Ecoboost vs Accord Coupe

[mustang_guy]

Also great information -- very good. It doesn't totally disagree with the R&T article though -- yours is a more complete explanation, for sure. Reading between the lines a bit, in the R&T article I get some sense of an "all other things being equal" thing, figuring that the drag coefficient is very, very close between a Hellcat and Scat Pack -- and that's -- as you point out -- not to the letter -- how it works.

he touched on torque multiplication, didn't even call it what its known as and then goes on to say HP wins races which it doesnt. Hes half ass educated.

Sponsored

 

[mikeyjobu]

he touched on torque multiplication, didn't even call it what its known as and then goes on to say HP wins races which it doesnt. Hes half ass educated.

Yes -- and without looking at any of the Dodge specs, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the Hellcat develops more torque too -- I think there's something missing about the relative rate of acceleration and how someone perceives it. The net amount of g-forces generated by the faster car has to be higher, but it's possible that it's a more constant g throughout a run?

Now I have a better idea why my 60ft times totally suck -- need to play with launch control and try actually adding some wheel spin to my launch -- but I digress.

Having just read the MT article, I have to say one of the major factors in choosing between an EB or an Accord V6 is whether or not I need to seat adults in back, and need to have the legal means to seat five people -- since we're talking Dodge some a little here anyway, I'll just say even though the Challenger's will seat five -- if having 5 seats is a requirement (ruling out the EB) and my third option is a base Challenger, I'd go with the Accord. The high-line Accords are in base Mustang GT territory price-wise though -- so that's what I got

 

[bluebeastsrt]

I've driven slow trucks that have big torque. There is an instant where they throw you back....and it is always not related to speed. I've driven 5.0 Coyotes, and they may be faster than my "slow" RT, but felt less Q. My current ride probably has about 500 foot pounds of torque (at the crank). If properly launched, it will shove you good. I've driven faster imports that did not have quite the effect.

Yea man...... Everyone's but dyno is calibrated differently. Like I said it's all prospective. And if your impressed with mid 13 second cars your probably better off cause it wont take much to make you happy.

 

[Trackaholic]

he touched on torque multiplication, didn't even call it what its known as and then goes on to say HP wins races which it doesnt. Hes half ass educated.

Well, he's talking about perception, and according to him humans are more sensitive to jerk (the rate of change of acceleration) than we are to acceleration itself. He is also saying that for portions of each gear, you actually do have more "torque at the wheels" and therefore more acceleration in the Scat Pack than you do in the Hellcat. So, couple that momentary burst of higher acceleration in each gear, with more frequent gear changes, and one can understand where he is coming from.

Regarding HP, your "net torque" example is actually talking about HP. So in a way you are agreeing that HP wins races (of course it is really the full HP curve, not peak HP, which is why this gets confusing).

The reason your example seems to show that CAR A is faster than CAR B is because your math is wrong. They don't actually have the same speed at the top of first gear. The reason CAR A seems to have a torque advantage in your example is because it actually has shorter gearing. With corrected gearing, CAR B is actually faster (it makes more power and because of that, more torque at the wheels). And this is always the case: Assuming two cars have equal gearing (this means gearing that makes them run equivalent speeds at the top of each gear), then the car making more power at a given MPH will also be making more torque at the wheels. In the example with constant torque, this is easy to see. In reality, it is actually the integral of the power over the RPM range (hence why people talk about the "area under the curve"), so things aren't so simple, since a car making a higher peak power may not be the one with the higher total power.

If you use correct numbers in your example, here is how it looks:
CAR A = Peak HP of 243.7 (160 * 8000 / 5252 )
CAR B = Peak HP of 245.6 (215 * 6000 / 5252 )

CAR B is making 0.78% more HP

Since both cars are making constant torque, the HP "curve" is just a straight line from 0 to those values when plotted against engine speed.

In order for both cars to have equal speed at the top of first gear the actual gear ratios are:

CAR A = 3.7, 4.1
CAR B = 3.3, 3.4477...

With those ratios, the torque output is:
CAR A = 2427.2
CAR B = 2446.2

CAR B is making 0.78% more torque at the wheels (the same as its HP advantage).

Incidentally, if CAR A had a torque output of 161.2, everything would be essentially equal between the two. Same peak engine power, and same torque to the wheels over the RPM range.

-T

 

[mustang_guy]

Wow. You took the example a little far. Net torque still isnt hp. I completely disagree. it doesnt need "corrected gearing". i chose that because it was simpler for most people to understand. Im not going to have some drawn out math class here. You feel youre right. I feel im right. Have a good night.

 

[Trackaholic]

Wow. You took the example a little far. Net torque still isnt hp. I completely disagree. it doesnt need "corrected gearing". i chose that because it was simpler for most people to understand. Im not going to have some drawn out math class here. You feel youre right. I feel im right. Have a good night.

Hehe, yeah I probably did.

My wife has a pillow she likes to shove in my face sometimes. It says, "You can agree with me, or you can be wrong."

I guess we can both go away from this with that in mind.

Have a good one!

-T

 

[Hack]

Wow. You took the example a little far. Net torque still isnt hp. I completely disagree. it doesnt need "corrected gearing". i chose that because it was simpler for most people to understand. Im not going to have some drawn out math class here. You feel youre right. I feel im right. Have a good night.

The entire reason people calculate HP is because it is a value that shows how much torque you can make through gearing. HP actually does win races, if the car is geared correctly to take advantage of it, and it has sufficient traction, etc.

The real answer to a lot of this is, it's complicated enough that it exceeds most peoples' attention spans.

 

[Tm@c1965]

Lots of people have driven them

Big blocks, yes. Light cars with big blocks, no.
Ive driven an srt I don't find that its a slam or a throw of any sort. Sure it puts you a little deeper in your seat, but that's a far stretch from throw.
.

Few drive the M6. Fewer drive an M6 with sticky tires. Even fewer know how to launch this particular M6 effectively.

 

[Tm@c1965]

I drive a mid 12 second car

Yea man...... Everyone's but dyno is calibrated differently. Like I said it's all prospective. And if your impressed with mid 13 second cars your probably better off cause it wont take much to make you happy.

Wish it had more but it does the job.

 

[jtmat]

If the accord had a convertible version that looked okay, I might have purchased that over the Mustang. I've had two Accords since '99 and they served me very well in the reliability department and were well built.

My mustang rattles when I play music...

 

[mikeyjobu]

If the accord had a convertible version that looked okay, I might have purchased that over the Mustang. I've had two Accords since '99 and they served me very well in the reliability department and were well built.

My mustang rattles when I play music...

HANG ON HERE! That didn't say anything about HP versus torque, butt dynos, seat-of-the-pants feeling, shove versus throw...

We need a "smile" that shows a head exploding.

 

[jtmat]

HANG ON HERE! That didn't say anything about HP versus torque, butt dynos, seat-of-the-pants feeling, shove versus throw...

We need a "smile" that shows a head exploding.

I'm not sure those who would cross-shop these two cars would be worried too much about that.

In the "real world" an accord can keep up with an ecoboost (especially a manual). Heck, it will "run" with a manual GT with a bad driver (lot of those around).

Where in the real world do you "drive fast" in and out of corners? In all my years, I've experienced hwy driving and 2 lane country road "racing" (if you want to call it that)... every now and then some light to light city driving.

Majority of drivers are posers... they focus on what looks nice, drives okay, resale value, and decent hp. If I wanted a race car, I'd purchased a gt and put a turbo/blower on that.

Heck, I consider the speed of my car a safety feature more than anything else... I can get away from stupid drivers faster now. Sure doing the mods are fun... seeing what more you can get out of the car is a hoot. Gives you something to do before meets and something to talk about during meets.

Car culture is good clean fun, for the most part.

 

[bluebeastsrt]

I think some of these magazine comparisons are reaching just for the simple fact that the S550 Mustang has got ridiculously positive reviews. They are trying to sell magazines. Writing something different is one way to do that. So they look for unconventional (I.E. Stupid) comparisons just to have something negative to say about the S550. The Mustang vs Camaro comparo has already been done to death.

 

[Rogues Gambit]

What's the current potential of a V6 Accord, I know they're shooting for 700hp with the EBM, but what could a V6 Manual Accord produce?

 

[Impulsed7]

What's the current potential of a V6 Accord, I know they're shooting for 700hp with the EBM, but what could a V6 Manual Accord produce?

A cloud of smoke as front wheels try to cope with those hp numbers?

Sponsored