vag-com, nm to ft/lb'

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (platinum)

i have been using .738 nm...

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (NJWolf18T)

You need to multiply the Newton meters by 0.738.

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (einsig)

i thought it was .73756

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (UMDKappy)

yep... but .738 is close enough for me

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (NJWolf18T)

ok so i was close.
thanks guys.
next question. what is the best way to get a accurate reading. im sure having like a car load of people does not help. correct. is a 3rd gear pull where it's at or...
thanks again
platinum.

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (platinum)

3rd gear from 2000-6500rpm...
i wouldn't recommend a car load of people in there while you do it.. although the extra weight won't affect how much power the car makes or the numbers it puts out, but it will put extra stress on your car not to mention your clutch... that's a lot of torque for a stock clutch and more weight in the car means more resistance... plus doing 95 mph with a full car isn't such a good idea anyway..

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (NJWolf18T)

FYI, nm stands for nanometers (usually used for measuring light wavelengths) Nm is Newton meters, which generally speaking is a measure of force.

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (einsig)

what kinda numbers are you guys putting down. im assuming this is crank power and not wheel power.
my numbers seem low. 300 - 319 nm. @4900 rpms
also how can i meassure hp.
i think you do it this way lbft x rpm/5252. does that sound right.
thanks.


[Modified by platinum, 5:43 PM 3-31-2003]

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (platinum)

319 isn't too bad for torque.. it's about 237 ft lbs... as for hp you can compute it like this
ft/lbs x (rpm/5252)...
just make sure the rpm/5252 is in parenthesis in your equation..

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (jcstomper)

with chip alone i should be at 247 ft/lb, correct. or are vag readings wheel. i have heard of some issue with chiped a4's and vag's , anyone else heard of this.
fyi. my hp looks decent at [email protected]

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (platinum)

people say block 120's arent very accurate once you start modding the car

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (jcstomper)

i think the guys that are running apr and upsolute have this problem... my numbers have gotten stronger with each mod... from chip to turboback exhaust... now whether or not they are accurate according to a dyno minus a correction factor is a different story...

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (einsig)

Newton is a SI unit of force, Newton x meters are SI units for torque. In USA torque is typically measured using foot x pounds, ft/lbs is something other than torque.

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (john s)

Yeah I know, I have no idea why I typed it that way. All I can think of is that I intended to pu "twisting force" (a general term for torque) and just forgot the twisting part.


[Modified by einsig, 10:22 PM 3-31-2003]

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (einsig)

so basically a block 120 is just a ruff estimate of what im getting. i should go get dyno'ed for the correct results.
no one has a conversion factor for the correct readings.
thanks again.
platinum

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (platinum)

Block 120 shows actual wheel tq and hp including loss due to alternator, a/c, etc. but it also derives its readings from the MAF readings, MAP readings, etc, as well, so they are not 100% accurate.
.7376 is a good conversion factor from Nm to ft/lbs, and the to go to Hp the formula is (tq*rpm)/5252 just as others have said. everyone has given you the correct conversion factors, it's just the Block 120 is not 100% accurate but it is darn close. my readings would indicate that my car is making the power to the wheels

Re: vag-com, nm to ft/lb' (platinum)

its definatly not wheel hp but rather a middle ground, do a search on this cause there was tons of talk about this a long time ago