 412 RWHP/461 RWTQ on a Dynojet 248 in-ground chassis dyno. Ambient was 72* in the test cell and the car had two month old gas in it...

HTH's

Regards,
Phil Rickard, President
Dynotech Engineering, Inc.

 

[EricVonHa]

That's a pretty stout ride. Who's buying?

 

[SurfnSun]

VERY nice...

 

[90Callaway]

That is a low RWTQ number for a B2K relative to the HP level which is not bad. It should be closer to 550-570RWTQ. Maybe he meant 561?

 

[malc350]

RWHP and Torque

Guys, you sure that's at the rear wheels, not the flywheel? I thought a manual car loses about 10-15% at the wheels due to driveline losses such as friction.

That would make that car 450 to 470 hp!!!!

Of course I hope it's true!

 

[malc350]

RWHP and Torque

Guys, you sure that's at the rear wheels, not the flywheel? I thought a manual car loses about 10-15% at the wheels due to driveline losses such as friction.

That would make that car 450 to 470 hp!!!!

Of course I hope it's true!

 

[CKA_Racing]

Actually that's pretty low considering it has twin turbos. I would have thought they pushed out more. I've seen countless Vortec supercharged vettes and 5.0 Mustangs pushing 500+ torq and 425+ HP at the rear wheels. So there is no reason a B2K can't do the same or better. At least from the info I know about B2K which is not much.:t :L

 

[SurfnSun]

Any light mods to a B2k can produce huge power increases, Malc. Its pretty easy to make a 500hp Callaway TT.

 

[TAC]

That is a low RWTQ number for a B2K relative to the HP level which is not bad. It should be closer to 550-570RWTQ. Maybe he meant 561?

;stupid

The torque should be much higher. My '87 hit only 289 rwhp but had 436 rwtq. Chev uses 16% factor for 4+3 so that puts me at 344 HP and 519 lb/ft torque--dead on specs for '87 HP and a little higher on torque. The torque peaks at 2800 as it should.

If the 412 HP is correct, the torque s/b somewhere around 555 using the same ratio as specs say mine should be. Perhaps it has some exhaust blockage or something.

 

[Stan A]

Good Point

Hi All,

Tim is right with his numbers. Back in 1995. David and modified a 1987 4+3 convertible. Dual the exhaust, K &N air filter, Ported the intake and exhaust side. Install a 52mm throttle body and turned up the boost to 12.5lbs with a single hi-flow cat for emissions. Results as follows with conversion to net figures:

Starting Net Figures Stock: HP- 366 and Torque- 508ft-lbs

HP: 438 @ 4500rpm
Torque: 582ft-lbs@ 3000rpm

Great little ride for the weekend warrior!

Take care all,
Stan

 

[*89x2*]

I am not sure what year this one is however, this was found on a dyno results site... This is NOT the Callaway for sale at DTE

Torque seems rather low on this one

:confused

 

[*89x2*]

FWIW - Here is a Dyno sheet on a 1990 ZR1 from the same dyno site (Same Dyno>???????)

Interesting...

 

[TAC]

Not only is it low but I think it peaks way late. I believe these engines peak right around 2800 and then taper off to 4k or so where they start to really drop off. The torque curve doesn't look right for a TT. Perhaps it's a SN instead? The ZR-1 (or should I say XR-1?) appears similar in shape to others I've seen but the power looks low too.

 

[SurfnSun]

Im gonna go out on a limb and say that dyno is a little bit off.

 

[*89x2*]

This one just showed up on e bay w/ a reserve under 30k :eek

Sharp car for little money

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=6168&item=2416436731

 

[luvmy92]

Something doesn't make sense with the dyno picture on the car for sale. It is definitely the same car but the graph does not show the hp/tq that is listed (412/460). It shows 2 horsepower runs both around the 460 hp level at it's peak. I'm not sure what's going on there...

Mike

 

[*89x2*]

Something doesn't make sense with the dyno picture on the car for sale. It is definitely the same car but the graph does not show the hp/tq that is listed (412/460). It shows 2 horsepower runs both around the 460 hp level at it's peak. I'm not sure what's going on there...

Mike

Mike , The Dyno numbers in the thread are from two Different Callaway's. The first set of numbers, were given to me in response to an inquiry about the cars power...
The second set (The Graph sheet(s) are from a Callaway (unknown year) and a ZR1...

The Callaway for sale does have 412/461, as mentioned to me by the dyno owner/operator.

Sorry if there was any confusion

You thinking of buying the beast???????????

 

[luvmy92]

I am referring to the Callaway on eBay. Look at the graph picture at the bottom of the page. The graph has two lines on it and both are HP lines... and they are both over 460hp. Not the 412hp/460ft that is printed on the graph. Maybe I'm missing something...

I see it now. The hp is on the left side and the tq is on the right...

Mike

 

[*89x2*]

Mike - thanks for the clarification I was afraid that I had confused someone... Are you considering this Callaway??? It is definately priced right!!!!!!

 

[TurboLuigi]

I too am bothered by that Dyno sheet.

I would think it should show a higher torque figure. I just looked at the Dyno sheet on my car when the distributor cap/coil were bad and it was running about 100 hp below normal (@ 364hp) and it was still producing 522 ft. lbs of torque (compared to 634 ft. lbs when running well).

If it were a normally aspirated engine then I wouldn't question it but a the turbo's give a big load of increase in torque.

Luigi
:cool