The problem is Sean that nothing is a "definative measure" you can turn up to a rolling road on day 1 and get X HP, turn up the next day and get Y HP, take 5 PSI out of your tyres and get Z HP
Dyno cells are considerably more accurate (well most are) but don't represent the power available when the engine is in the car (heat, proximity of body work etc)
The point I am trying to make is that drag strip testing "can" be as useful as anything as long as the data has sufficient density and that the "operator" understands the value of what he see's and at no time have I ever suggested that you can turn up, do 1 run and instantly get a result that will be useable, if anyone thinks that then its absurd and they need to read my posts properly.
My standpoint is that it is possible by using basic physics and the gathering of statistics to predict with reasonable accuracy the HP an engine produces, it has been done for many years and works (the hyperlink I used on my last post proves this), can it completly take into account Mrs Miggins and her 5 second gear shifts...no of course not, how can it, but by the same token a dyno or rolling road can't factor in a bad operator (both of which happen)
In the end, all of these measures are best used as a comparative measure in isolation from each other.
Contrary to popular belief, I don't have an absolute fixation with the strip, it mearly satisfies the need to collect data, and that is data you can't get from a track, if you could, I would be on the track all day long.
And yes if it was 1991 when you last ran on a real 1/4 then you definitely need a refresher.
May I suggest that if we want to debate HP and its derivation then we start a new thread rather than continually dilute this one, I am more than happy to as I think we all learn things from it.
Dyno cells are considerably more accurate (well most are) but don't represent the power available when the engine is in the car (heat, proximity of body work etc)
The point I am trying to make is that drag strip testing "can" be as useful as anything as long as the data has sufficient density and that the "operator" understands the value of what he see's and at no time have I ever suggested that you can turn up, do 1 run and instantly get a result that will be useable, if anyone thinks that then its absurd and they need to read my posts properly.
My standpoint is that it is possible by using basic physics and the gathering of statistics to predict with reasonable accuracy the HP an engine produces, it has been done for many years and works (the hyperlink I used on my last post proves this), can it completly take into account Mrs Miggins and her 5 second gear shifts...no of course not, how can it, but by the same token a dyno or rolling road can't factor in a bad operator (both of which happen)
In the end, all of these measures are best used as a comparative measure in isolation from each other.
Contrary to popular belief, I don't have an absolute fixation with the strip, it mearly satisfies the need to collect data, and that is data you can't get from a track, if you could, I would be on the track all day long.
And yes if it was 1991 when you last ran on a real 1/4 then you definitely need a refresher.
May I suggest that if we want to debate HP and its derivation then we start a new thread rather than continually dilute this one, I am more than happy to as I think we all learn things from it.
