My name is peter Burgess and I am a tuning junky

[PeterBurgess]

Thanks for that link Matthew.
That would be ideal on the smaller Clayton engine dyno we have lying around as it has a flange style coupling and the dyno is 'stand alone' as would be the engine. The SF901 uses the engine to become rigid, it has a bell housing and spigot shaft just like a gearbox. The engine is bolted in place and the end of the spigot shaft is supported in the end of the engine crank. The instructions say this fitting method, along with a flexiplate clutch is necessary. I notice folk make adaptors to either bolt onto the end of the crank or onto the flywheel rather than use the clutch assembly from the test engine and changing the spigot shaft for each different engine.

Peter

[PeterBurgess]

Thanks for sharing that Adrian.
You just need to get em to let you build an engine dyno now!
Is your test hack around 175 bhp/ 130KW rated at engine?

Peter

[PeterBurgess]

Which is exactly the problem we see about engine dyno, so only going down that route after 30 years

I was wondering about the engine power as it seems to fall in line with what we find.

If you divide your 118 by .95 for the diff then .97 for box one would get 128 KW /171 bhp, the quantity losses look like we get on the coastdown losses, 18 KW/25 bhp losses, coincidence I know but it does give us comparable figures for testing like for like models. Biggish tyres and high speed we would expect you run at another 5+ losses so that is why I guessed at 175 But, like we all keep saying, guesswork.

Peter