Stock Stinger HP numbers: Kia is massively underestimating power.

[Dr_jitsu]

The factory HP numbers on the Kia are hugely under-reported.

Typically, flywheel HP numbers are 20% more than whp numbers.

So, an automatic car with 365 flywheel power will normally make about 280-290 at the wheels. Based upon the dyno's the stock Stinger puts 327 to the wheels. This number does not reflect the massive powerband, and or torque.

That is why the 3.3 Stinger will walk the Infinity Q50 RED SPORT 400, even though the Stinger has less reported HP.

 

[Ty Davis]

The factory HP numbers on the Kia are hugely under-reported.

Typically, flywheel HP numbers are 20% more than whp numbers.

So, an automatic car with 365 flywheel power will normally make about 280-290 at the wheels. Based upon the dyno's the stock Stinger puts 327 to the wheels. This number does not reflect the massive powerband, and or torque.

That is why the 3.3 Stinger will walk the Infinity Q50 RED SPORT 400, even though the Stinger has less reported HP.

In addition, the Redsport has a 7 speed automatic vs the 8spd in the Stinger.

The extra gear serves the Stinger well.

 

[CKeeler]

From what I’ve seen, the HP numbers are pretty close to a 15% drivetrain loss. Which is what I thought was the norm. The TQ numbers on the other hand are much higher than what Kia claims according to people who have had their Stinger on a dyno.

 

[Dr_jitsu]

From what I’ve seen, the HP numbers are pretty close to a 15% drivetrain loss. Which is what I thought was the norm. The TQ numbers on the other hand are much higher than what Kia claims according to people who have had their Stinger on a dyno.

15% is the norm for manual transmissions. 20% is the norm for automatics.

 

[CKeeler]

15% is the norm for manual transmissions. 20% is the norm for automatics.

You’re telling me it hasn’t changed in 20-30 years? Automatics are more efficient and better capable of handling more power these days and still suck more power than a manual? I’ve been a car guy for my whole life and this just doesn’t make sense anymore considering the advances in automotive tech that have come along in just the past 10 years

 

[Gleis25]

You’re telling me it hasn’t changed in 20-30 years? Automatics are more efficient and better capable of handling more power these days and still suck more power than a manual? I’ve been a car guy for my whole life and this just doesn’t make sense anymore considering the advances in automotive tech that have come along in just the past 10 years

^This And to say the Stinger will walk the Red Sport is just ignorance. Don’t get me wrong, I love the Stinger. It’s fast. There are plenty of other fast and faster cars out there too though.

Look at the numbers. Stock for stock, with equal drivers and conditions, the Red Sport wins.

For as much as you’d pay for one I wouldn’t do it. But it is a good looking car and it’s also fast. Just saying

 

[Chucky]

^This And to say the Stinger will walk the Red Sport is just ignorance. Don’t get me wrong, I love the Stinger. It’s fast. There are plenty of other fast and faster cars out there too though.

Look at the numbers. Stock for stock, with equal drivers and conditions, the Red Sport wins.

For as much as you’d pay for one I wouldn’t do it. But it is a good looking car and it’s also fast. Just saying

Seriously? you must be trollin' dude...

 

[ecko04]

I happen to agree that the torque figures from KIA are inaccurate. However, for the red sport...

Let’s see what google says.

MotorTrend - From a standstill, the Red Sport booked it to 60 mph in 4.5 seconds and completed the quarter mile in 13 seconds flat at 109.2 mph

MotorTrend - but the rear-drive Stinger GT launches from 0 to 60 mph in 4.8 seconds and clocks the standing quarter mile in 13.3 seconds at 106.9 mph.

.3 seconds can be attributed to driver differences. The trap speed, however, not so much.

I’m inclined to say with equal drivers, stock-for-stock, the red sport takes it, but neither car is a slouch in the power arena.

 

[Gleis25]

Seriously? you must be trollin' dude...

Please do tell me how I’m trolling. Because I actually looked it up and know the Red Sport isn’t a slow car? You can disagree all you’d like, but that doesn’t change the facts.

 

[ecko04]

I didn’t mean to get in the middle of a fight. I’ll watch you all duke it out.

 

[Ty Davis]

The Stinger GT and Q50 RedSport share acceleration times that are damn near identical...
These tests were done by Car and Driver.

 

[Gleis25]

The Stinger GT and Q50 RedSport share acceleration times that are damn near identical...
These tests were done by Car and Driver.

Exactly my point. The Stinger isn’t walking the Red Sport. If anything, the Red Sport has the slight edge with slightly quicker 0 to 60 and 1/4 mile times.

 

[Ty Davis]

Exactly my point. The Stinger isn’t walking the Red Sport. If anything, the Red Sport has the slight edge with slightly quicker 0 to 60 and 1/4 mile times.

In addition, the Redsport seems to most often test in the 4.4 to 4.5 second range.
The Stinger tests seem to hover around 4.4 to 4.8

 

[Oryan]

They're close enough that in the real world it comes down to driver and the individual cars. That being said, paying 10k more for a Red Sport that looks more generic and with what has to be the hands-down worst interior and infotainment of any car over 50k..hell, 35k..Hard pass. The capabilites of the VR30 and ability to tune it are nice but to me, the rest of the car is a bunch of meh.

 

[Oryan]

You could probably chalk that up to the fact that the Red Sport has a WTA heat exchanger and not simply a front mount IC like we do. You can beat on it more and get more consistent runs out of it.

 

[Dr_jitsu]

You’re telling me it hasn’t changed in 20-30 years? Automatics are more efficient and better capable of handling more power these days and still suck more power than a manual? I’ve been a car guy for my whole life and this just doesn’t make sense anymore considering the advances in automotive tech that have come along in just the past 10 years

I am only going with what I have seen hundreds of times on the dyno. Double clutch PDK set ups may lose less than the tranny's like the Stinger.

 

[Socalstinga]

hahaha...this is always funny to read - even up to .3 seconds we're just splitting hairs.

 

[Dr_jitsu]

^This And to say the Stinger will walk the Red Sport is just ignorance. Don’t get me wrong, I love the Stinger. It’s fast. There are plenty of other fast and faster cars out there too though.

Look at the numbers. Stock for stock, with equal drivers and conditions, the Red Sport wins.

For as much as you’d pay for one I wouldn’t do it. But it is a good looking car and it’s also fast. Just saying

Correct. I do not consider a Stinger that fast unless it has been modded. I ran a Red sport with my stock car and put nearly 2 lengths on him by 130.

 

[Gleis25]

Correct. I do not consider a Stinger that fast unless it has been modded. I ran a Red sport with my stock car and put nearly 2 lengths on him by 130.

I’ve seen that thread also, that’s why I finally commented on this one. You said yourself you weren’t even sure which Q50 it was. Now it was a Red Sport you put 2 lengths on
The cars are very close, no stock Stinger is walking the other.

 

[Travis Wills]

15% is the norm for manual transmissions. 20% is the norm for automatics.

The numbers are more like 10%-15% for drivetrain losses now. DCT transmissions will be less than traditional planetary automatics. However, I don’t think there are any transmissions with a true 20% loss in recent brand new cars.