Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC - Page 2
  1. Welcome to RangeRovers.net – General discussion forum for Range Rovers

    Welcome to RangeRovers.net - a website dedicated to all things Range Rovers.

    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, Join RangeRovers.net today!
     
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 51

Thread: Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC

  1. #16
    SOPHOMORE ROVER
    Join Date
    November 14th, 2009
    Posts
    318

    Re: Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC

    Agreed - with a pulley and tune, you MUST adjust your a/f and the only way to properly dial that in is with the assistance of a dyno, which will illustrate the curve. Otherwise you're just assuming that the tuner did it correctly, and any tuner worth his salt will almost insist that you strap your car down. And you need an AWD dyno at that, of which there aren't too many around.

  2. Remove Advertisements
    Range Rovers Forum
    Advertisements
     

  3. #17
    SOPHOMORE ROVER
    Join Date
    November 14th, 2009
    Posts
    318

    Re: Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC

    One last note, there is NO reason you cannot get longevity out of a forged engine with a reasonable increase in boost provided your a/f is dialed in and your timing is in a good range. If our 4.2's are stock with ~10 lbs, then running ~14-15 with a proper tune would be no problem. Add a few degrees of timing and dump some more fuel in and you will be fine. LR did not max out the performance on these engines, not even close. If they did, you'd see way more hp than 400. Remember, corporate philosophy on power levels and engine safety are always A LOT more conservative than the average car guy - since they're trying to protect an entire brand. And one little FYI...If you recall, the E39 M5 was getting 400 ponies out of an N/A 4.4L - that is impressive.

    Now, at 20 psi + ?? You're starting to play with fire, even with a good tune. I don't have the specs on what LR tested the engine to, but I can imagine that double the boost is probably near the limit. That said, I am NOT going to volunteer!!

  4. #18
    FORUM MODERATOR
    Join Date
    January 8th, 2006
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    4,454

    Re: Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC

    Quote Originally Posted by Ukraine Range
    Now, at 20 psi + ?? You're starting to play with fire, even with a good tune. I don't have the specs on what LR tested the engine to, but I can imagine that double the boost is probably near the limit. That said, I am NOT going to volunteer!!
    Oh come on...I thought we were about to find the volunteer at last...you'd be perfect for it!

    I can't do it as I don't have a S/C...otherwise I'd be all over this...

    PJPR
    13 Orkney Grey RRS HSE Lux
    06 Cairns Blue RRS HSE (200K...sold to a friend)

  5. Remove Advertisements
    Range Rovers Forum
    Advertisements
     

  6. #19
    JUNIOR ROVER Flash G's Avatar
    Join Date
    February 8th, 2007
    Location
    Hollywood Hills
    Posts
    699

    Re: Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC

    A 500hp SUV is a waste of money.

    Unless you plan on drag racing every idiot at stoplights, the standard RRS is sufficient.
    `07 Lotus Exige S - Ardent Red
    `06 Range Rover Supercharged - Java Black
    `06 Range Rover Sport HSE - Java Black
    `05 Lotus Elise - Ardent Red
    `97 Range Rover 4.6 HSE (Sold)

  7. #20
    Premium Member TripleE's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 16th, 2007
    Location
    ID
    Posts
    1,657

    Re: Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC

    Quote Originally Posted by Ukraine Range
    The bottom line is that you spin the blower faster, you create more boost and as a result more power. That's a fact.
    Likely, yes; fact, no that is not always the case - as per the reasons I stated earlier.

    '07 RRS
    '03 325i
    '94 GSX

  8. #21
    SOPHOMORE ROVER
    Join Date
    November 14th, 2009
    Posts
    318

    Re: Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC

    You need a physics lesson, and a basic one at that. I've spent more time with supercharged engines than you can imagine - those who want more power either go with a smaller pulley or bigger blower, period. Either one is guaranteed to deliver more power.

  9. #22
    Premium Member TripleE's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 16th, 2007
    Location
    ID
    Posts
    1,657

    Re: Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC

    Quote Originally Posted by Ukraine Range
    You need a physics lesson, and a basic one at that. I've spent more time with supercharged engines than you can imagine - those who want more power either go with a smaller pulley or bigger blower, period. Either one is guaranteed to deliver more power.
    I believe you may have missed a class on efficiency. There IS a point where it is entirely possible to not make any more power if you have pushed past the limits of the intercooler and charger, period. Is that the case in the Sport @ 400hp and the levels of boost it is running? No, I don't believe so, but I imagine it is closer to that limit than most people think (remember the thread where you thought 10 lbs was a lot of boost for only 400hp?).

    '07 RRS
    '03 325i
    '94 GSX

  10. #23
    Premium Member
    Join Date
    July 2nd, 2006
    Location
    It's a dry heat
    Posts
    1,737

    Re: Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash G
    A 500hp SUV is a waste of money.
    Unless you plan on drag racing every idiot at stoplights, the standard RRS is sufficient.
    Right. Thanks for the puerile lesson on excess, "Mr. I-have-3-cars-two-of-which-are-the-same"
    I didn't even have to look at your info to know you were posting from PRK.

    This thread is funny - all the N/A folks arguing rallying against the F/I guy making his truck faster. *News flash* he can already beat you guys with his factory pulley

    I'll tell you this... I actually looked for a replacement pulley on my truck. Wasn't about to spend $395 on a fancypants "arden" one (or whoever it is that sells them)... but if I could find one in Summit for $20 I'd use it in a heartbeat. We've got all sorts of room to play. The factory tune/build is always very conservative. Also, I bet the factory ECM would handle the A/F adjustments automatically.

  11. #24
    FRESHMAN ROVER
    Join Date
    September 5th, 2009
    Posts
    27

    Re: Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC

    @Ukraine Range,

    You can’t rely on Boost level to estimate HP. It is all about how much air you get into the engine, and at what cost. The (H)Eaton blower is already at its max efficiency around 11 psi, any increase spinning this roots type blower faster will generate more heat (Boost) so less air density, bigger chance of pre-ignition, and even worse it will cost the engine more power to turn the blower.

    So you will probably get some more horses if you spin the blower faster, but it will cost you dearly, and as long as you can’t show any dyno, it is pointless to claim gains. There is a reason why you don’t see dyno slips I guess, do you actually think that no one here or on any other forum has ever tested their car?

    I also think that 500 bhp is adequate .

    Andre.
    2008 RRS TDV6
    2000 XKR 600+ BHP (Twin-screw conversion and LSD)

  12. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    November 17th, 2009
    Location
    Torrance, CA
    Posts
    93

    Re: Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC

    And what do you get for the extra 100hp? Getting to the next red light a lot faster (and replacing the brakes a lot faster)?

    A RR, like a Jaguar, is a symbol of class and heritage, and transcends beyond mere Teutonic specs & numbers. It needs no apologies.

    I am very happy with my '06 RR and will keep it for many more years...until maybe the all-aluminum one comes along.

  13. #26
    FRESHMAN ROVER
    Join Date
    September 5th, 2009
    Posts
    27

    Re: Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC

    The extra 100 HP makes the car feel a lot lighter, so you wouldn’t have to wait for a aluminum version .

    There are enough situations where you can enjoy the extra power, why would you think more power will only be used between stop lights

    “A RR, like a Jaguar, is a symbol of class and heritage, and transcends beyond mere Teutonic specs & numbers. It needs no apologies. “

    Couldn’t agree more, but where would a Jaguar be without the power to move when it needs, like ehhm a Jaguar?
    2008 RRS TDV6
    2000 XKR 600+ BHP (Twin-screw conversion and LSD)

  14. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    November 17th, 2009
    Location
    Torrance, CA
    Posts
    93

    Re: Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC

    Quote Originally Posted by avos
    The extra 100 HP makes the car feel a lot lighter, so you wouldn’t have to wait for a aluminum version
    the aluminum version saves gas, the extra 100hp does not.

    Quote Originally Posted by avos
    There are enough situations where you can enjoy the extra power, why would you think more power will only be used between stop lights
    obviously you do not live in southern california suburbia.

    Quote Originally Posted by avos
    but where would a Jaguar be without the power to move when it needs, like ehhm a Jaguar?
    power isn't everything. the '09 lotus elise has only 189hp but handles like a champ. jags & RR's may not be the fastest or most powerful in their class, but they make you feel special every time you enter them.

  15. #28
    SOPHOMORE ROVER
    Join Date
    November 14th, 2009
    Posts
    318

    Re: Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC

    Ten lbs of boost is a lot for a blower that's probably what, 2L or so? But it's nowhere near its max.

    We can argue this till the cows come home, the point is that smaller pulley = more power, and that 500 hp is nice but not necessary because I agree 100% with figaro on what the RR is all about.

  16. #29
    FRESHMAN ROVER
    Join Date
    September 5th, 2009
    Posts
    27

    Re: Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC

    @Ukraine Range

    The Eaton is about 1.87 Ltr, and is running about 11/11.5 psi. You can get more power by spinning it faster (which I said), but the question is how much(or how little). The higher the pressure the less efficient this eaton type becomes which is common knowledge.

    Everyone how they like it, being it 200 or 500 hp
    2008 RRS TDV6
    2000 XKR 600+ BHP (Twin-screw conversion and LSD)

  17. #30
    Premium Member TripleE's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 16th, 2007
    Location
    ID
    Posts
    1,657

    Re: Shocking Video of 2010 RRS SC vs 2009 RRS SC

    Quote Originally Posted by Ukraine Range
    We can argue this till the cows come home, the point is that smaller pulley = more power
    *Sigh* Again, that is not always true. I guess I'll have to resort to linking websites. While common knowledge for FI, as avos has also pointed out, this was the second hit I got on google - ironically, you'll notice the title of the page has "Physics 101" in it...

    http://www.thrashercharged.com/L67_htm/intercooler.shtm

    4th paragraph copied for convenience:

    A common misconception is that more boost is always better. This is true, but only to a certain extent, because superchargers operate most efficiently at a certain speed. To create more boost, blower speed must be increased, more heat is generated, and efficiency suffers. One must understand that high density is what's important, not necessarily high pressure (boost). Compressing air does increase both pressure and density, but the resulting heat generated simultaneously reduces density as well. To achieve optimum performance from a blower, we want to create the most pressure (boost) while adding the least amount of heat, thus achieving the highest air density possible in the intake manifold. As blower speed is increased, at some point the heat created decreases the air density to where addidtional boost is just offset by the increased heat, resulting in no density (and therefore power) gains; further increases in boost may actually even decrease power.

    Mooooooooo.

    '07 RRS
    '03 325i
    '94 GSX

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Similar Threads

  1. Map Update DVD Version 2009-2010
    By b_arra in forum Range Rover Sport / L320
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: December 14th, 2011, 09:14 PM
  2. Navteq DVD Update (2009-2010)
    By BrianW21 in forum Range Rover Mark III / L322
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: November 28th, 2011, 10:03 AM
  3. 2008 RR SC versus 2009 or 2010 HSE
    By goks in forum Range Rover Mark III / L322
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 11th, 2010, 10:22 PM
  4. Decision 2009 SC vs new 2010
    By CapitalRRSC in forum Range Rover Mark III / L322
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: August 1st, 2009, 01:01 PM
  5. 2009 vs. 2010 version
    By JGS in forum Range Rover Sport / L320
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: June 5th, 2009, 10:12 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.3.0