tdbrown75

Yea, but size does count!

tdbrown75

Got torque? For example, the Acura TL claims to have 286HP. The people who drive those cars *think* they are fast, i have had more then one try and "race" past me only to be spanked. It's nto the 14HP that makes the difference, its the 50ft/lbs TQ!

kevinb120

Its also not a linear torque curve with the smaller engines. Even though the numbers sound good, you have to look at the specs at 2000/3500/4500/6000 rpm. And very sophisticated motors like the M3's 330hp I6 are stretched to the motor's absolute limit to get that power. You have to match it dollar for dollar. If the stang was $2000 more with forged pistons, crank, and rods from the factory it would be a monster of potential still well under the price of 'techie' high end cars. The F430 gets 490hp out of 4.3L

Maybe you never heard of the RS200 from ford in 1986. Try 271hp per L, 0-60 in 3 flat. 580hp from 2.1 liters...The race version was banned for being too fast, even though it met the class specifications at the time, even though it came about right at the end of true rally car racing. World's quickest street legal car for a long, long time, with crude engine computers and vacuum line engine management of the time. http://www.supercars.net/cars/3554.html

clockworks

Yeah, torque makes it easier to drive around town... but in an all out race, nothing matters but HP. Yes, that statement is over simplified.

bob

Y'know more HP would be nice, but 300hp aint a bad place to be, especially when your essentially 2 to 2.5 seconds better than the average peice of transportation.

However, let me give you guys a good example of a car that had more hp, handled better (at one point it was able to best the vette around GM's proving grounds) and had equally rabid fans who were quick to point out that thier car had more HP, but all that HP did nothing to save it from extinction (well a hiatus really).
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Yeah, you guessed it, Camaro - a vehicle which pretty much ratcheted itself up from the pony car formula to maximum performance for minimum price.

The GT is the bred and butter V8 car, I wholeheartedly agree that there needs to be something in between the GT and the GT500, but it would be foolish to abandon the entry level V8 catagory simply to appease the hardcore.

Hollywood_North GT

Well, you just said it right there. 268 ft lbs of torque, which is SUBSTANTIALLY less than 320 ft lbs of torque (and our Stangs are a bit under-rated HP-wise, too, producing more like an average of 312 - 315).

Don't get too hung up on the VQ's horsepower numbers, and remember that the 4.6L 3V won the Ward's Ten Best Engines award two years in a row.

The Mustang is still a 5.0 second car, which edges out all the other vehicles we're discussing here. How fast can you realistically go on public roads, particularly since NONE of these other vehicles being discussed here are designed for anything other than the street?

Hollywood_North GT

Yeah, I'd say it's oversimplified alright.

What matters is the relationship between HP and torque, the linearity of the power utilization curve, and where peak HP comes on.

freyke

HP is derived from torque...(whithout torque, there can be no horsepower.) It's kind of like the "other side of the coin" Put simply the faster you can spin a givin amount of tourqe, more horsepower will result:

HP= ENGINE RPM X TORQUE (FT-LBS) / 5252 (CONSTANT)

Regards,
Kevin

freyke

Potential torque (and horsepower) is generally a function of engine displacment. A loose rule of thumb says that potential torque can be guestimated by an engine's displacment in cubic inches. The more displacment, the more potential torque. On average a 300 cubic inch (5.0 litre) gasoline engine will have roughly the potential to produce 300ft-lbs of torque; a 140 (2.3 litre) cubic inch engine will have the potential to produce around 140 ft-lbs of torque. In order to produce horsepower we need to rotate the torque to a given RPM. Lets say we take that 140ft-lbs and spin it to 9000 RPM - that's = about 240HP. (140 X 9000 / 5252 = 239.9). Now take 300 ft-lbs to that same 9000 RPM; wa-lah - 515 HP (300 X 9000 / 5252 = 515)...

Hope that helps explain the relationship between torque and HP.

Regards,
Kevin

LBJay

Torque and Horsepower - A Primer

"It is better to make torque at high rpm than at low rpm, because you can take advantage of *gearing*."

kevinb120

Yup, I will say that the last of the Camaros were awful cars from a quality of build-logistical standpoint but they are extremely capeable cars. Strong, easilly modded engine and incredible handling if done correctly. They still show up at open track days and autocrosses and wipe the floor with lots of butts. The SN95's were no status quo for quality either(hell they shipped with some of the worst stampings in decades on the door panels/front fenders and the ergos were the pits). A modded SS is a force to be reckoned with.

jsaylor

I've seen what this guy has to say and I simply disagree. The relationship isn't nearly as simple as he makes it out to be and I frankly have no idea why anybody listens to him.