GT350 1/4 mile

[mustang_guy]

Net torque ftw.

Sponsored

 

[derpington]

I've said that from the beginning. Your initial example was trying to cheat, by having an amount of torque with no RPM and say that proves your theory that horsepower is king. I at least gave your example both torque and RPM.

We're having an argument on exactly what people have been arguing about for years, and is shown in the Camaro versus Mustang debate. High torque with low RPM limiter versus lower torque with higher RPM limiter. Gearing makes the difference, and is why the 11-14 Mustang typically won in the quarter mile, because of the gearing which multiplied the engine's torque output to a higher degree than the Camaro, and the higher RPM limiter was enough to push it over the edge and give it the win.

No, we're not having the same argument that people have been arguing for years. I am not saying either of these are better. I am not stating an opinion. It is a physical fact that it is horsepower that allows vehicles to accelerate and move, not torque. I am not saying it is peak horsepower. I am saying it is horsepower, period, as it is a measure of power. People that say stupid things like "horsepower sells cars, torque wins races" have no idea what they're talking about. Torque is only a measure of force, not a measurement of power.

As I said before, if a car with a lot of low end torque is winning a race, it is doing this through the horsepower which it is also producing. It is incorrect to say the torque is moving the vehicle.

 

[cosmo]

No, we're not having the same argument that people have been arguing for years. I am not saying either of these are better. I am not stating an opinion. It is a physical fact that it is horsepower that allows vehicles to accelerate and move, not torque. I am not saying it is peak horsepower. I am saying it is horsepower, period, as it is a measure of power. People that say stupid things like "horsepower sells cars, torque wins races" have no idea what they're talking about. Torque is only a measure of force, not a measurement of power.

As I said before, if a car with a lot of low end torque is winning a race, it is doing this through the horsepower which it is also producing. It is incorrect to say the torque is moving the vehicle.

Yes, horsepower allows a vehicle to move. Congrats. Because it is torque at an RPM, elementary definition. You're wrong in the second note, it'd be incorrect to say torque ALONE moves the vehicle. It's torque at an RPM. Which by definition, is horsepower. But a high horsepower vehicle won't completely win a race. If it has low torque and doesn't compensate enough for it with a good enough gear ratio and high enough RPM limit, it won't win. That's where my jet engine with a 5000 HP 500 ft/lb motor won't be a 1500 HP 1500 ft/lb motor in the quarter mile. Talking a mile race? Then yeah, the jet engine will win. But not in a quarter mile.

 

[derpington]

You're wrong in the second note, it'd be incorrect to say torque ALONE moves the vehicle. It's torque at an RPM.

No, it is correct to say that torque moves the vehicle, period. Torque at an RPM is measuring a different thing than torque, just like a foot is measuring a different thing than a ft/lb. You can't say that a car's length in feet makes it go faster. Saying that the torque it produces does this is the same thing.

Also, if you have agreed with me from the beginning, then why did you say:

Yes, it is force which dictates acceleration moreso than horespower.

 

[cosmo]

No, it is correct to say that torque moves the vehicle, period. Torque at an RPM is measuring a different thing than torque, just like a foot is measuring a different thing than a ft/lb. You can't say that a car's length in feet makes it go faster. Saying that the torque it produces does this is the same thing.

Also, if you have agreed with me from the beginning, then why did you say:

You conveniently left something out of that quote...

It's the combination of torque curves, RPM limits, and gearing which dictate strip times.

Not just horsepower. Horsepower doesn't tell the whole story. Neither does just torque. You need more than that.

 

[200MPHCOBRA]

Idk of anything that has infinite, or any, torque at 0 RPMs.

I was exaggerating for effect, but have you ever heard of an electric motor? Moment = torque, torque is a force, not a movement.

 

[derpington]

You conveniently left something out of that quote...



Not just horsepower. Horsepower doesn't tell the whole story. Neither does just torque. You need more than that.

Horsepower at the wheels and weight are actually the only things required to determine acceleration, assuming perfect traction. At no point does torque come into the equation.

I was exaggerating for effect, but have you ever heard of an electric motor? Moment = torque, torque is a force, not a movement.

Exactly.

 

[cosmo]

Horsepower at the wheels and weight are actually the only things required to determine acceleration, assuming perfect traction. At no point does torque come into the equation.



Exactly.

Horsepower IS torque LOL. You can't use horsepower in calculating a vehicle's track time. You need to use ((torque @ certain RPM after gear multiplication)/(tire radius))/mass. THAT is finding the acceleration of the vehicle at that moment. You can then use basic physics equations to calculate the speed the vehicle will be at, and use an interval of time of your choice to evaluate the next moment.

Just being given "you have 150 horsepower and your vehicle is 3300 lbs, what is your acceleration?" can't be found. At what RPM is that horsepower at? That gives the force of the acceleration, as 150 horsepower at 100 RPM and 150 horsepower at 5000 RPM will accelerate a car at drastically different rates.

 

[DrumReaper]

I was exaggerating for effect, but have you ever heard of an electric motor? Moment = torque, torque is a force, not a movement.

I know you were, as I was responding in fun... But yes I have heard of an electric motor and they do not achieve torque until it is set in motion by an electrical input.

 

[Rogue]

19 pages talking about 1/4 mile times.....did anyone actually read this drivel?

 

[200MPHCOBRA]

I have to eat my Wheaties before I torque my 385's head-bolts to 140 ft-lbs.

 

[mustang_guy]

I was lucky i was born a boy. Ill always have something to play with.

 

[aethyr]

No, it is correct to say that torque moves the vehicle, period. Torque at an RPM is measuring a different thing than torque, just like a foot is measuring a different thing than a ft/lb. You can't say that a car's length in feet makes it go faster. Saying that the torque it produces does this is the same thing.

Also, if you have agreed with me from the beginning, then why did you say:

Torque moves the car, but HP determines how much torque a car can generate as it MOVES. Torque without RPM is meaningless. A bulldozer can generate 2000 ft-lbs....but only at low rpms. So if I simply described an engine as max torque: 2000 ft-lbs, you would not be able to determine what its 1/4 times would be. If it was 2000 ft-lbs at 8000rpm, you'd think holy hell, that's a fast car. But 2000 ft-lbs at 500rpm, no so much. So max torque is an incomplete picture.

In the opposite extreme, take an F1 engine, which spins to 18k, and has about 750 HP. It only generates about 200 ft-lbs of torque, but an F1 car is an 8 second car. Clearly torque alone doesn't win 1/4 mile.

 

[CANTWN4LSN]

I was lucky i was born a boy. Ill always have something to play with.

If a woman chimes in now to counter your argument we're all in trouble and this thread will definitely be considered hijacked.

 

[mustang_guy]

If a woman chimes in now to counter your argument we're all in trouble and this thread will definitely be considered hijacked.

Is that a complaint?

Sponsored