SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,481 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Hey all,

Had the chance to run my P* optimized 2012 XC70 T6 on a dyno recently (with the New England Volvo Club and Swedish Chariots Auto Club).


Pull was interesting:
HP at the wheels seemed way too low: 270 hp
Torque at the wheels seemed high: 333 ft lbs

They say this type of dyno (Mustang) reports approximately 14% lower outputs than a Dynojet, but the results are more "real world".

Either way, that 14% difference equals:
HP: 307-ish
Torque: 379

It has been speculated on here (I think by WarpedCow) that the torque ouptut for the P* optimized cars is under-reported by Volvo. I really do think this may be true after seeing these numbers. The HP/FT LB from their website is 325/354 respectively.

I still say there were calibration issues, as their computer system didn't have anything newer than 2008 models for "reference" cars, the traction control was on, and on two following runs he let the car shift instead of locking it in gear. The curves look wonky, nothing like the ones from the Polestar website. They also started the pull at nearly 3K RPM, which is already well within the powerband for this car.

And it's tooo QUIET!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
I have wondered what the Polestar was really doing. I have a Blue 2014. The real joy of this car is 40-70mph. It is so strong there.

Merry Christmas!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,481 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
It's like a freight train at that speed range.

And Merry Christmas to you!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
Could not agree more. I do wish it had a little more growl.. Have not seen anyone who figured a cost effect way to get it. Don't want more noise on the highway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,936 Posts
Hey all,

Had the chance to run my P* optimized 2012 XC70 T6 on a dyno recently (with the New England Volvo Club and Swedish Chariots Auto Club).


Pull was interesting:
HP at the wheels seemed way too low: 270 hp
Torque at the wheels seemed high: 333 ft lbs

They say this type of dyno (Mustang) reports approximately 14% lower outputs than a Dynojet, but the results are more "real world".

Either way, that 14% difference equals:
HP: 307-ish
Torque: 379

It has been speculated on here (I think by WarpedCow) that the torque ouptut for the P* optimized cars is under-reported by Volvo. I really do think this may be true after seeing these numbers. The HP/FT LB from their website is 325/354 respectively.

I still say there were calibration issues, as their computer system didn't have anything newer than 2008 models for "reference" cars, the traction control was on, and on two following runs he let the car shift instead of locking it in gear. The curves look wonky, nothing like the ones from the Polestar website. They also started the pull at nearly 3K RPM, which is already well within the powerband for this car.

And it's tooo QUIET!!!!
If you do another pull, put it in 4th, start the run at 1500 RPM, and disable DSTC spin control.

What octane fuel are you running?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
I had the Polestar tune put on my 2015.5 XC70 T6 AWD and am really impressed with the added horsepower and torque. Haven't timed or dyno'd it but on an open freeway in WA. when I first got it put on, slowed to about 50 mph and floored it and it "did" pull like a freight train with quick shifts tacking out at the red line and got to 110 mph "very" quickly as compared to the same previous test before the tune. The entire front end of the car lifts up and torques a little to one side. IMO, really wakes up the car and worth it to me. Paid $1,200 at the Dealership where I bought it in Bellingham WA. last July.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
I have both a 15.5 S80 and XC70 in the household, the latter has the Polestar mapping. There is a difference, both cars pull hard but the XC70 feels very similar to the GM LSX cars I used to own and play with.

It's a shame the engine is no longer available in any Volvo model. I'd love it in the new XC90.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
I have both a 15.5 S80 and XC70 in the household, the latter has the Polestar mapping. There is a difference, both cars pull hard but the XC70 feels very similar to the GM LSX cars I used to own and play with.

It's a shame the engine is no longer available in any Volvo model. I'd love it in the new XC90.
I love the XC90 also and was thinking of buying one in mid 2016 to add to my fleet but have some doubts due to the many problems other are having. Probably will wait and see instead.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,481 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
WarpedCow, I know where the car makes power and how they should've run it. I actually had a lot of back forth with the guy doing the pulls about leaving it in one gear (4th, as a matter of fact). I think they started to half-arse the pulls towards the end of the day (when I went). Who let's a car shift on a dyno pull? The pull from this video is the only one he locked in gear, and he chose 3rd against my request. They didn't really listen to anything we told them about the cars or where they make power, traction control, etc. Guy gave me 3 days worth of excuses on facebook when he found out I was unhappy with the results. And 2 of the 3 pull graphs were complete garbage as far as output goes. Only 1 had a decent graph of the power curves.

As long as the "seat of the pants" dyno tells this car hauls, I'll believe that :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,936 Posts
WarpedCow, I know where the car makes power and how they should've run it. I actually had a lot of back forth with the guy doing the pulls about leaving it in one gear (4th, as a matter of fact). I think they started to half-arse the pulls towards the end of the day (when I went). Who let's a car shift on a dyno pull? The pull from this video is the only one he locked in gear, and he chose 3rd against my request. They didn't really listen to anything we told them about the cars or where they make power, traction control, etc. Guy gave me 3 days worth of excuses on facebook when he found out I was unhappy with the results. And 2 of the 3 pull graphs were complete garbage as far as output goes. Only 1 had a decent graph of the power curves.

As long as the "seat of the pants" dyno tells this car hauls, I'll believe that :D
Good to know. Next time, different dyno shop. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,481 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
^bingo! This was the first time we used these guys, and a lot of the other people were disappointed, too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,155 Posts
I'd like to add, when my C30 was stock it had a decent amount of power in that mid range. After I had it tuned, the thing just PULLS, PULLS PULLS THROUGH ALL GEARS! Went with the elevate tune. Have a few other mods.

It's like a freight train at that speed range.

And Merry Christmas to you!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,481 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
I'd like to add, when my C30 was stock it had a decent amount of power in that mid range. After I had it tuned, the thing just PULLS, PULLS PULLS THROUGH ALL GEARS! Went with the elevate tune. Have a few other mods.
I believe it! Volvo may not make 0-60 screamers, but they've always been great mid-range and highway cars. A tune on the T5 or T6 engines makes them that much stronger, and way more fun to drive!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
739 Posts
Pull was interesting:
HP at the wheels seemed way too low: 270 hp
Torque at the wheels seemed high: 333 ft lbs

They say this type of dyno (Mustang) reports approximately 14% lower outputs than a Dynojet, but the results are more "real world".

Either way, that 14% difference equals:
HP: 307-ish
Torque: 379
So, if it's 270hp at the wheels, and then up 14% for the Mustang-to-Dynojet Conversion (307hp), and then at least 10% for the power loss through the AWD drivetrain, you're at 338hp at the crank... that's like BMW underreporting the power from their 328 engines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,481 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
If you use those calculations...think about the torque ouptut of the T6 with Polestar optimization.

333 up 14% (Mustang to Dynojet) = 379 (already over the 354 ft/lb reported by Polestar, then at least 10% for power loss through the drivetrain = 416. That seems way too high, but it's somewhere in there and well above 354 ft/lbs, if you ask my butt dyno.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
739 Posts
If you use those calculations...think about the torque ouptut of the T6 with Polestar optimization.

333 up 14% (Mustang to Dynojet) = 379 (already over the 354 ft/lb reported by Polestar, then at least 10% for power loss through the drivetrain = 416. That seems way too high, but it's somewhere in there and well above 354 ft/lbs, if you ask my butt dyno.
Yeah, I'm far from 100% on the whole dyno-to-actual conversion, but the results seem wonky. Irregardless, the tune is certainly worth it. I don't own one, but have had the privilege of driving a few over the past year or so, and they are a nice upgrade! Nice to see one making the effort to strap one up, thank you for the share!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,481 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
My pleasure!

It all depends on who you talk to, what dyno they run, how they set it up, etc. But, the numbers do indicate the torque is substantial, and definitely worth it!!

I hope to do it again next year at a different dyno shop, and should have cat-back on the car by then. At least it will sound better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Anybody who knows about Polestar on D5?

Had the upgrade and it feels really good.

I have ELM327 readout from obd2 - and with right parameters Dashboard Command says just above 250 bhp at around 4500 rpm whereas Polestar says 225 bhp at 4000.

Torque is less than promised - but more constant over a wider range.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
329 Posts
Pull was interesting:
HP at the wheels seemed way too low: 270 hp
Torque at the wheels seemed high: 333 ft lbs

They say this type of dyno (Mustang) reports approximately 14% lower outputs than a Dynojet, but the results are more "real world".

Either way, that 14% difference equals:
HP: 307-ish
Torque: 379
I've been doing dyno research for almost 20 years now. AWD Mustangs are generally a loss of 12-18%. 12% would generally be a lower HP 2WD car with a manual. 18% would be a very high horsepower AWD car with automatic.

I think you're pretty close at between 14 and 16% loss. I still havent crunched enough numbers on Haldex equipped cars

Automatics are very difficult to do though because of slippage and lockup variables.
That said, you did your math wrong. You ADDED drivetrain loss. you need to subtract and solve for X where X is BHP
So BHP (X) - Drivetrain Loss % (Y) = WHP (Z)
lets stick with 14% because I always prefer the lower of the numbers anyway
so 270whp / .86 (100 minus 14) is ~314bhp
333wtq / .86 = ~387 ft/lbs of torque at the crank.

Got it? :)

Most people do that math wrong.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top