I was looking at a green rhd 240z on ebay, and he put a picture of a dyno sheet on there along with it. But something is wierd about it. See if you can find out what it is.....

wth are the numbers on the right?

Normally the power and torque curves cross at 5252 RPM but I guess if you don't start the torque scale at 0 then the graph doesn't make as much sense.

It could be predated depending on the format.

The company Stewart Wilkins Rallying is in Australia...

More torque at idle than anywhere else.

Will

It could be predated depending on the format.

What do you mean by "predated"? The sheet appears to be from March of this year.

The date code would look strange to the average American, because we write the date month-day-year, and it would seem to indicate September 3, 2007. In fact however the rest of the world writes the date day-month-year, which shows that the dyno reading was taken on March 9, 2007.

Is that what you thought was weird?

The numbers up the left side are for kiloWatts (kW), and the ones up the right side are torque (Newtons.) It's dated 9 March, 2007.

that's how I read it.

The numbers up the left side are for kiloWatts (kW), and the ones up the right side are torque (Newtons.) It's dated 9 March, 2007.

that's how I read it.

i realized that (newtons) this time when i read it... .. thanks tomo!

Yeah, but isn't torque usually measured in Newton-meters? Maybe somebody can 'splain that one. And which line is for which?

thxZ

I thought you all would be confused by the format of a non-u.s. dyno sheet. Thats why I thought it was wierd.

The top line is for the kw.... converted is about 103hp

The bottom line....... I have no clue how to convert that into tq. Maybe someone else knows.

The torque curve does not make sense to me. The peak (if you ignore the values near idle) seems to be around 2200. The scale is labeled N but as someone else pointed out it would normally be newton meters or Nm. 1 Nm = 0.737 lb-ft but there's no way a 103HP engine would put out 1622 lb-ft of torque. Hopefully a non-US person can explain it to those of us still using an antiquated system of measurement.

As far as the date format goes I deal with it all the time in software development. I think m-d-y and d-m-y are both silly. y-m-d makes the most sense. After all, you don't tell time in s:m:h or m:s:h ...