Anyone has a DYNO GRAPH for a 360 (6-Spped or F1)?

355 is completely different to a 360. The 360 has a gearbox BEHIND the engine..it's got to be a much better system power wise, but i'd imagine it's also one of the reasons why the 360 has to be much longer.

 

From your picture, I see the F360 transmission uses 2 gears (tranny plus Diff) where the F355 uses 4 (drop, turn, tranny, diff). But note the CoG of the 360 tranny is not as good as the CoG of the F355.

 

Here's comparason dyno run of my car and an F355, you can see F355 loses more power through drive than the 360.

F355 at RW is 298.5 vs. 375 BHP
360M at RW is 339.9 vs. 395 BHP
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Careful there. All I see is the 355 number is making a lower % of the claimed hp.....but there is nothing to say why. Drive line lose is only one of many possible aswers.

 

I have an official dyno sheet from Ferrari for a US spec 360 and it says 373 HP (DIN) = 368 SAE at 8500 RPM and 37.3 KGM = 270 pounds feet torque at 4750 RPM. Power measured at crankshaft on Ferrari's dyno.
PS It's framed and hanging on my shop wall if you want to see it.

 

My friends at the factory that whitnessed dyno runs on F40/ F50 said they were the only ones in memory that made advertised horsepower

 

What do you mean official if the car is spec'ed at 395 BHP? Is that an internal document? What were the numbers for F355 if they were claimed at 375 BHP?

 

You're in the Bay Area, come by and see it, you can be my proof of authenticity. Don't have #s for 355 but if you extrapolate from all info on this thread you should be pretty close. Read PM

 

1000 miles?? You lazy slug! I've got 2500 on mine already. Get out there and drive!!

Gary

 

Hey guys I am new to the board I just recieved my 98 355b last thursday and love it. I like to see the Ferrari guy's like to talk RWHP I come from the Porsche world and have a High HP porsche site www.C2turbo.com we collect dyno's from all types of cars. I just Dynoed my car tonight, not quit the HP I expected, 286 rwhp the car has 6k on it and runs well. what are the best mods for theses cars ? and how well do the 355s handle mods is it easy to blow a motor? do any of you guy's do your own work? sorry for all the ?'s in one post

Thanks Dave


www.C2Turbo.com

 

I had to think about that for a while before answering, but yes it is an internal document. I used to be the shop foreman at Ferrari of Los Gatos and we did a warranty motor replacement on a brand new 360 Spy a couple of years ago. It took a long time to get a motor and the story we got was that at the time no motors were available through regular parts channels and one was taken from the production line and shipped directly to us from the factory. When we opened the crate the dyno sheet was still hanging on the motor. Three levels of management above me knew we recieved it and nobody seemed to care so I kept it. The picture files of it are to big to post but I can e-mail it to you.

 

Makes sense! Gioseppie (sp) who worked on my car at the factory while being built told me the worst dyno engines go to 360C. I had heard otherwise, may be you can comment on that. I guess it is because they go through rebuild so often and the HP profile will change each time. When I showed him my dyno graph he was impressed but I hadn't any other to compare. I think they were under pressure probably to get an engine out to your customer and they just grabbed whatever they could. But then again seeing other actions from Ferrari, I would not be surprised if they simply lie or misrepresent the facts to their advantage while marketing products to public.
I have seen many failures on the 360 drive train and when it comes to getting Ferrari to admit the issues they dance around it w/o admitting anything. They are great politicians!

 

I have e-mailed you the photos. And yes I have heard that about the C's as well. As Mako99 said previously it has long been known that the horsepower figures are embellished and I agree with him in so far as the performance is what counts not what some machine says the # really is. I do however take exception to Ferrari's misrepresentations. As to the other problems with the 360 I rarely find myself being an apoligist for them but all car makers make running changes/improvements as the need arises so I don't consider them negligent on that count.

 

when i grow up, i want to be mitch

insanely educational stuff dude - many thanks.

doody.

 

After spending some time and $$$ on dyno runs here is what I have come to think.

A dyno run is only good for one thing: Compare before and after of the same car on the same dyno, the dyno has to be operated by the same person, the car was strapped down by the same person with the same ties and the weather is the same and you got gas at the same gas station and your tank is filled up to the same level.

Only under these condition is the dyno chart worth anything. It will tell you by what percentage your modification changed the TQ and HP of your car.

Just my opinion since I don't trust correction factors.

 

I have a G-Tech Competition Pro, and it is VERY pessimistic in general for estimating HP/TQ unfortunately. I have literally hundreds of chassis dynographs from my car to compare with the G-Tech and it is always low. It is however, fairly accurate for estimating acceleration, including 1/4 mile ET and trap within about 0.3s and 3-4 mph.

Most of the dynographs on the KTR performance link in this thread are lower than typical also. The results vary substantially from different dynos, be it a Mustang dyno or Dynojet 248C, etc. and also the correction factor applied to the results. In America, SAE correction is accepted as the standard. I watched a 100% stock 550 Maranello dyno a rather healthy 419 RWHP SAE, compared to the sickly 366 RWHP shown on the KTR site. So it is quite possible that the dyno they use reads lower than typical, or perhaps some of the Ferraris on that page were badly in need of tuning.

 

I have an old Car & Driver issue where they put John Carmack's (programmer of Quake and Doom computer games) F50 on the dyno for a baseline at Norwood Performance before doing a twin turbo upgrade. The result was a dismal 370 RWHP compared to the advertised 520 hp at the crank. Norwood said such low results are typical of Ferrari.

Ford had a power deficit issue with their 1999 Cobra’s which were actually putting out 280 hp at opposed to the 320 hp advertised. Owners launches a class action lawsuit and Ford was forced to do a recall and corrected the issue by replacing the intake manifold and a few other components. The same thing occurred with the new Mazda Miata and RX8. Mazda was forced to either buyback the cars or give owners a ~$1000 rebate and lowered their advertised power ratings accordingly.

I have never seen so much pseudo science in an attempt to justify these low figures: 20% driveline losses????? Driveline loss is friction, that means the lost power is turned into heat, where would all that heat go? Not even an AWD vehicle will have a loss of 20% And all this talk about internal frictional losses in the engine, were talking about crank ratings, therefore anything lost in the engine is irrelevant. Also these bizarre dyno correction formulas are simply nonsense.

 

I agree that 20% loss is pretty significant but I am not a scientist and have not seen numbers from crank vs. rw in a controlled experiment where we can see how they differ (way too costly for an individual). But referring to your comment as you say the engine friction losses are factored in when discussing crank numbers. When doing a chassis dyno you can figure that turning the transmission, wheels, rotors and other components outside of the engine will take energy or work. those losses are due to turning the masses to get the car moving, how much? I don't know but a good estimate was about 15%, but some cars may be more/less efficient than others and the driveline loss number could be off 30 - 50%. And some of the losses occur if driving wheels are not making ideal contact so there would be less friction. In general I think chassis dyno is a relative number for use in tuning and are best to see a before and after a modification. They may never provide a true BHP at rw when driving on the road.

 

I remember my '99 Modena'a owners manual saying that due to a ram air effect that 20hp is gained at top speed. That would account for considerable margin of error since on a dyno the car is still. If I still had the car I'd scan it for you guys.

 

Although I have not seen a 99 owners manual I have never seen any reference to HP increase and ram air effect in mine or any other. It would be good if you could specify where you saw the reference, I can get a 99 manual to check.

 

Please try to find a manual, it may be in my hard cover Modena book at home. I remember it like yesterday, because I remember wanting those 20hp all the time, I'll check the Modena book when I get out of work maybe its in there.

 

30-50% is a huge margin that seems a bit unrealistic. I've seem a Buick 455 put on an engine dyno, and then on a chassis dyno. The results was a drivetrain loss of 14.5% This was behind a built TH400 may I add, which even stock is a heavily built transmission.

If there was not ideal contact, the tires would spin on the dyno. It would be impossible to miss the smoke or sound produced.

 

The "ram air" effect had been debated for a long time and all science shows that it is only a mere marketing gimmick. On one forum even an Boeing aerospace engineer stated that even at speeds of 200mph, a car is simply too slow to actually produce a significant pressure front which is the basis of the "ram air" effect.

Also the Modena is rated by the SAE net method. I don't believe this rating can take into account firgures produced only when the vehicle is moving.

 

I should have qulaified my statement when I said 30-50%, 50% of 14.5% in the wrong direction adds up the losses to 21.75%. It is not uncommon to see this type of loss on dyno dynamics. But the same car on dynojet may lose only 15%.

To exmine the traction at 125 MPH or so turning dyno drums is hard to notice, but one can ignore it if the car has good rubber, and aftreall what can you do if there are minute traction issues.

 

Hans if it answers some of your questions I have a factory dyno sheet for a US version 360 tested by the factory on their dyno at the factory. It converts to 368SAE HP. There is not a great deal of difference in engine output for different markets on the current cars so I would expect cars sold in Italy to be similar. It has long been known that Ferrari embellishes HP claims. It is one of the reasons I don't pay too much attention to them as the acceleration and top speed figures are in my opinion a more important yardstick.