Torque vs. horse power

[chiplee]

DAMNIT Chip.

 

lol, what? it's not wrong to use "a lot". It's just informal.

[emagdnim]

You got me with that damned D... CRAP.

[chiplee]

You got me with that damned D... CRAP.

 

oh yeah that, haha. fire fox wouldn't catch that either since "suppose" is also a word. it doesn't do any grammar correction obviously. It's strickly spellin', but it helps. It only does it in fields so obviously you don't see it in a post until you quote the person. it's funny to see some posts just littered with red when you quote "certain" folks around here.

Edited April 27, 2008 by chiplee

[Chad]

I spell like crap on purpose, so poeple know it's origional content

[marso]

I'm not trying to wire brush your nuts here man, but no they aren't, and yes there is a definitive answer for a given car.

 

 

And once you've found said "right mix" you will have also found the definitive answer you just said didn't exist.

 

The initial question did not apply to any certain vehicle so there is no definitive answer.

 

Yes you will find an answer if you have a something to base it on like a car. If it's a heavy car I like to increase torque rather than rpm's.

[Chad]

If it's a heavy car I like to increase torque rather than rpm's.

 

That is a perfect example where torque will be more useful, a "torque" motor will drive a lot better than a "power" motor will in this situation.

 

In a race of speed, the power wins, but in a competition of "what dirves better", the torque motor will be far better suited to the competition, unless ofcourse you like running at redline all the time.

[macrophage]

The funny thing is if we all had super high hp and much torque stock this would'nt be a conversation.

[tsiconquest88]

lol yea man, well however, as we went through at the time, i stated i just choose not to care about my typing cus i just buzz through when typing a lot, and it wasnt even the spelling that was the issue, it was my choice to not punctuate u said.

[Siance]

Light car+ peak hp=beats anything For example car A is 3500lb with 400hp 500ft Car B is 2600 has 500hp 400ft...car b would win...seen it to many times!!

[marso]

Light car+ peak hp=beats anything For example car A is 3500lb with 400hp 500ft Car B is 2600 has 500hp 400ft...car b would win...seen it to many times!!

 

 

900 lbs lighter. 100 more hp and 100 less tq. Your a genious.

[tsiconquest88]

for the record u dont gain hp, u gain the pulling feel of the more power, but ur ratio was right, its based on per 10. 1hp FEEL of pull is gained off per 10 pounds removed. Edited May 5, 2008 by tsiconquest88

[marso]

for the record u dont gain hp, u gain the pulling feel of the more power, but ur ratio was right, its based on per 10. 1hp FEEL of pull is gained off per 10 pounds removed.

 

 

I hope you're not replying to my sarcastic reply. The car weighs 900lbs lighter with 100 more hp and only 100blft less of torque of course it would win the race. My dyslexic dog can figure that one out.

[tsiconquest88]

actually no i didnt, apparently a post was deleted by a member that typed something which i had typed that for, interesting The person had said you gain 10 hp for every 100 pounds of wight and i typed that thing saying no u dont GAIN hp per say, but u do gain a faster car from removing weight. Edited May 6, 2008 by tsiconquest88

[Siance]

[tsiconquest88]

thread went dead, prob for good reason lol

[PDX87Starion]

Now that we all are convinced that HP is the winner... I will rock the boat for arguments sake with real world results.

 

This is from a RSX tuner (magazine) challenge, and car and driver won.

 

Car and Driver 13.521@ 105.24 HP=232.6 (supercharged)

Super Street 13.611 @ 105.89 HP=329.2 (turbo)

Honda Tuning 13.998 @ 105.85 HP=247.8 (N/A! + nos?)

Import Performance 14.219 @ 99.39 HP=225.5 (N/A)

 

http://www.hondanews.com/search/release/31...ddy&s=acura

 

The super street RSX has almost 100 HP more (96.6 HP) but was slower in the 1/4.

I believe the trannys were stock.

 

Torque numbers were not posted on that link, but I'm guessing the super street car could not stay

in its narrow peak HP area, while the car and driver car had a broader torque curve (more area under the curve).

 

I was actually looking for a different tuner shoot out that I read about a few years back that had similar results. IE the "dyno queens" were not the fastest cars. I coulndt find it but I found this one.

 

Discuss.

[tsiconquest88]

beats me what the verdict was in this thread lol all i know is i seen that one guy say u gain hp from weight loss and thats all i decided to comment on lol. I stated you dont gain hp or torque by dropping weight u gain better acceleration which for every 10 pounds u accelerate 1 hp faster (so the equasion says) but u dont gain hp or anything lol. As for the rest of this thread i might as well chime in for the rest of it all. Read carefully maybe some clarification could help some of you, as far as which is better, the common theory is hp is a biproduct of torque, without torque u wouldnt even have tq however its in the size of the piston, stroke, the engines weight, and other such things. Various bore sizes increase or decrease hp and or tq depending on the motor and what is done, increasing bore size tends to drop hp and adds tq, generally smaller pistons are good for hp and tq goes lower. Good example is high end cars like ferrari etc, u ever see pistons on those? yea half the size of ours lol. However for example a gm 350 is a torque monster but u dont get the hp which leads to high speed cars as u see for ferrari cus the piston size is so much larger. Our motors are torque monsters and the reason lies with more then just stroke but our pistons are huge. Honda on the other hand, are high hp over tq and the pistons are tiny, another reason they rev rev rev. There is the facts i think people may have been looking for. However i personally like larger pistons cus i want tq. Really none is better then the other per say cus its all in what the person wants with what they are looking for, u want high end speed go for some smaller pistons, u want high torque then u want larger pistons, and ur best example of best of both worlds is probably the new vettes, they have in between the lines of a ferrari size bore and the 350 size bore exact numbers i dont know offhand but its irrelevent, anyway point those cars are both high tq and hp and do better then ur typical high tq car for hi speed yet just under ferrari type high speed. Fact really remains in these examples. If anyone thinks there is an argument here then i would have to say u need engine schooling lol. As far as any statements people make as to what cars are faster that has nuthing to do with anything really, cus one car having more tq or more hp winning over another car with more hp or tq, you also have to look at what other mods it had, suspension type, obviously meaning how it handeled over the other car etc, you can have one car have 200 hp or tq over the other but that car could win or lose depending on the others cars handling and setup over the higher powered car OR the 200 hp or tq car could even win cus the car it was facing couldnt match its power OR hadnling etc. Of course the drviers too lol. OOOOH and my favorite example in a discussion like this is the lotus elise, (well lotus in general really lol) if u ever been in an elise, its power is less than a tsi but it can pull on many exotics, its tuned, low weight, and aerodynamics are designed without flaw and u wouldnt believe ur in a car with such low power that can do so much. Edited May 16, 2008 by tsiconquest88

[Alcyone]

beats me what the verdict was in this thread lol all i know is i seen that one guy say u gain hp from weight loss and thats all i decided to comment on lol. I stated you dont gain hp or torque by dropping weight u gain better acceleration which for every 10 pounds u accelerate 1 hp faster (so the equasion says) but u dont gain hp or anything lol. As for the rest of this thread i might as well chime in for the rest of it all. Read carefully maybe some clarification could help some of you, as far as which is better, the common theory is hp is a biproduct of torque, without torque u wouldnt even have tq however its in the size of the piston, stroke, the engines weight, and other such things. Various bore sizes increase or decrease hp and or tq depending on the motor and what is done, increasing bore size tends to drop hp and adds tq, generally smaller pistons are good for hp and tq goes lower. Good example is high end cars like ferrari etc, u ever see pistons on those? yea half the size of ours lol. However for example a gm 350 is a torque monster but u dont get the hp which leads to high speed cars as u see for ferrari cus the piston size is so much larger. Our motors are torque monsters and the reason lies with more then just stroke but our pistons are huge. Honda on the other hand, are high hp over tq and the pistons are tiny, another reason they rev rev rev. There is the facts i think people may have been looking for. However i personally like larger pistons cus i want tq. Really none is better then the other per say cus its all in what the person wants with what they are looking for, u want high end speed go for some smaller pistons, u want high torque then u want larger pistons, and ur best example of best of both worlds is probably the new vettes, they have in between the lines of a ferrari size bore and the 350 size bore exact numbers i dont know offhand but its irrelevent, anyway point those cars are both high tq and hp and do better then ur typical high tq car for hi speed yet just under ferrari type high speed. Fact really remains in these examples. If anyone thinks there is an argument here then i would have to say u need engine schooling lol. As far as any statements people make as to what cars are faster that has nuthing to do with anything really, cus one car having more tq or more hp winning over another car with more hp or tq, you also have to look at what other mods it had, suspension type, obviously meaning how it handeled over the other car etc, you can have one car have 200 hp or tq over the other but that car could win or lose depending on the others cars handling and setup over the higher powered car OR the 200 hp or tq car could even win cus the car it was facing couldnt match its power OR hadnling etc. Of course the drviers too lol. OOOOH and my favorite example in a discussion like this is the lotus elise, (well lotus in general really lol) if u ever been in an elise, its power is less than a tsi but it can pull on many exotics, its tuned, low weight, and aerodynamics are designed without flaw and u wouldnt believe ur in a car with such low power that can do so much.

 

I'm not even trying to read that. (until you go back and add some punctuation and spacing)

 

wieght and traction have a heck of a lot to do with quarter mile times.

being in the power/torque band is what matters. your peak HP is worthless if you never make it to that point in the power band.

 

gearing etc all make a difference as to whether torque or HP wins the race.

if an S2000 had long gearing it would be gutless and worthless.

[tsiconquest88]

OOOOH K buddy, well to sum it up for just you. what u said was in there too, dont gotta read it then i guess. Oh and its not that bad ur just lazy. DEFINATELY could have just read it and made sense of it. The sentences are seperated with periods and all, just missed some commas here and there Edited May 19, 2008 by tsiconquest88

[Chad]

true, PDX87Starion's test example is not a true measure of a cars power or performance universaly, not unelss all cars had the same tires with the same pressure, on the same surface, at the same time, with the same driver. Heck, I bet if we made it a race to 60' the results would be completely different. There are many varriables that skew actual observed results.

 

Even somethign as simple as making it a race to 1000 feet or 1/8 mile, or 1/3 mile will result in different winers in those races. 1/4 mile times are not a good measure of a cars performance, unless that is all it's built for...

[tsiconquest88]

[garrett41]

1/4 mile times are not a good measure of a cars performance, unless that is all it's built for...

 

Unless 1/4 mile happens to be the most agreed upon drag race distance the world over... And in the case of the cars PDX87Starion posted results for, I would say they were built for exactly that purpose, and the results speak for themselves...

 

If you are discussing overall performance of cars, including handling and all that jazz, then sure, the straight line race doesn't matter, but when the entire thread is about the difference between torque and horsepower winning races, the posted results go right to the point... In a straight TQ vs. HP discussion, you are talking about the straight line, not the twisties...

 

My friend has a single turbo supra, and traps unbelievably fast in the 1/4 mile, but he often loses to "slower" cars because his time from start to 1/4 mile is not that great... I think he was running somewhere in the 12's at like 138mph with 600+rwhp... Guys were beating him with low 12's at 115 in 400rwhp cars... Agreed, it would be a different race given a 1/2 mile track, but lets talk about standards a tad... Only the 1/8th and 1/4 mile track are used in any sort of professional capacity, so they become the benchmark...

[Alcyone]

 

:MMouse:

[Chad]

1/4 mile times are not a good measure of a cars performance, unless that is all it's built for...

 

Unless 1/4 mile happens to be the most agreed upon drag race distance the world over... And in the case of the cars PDX87Starion posted results for, I would say they were built for exactly that purpose, and the results speak for themselves...

 

 

If you read earlier in this thread, you will see that 1/4 mile performance was not the primary focus of this topic, it was supposed to be focusing on how the varribles of torque, gearing, and time work with or against a perticular power curve of a given motor.

 

It's about How those varriables dictate accelration and dirveability. There are deffinatly some arguments to be made about 1/4 mile results beign the ideal benchmark as it is often the most standard and accepted format available to people, but it coudl be said to be a very narrow measure of a cars performance. I bet that supra is a blast on the freeway compared to the 400 wonder cars that beat it in the 1/4 mile. Your explanation supports my point, one and only one benchmark is useless. Of all the street races I've been in, none were to a set 1/4 mile, infact most were rolling runs.

[PDX87Starion]

If you read earlier in this thread, you will see that 1/4 mile performance was not the primary focus of this topic, it was supposed to be focusing on how the varribles of torque, gearing, and time work with or against a perticular power curve of a given motor.

 

It's about How those varriables dictate accelration and dirveability. There are deffinatly some arguments to be made about 1/4 mile results beign the ideal benchmark as it is often the most standard and accepted format available to people, but it could be said to be a very narrow measure of a cars performance. I bet that supra is a blast on the freeway compared to the 400 wonder cars that beat it in the 1/4 mile. Your explanation supports my point, one and only one benchmark is useless. Of all the street races I've been in, none were to a set 1/4 mile, infact most were rolling runs.

 

Yeah many variables but that was a good comparison considering the cars were identical supplied by Honda. The cars were built by reputable tuners and companies, and the teams best drivers had multiple passes to get the best times. Its hard to find a comparison like that.

 

The higher HP cars have the HP to "get more work done" or go faster, but the acceleration factor meant that the torque worked better with those set ups.

 

If the cars had a continuously variable transmission (CVT) I think the higher HP cars would shine. With the RPMs staying at the peak HP the whole run instead of shifting out of the sweat spot (where tourqe helps) as long as there is traction I think the more HP would = the fastest time.

 

Since we are building cars without "CVT's" or even close ratio gear boxes a good torque curve should not be sacrificed for peak HP, IMO.

 

A car specifically built for SCCA style road racing would be the exception as long as its matched with a GB for the same purpose. But I only know of one of those.