Jump to content

Photo

What pins you back in your seat torque or power?


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#41 stealthgrow

stealthgrow

    Regular Forum User

  • Feedback: View
  • PipPipPip
  • 581 posts

Posted 31 Oct 2010 - 19:09

Your all wrong.... EDIT: Harry spotted this 3 posts above me I see now... :P

Rate of change of displacement is what pins you in your seat...... how you get this is a different question and it'll be power that you'll need (it's a rate after all...)




Trust me its not power you need torque is the only force you feel in a car lots of things effect this such as weight and gearing but ultimately its torque nothing else!

BHP is simply a calculation made directly from torque rolling roads do not measure bhp its just calculated from the torque made.

torque x rpm divided by 5252 = BHP

The reason hondas are able to get high bhp figures from small engines with hardly any torque is because they rev so bloody high!

Take a 2001 civic type R

These are the peak figures from a type r which mean very little in the real world without a full dyno graph but peak figures do a grand job selling cars!

Peak power = 197 bhp @ 7600 rpm

Peak torque = 145 ft·lb of torque @ 5900 rpm

Honda only tell us the peak torque made which is at 5900 rpm so a simple calculation tells us the following

145ft.lb x 5900rpm = 5252 = 162 Bhp

So the type r only makes 162bhp at 5900 rpm to get 197 bhp we have to rev to 7600

and obviously further down the rev range we go even less power is being made! This is why they are gutless under 6k!

You can work out the torque from the bhp as well

197bhp x 5252 divided by 7600 rpm = 136 lb of Torque so when the type r is making its peak power its only making 136lb of torque!

On paper they look awesome with 197bhp but to get that 197bhp you have to build up the revs 1st and hold it pretty much between 6-8k at all times and because the power is made at such high revs it means it drops off rapidly lower down the rev range.They rely on been light and revved, put 3 people in the back or drive it up a hill and it will struggle. overall they are well designed the gear box works well with the revvy engine but in reality day to day driving around town although they have enough power to get you from a-b they are gutless low down,anyone that says they aint aint drove a car with **** loads of torque before to get any kind of decent power you have to drive it around like a complete loon at 8krpm

Car's with loads of low down torque are effortless to drive have tonnes of low down power and you don't have to drive them like a loon to make them shift they have big huge fat surges of power as soon as you blip the throttle, the high revving boys still think there cars can do this by cruising at 5krpm and then flooring it THIS IS NOT THE SAME LOL! im talking cruising at 2k rpm then flooring and have the car plant your cheeks on the head rest and if you try and pull you self forward you neck hurts! you dont need big bhp to do this you need masses of torque. The kick i get out of fast cars is purely this stuck to the seat neck hurting effect how fast the car can go is irrelvent to me. you can have **** loads of torque and not much bhp which results in a car that will stick you well and truley in the seat from 2-5k but 5-7k power will drop off hard and you run out of poof, if you want to win races ita all about balacing the torque and power if you simply want the push you back in your seat sensation then you want masses of torque

If you compare the power and torque from a type r to a saab 9-5 aero for example

Type r Peak torque = 145 ft·lb of torque @ 5900 rpm

Saab Peak torque + 370 N·m (270 lb·ft) @ 1900 rpm

The saab makes more than double the civics maximum torque at only 1900rpm!

while the civic is making 145 ft lb and 162bhp @ 5900rpm

The saab is making 250 hp and 247 ft lbs at 5300 rpm

The above is not a fair comparison but it shows the difference between low down torque and just peaky bhp figures.



A well set up car will have the perfect balance of torque and bhp fo its weight and gearing. Torque is low down power and bhp is top end power you can have loads of bhp but if you have no low down power a car with less bhp and more torque will be quicker overall.

bhp sells cars torque wins races is true to an extent so many people think bhp is the be all trust me its not.

There was a thread on here the other day a guy with a subaru sti got wasted by a saab 9-5 he said it just seemed to take off making very little noise just a slight turbo whistle.

here's a better comparison

2007 subaru sti

270 bhp @ 6500 rpm

306.0 Nm (226 ft·lb) @ 2800 rpm



Saab 9-5 aero again

250 bhp @ 5300 rpm

370 Nm (270 lb·ft) @ 1900 rpm



As you can see the sti has 20bhp but the saab has 64Nm more of torque + it makes both its peak power and peak torque lower down the rev range and quicker than the subaru, from a rolling start in the dry i know from experience there is nothing in these two cars on the road, i would say the saab that wasted the subaru was most likely a stage 3 aero which my best friend has which would be pushing around 280-290bhp at around 5000 rpm and around 450 NM of torque from around 1.9krpm! so a stage 3 aero would have 10-20bhp more and nearly 150nm more torque! again i know from experience a stage 3 aero will smoke a sti once moving in the dry and in a straight line of course. :D

I have another friend with 380bhp evo and it doesent try to push me through the seat and hurt my neck like my mates saab watching them race is fun and you can see the difference in the torque,from a standstill start the evo smokes the saab but from a 30mph rolling start he race goes like this

Saab pulls ahead but starts to run out of poof high in the rev range (less hp)

evo slowly gains on the saab and finaly over takes

saab changes up a gear mid range clout kicks in and starts gaining rapidly but dosent over take

Saab starts to run out of top end again

Evo pulls ahead gradually even further

saab changes up another gear and starts gaining rapidly again but evo is alreay well ahead

saab runs out of poof again

evo gradually gains further ahead and so on and so on

You can see the evo just gaining and gaining all the time and you can see when the saab hits its sweet torque spot as it starts gaining rapily for a few seconds before it runs out of poof again.

#42 HRC

HRC

    Stink-wheel-atar

  • Feedback: View
  • 13,751 posts
  • Location:Hertford

Posted 31 Oct 2010 - 19:39

It is not torque, it is the rate of acceleration that pins you in your seat.

Saab Aero - 270ft lb Torque
BMW S 1000RR - 80ft lb Torque

Which will make you feel like you are pinned in your seat? The Saab that does 0-60mph in approx 8 seconds or the BMW that gets to 120mph in 7 seconds? :lol:

#43 youngsyp

youngsyp

    Regular Forum User

  • Feedback: View
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,199 posts
  • Location:Potterspury

Posted 31 Oct 2010 - 20:25

Your all wrong.... EDIT: Harry spotted this 3 posts above me I see now... :P

And I mentioned acceleration force 10 posts above his!

Paul
Pioneer DEH-P88RS - Focal 165VB - Rockford Fosgate Punch 4080DSM - Alpine MRD-M1005 - Sundown Audio SA-8 D2 in an HBH ported enclosure

#44 HRC

HRC

    Stink-wheel-atar

  • Feedback: View
  • 13,751 posts
  • Location:Hertford

Posted 31 Oct 2010 - 21:02

^This.^

Torque is what accelerates a car and that's the force your feeling when you're pinned into your seat.

The quicker that torque builds, the quicker the car will feel and the more acceleration force you'll feel. If the torque is spread over a wide rpm range, the car will feel like it's acceleration all the way until the torque drops off. :)

That's why turbo charged cars generally feel quicker than N/A cars. The turbo will spool up and provide a big increase in torque level very quickly. It will then feel like a lorry has hit you up the backside. :twisted:

Paul


I thought you said this, which in a way is true, but an engine will continue to pull very strongly even after the torque drops off. Most bike engines (in line 4s) create their max bhp at about 12K. Their torque will drop off from about 8k. However they are still pulling hardest from 8k because the bhp is greater. It is combination of bhp and torque, not just torque, which you stated 10 posts above mone :lol:

#45 jammy86

jammy86

    Genesis whore

  • Feedback: View
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,221 posts
  • Location:Oxfordshire

Posted 31 Oct 2010 - 22:59

If you're moving and in this universe you need power.....

#46 Sati_007

Sati_007

    Narrow-Angle-Six

  • Feedback: View
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,292 posts
  • Location:Ilford

Posted 31 Oct 2010 - 23:42

it depends on the engine power and gearing and weight...

having an engine that makes a lot of touqre+short gearing + min weight = rapid acceleration ..(youtube...lupo W12 or fiesta cosworth)
Mk2 Golf - Narrow Angle Six:
Alpine 9880R

Audiocontrol Epicenter (20hz Subsonic)
Crunch P1800.4 Amp: 2x 3.5" Dual Cones - Tweets , 4x 6.5" VIbe Black Air - Mids

Alpine MRP-T130 Amp: 2x 6.5" Infinity Ref 6022i (rear)
Orion Hcca D5000 Amp: 2x 12" DBXI-12D Earthquake's , 4.2Cuft Box @ 35hz ,

0awg Wiring, Odssey P2150 100ah & Ac Delco 54ah Battery's, 120amp stock Alt (180A waiting to be fitted)

#47 youngsyp

youngsyp

    Regular Forum User

  • Feedback: View
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,199 posts
  • Location:Potterspury

Posted 01 Nov 2010 - 13:28

Most bike engines (in line 4s) create their max bhp at about 12K. Their torque will drop off from about 8k.

That doesn't fit in with what I've seen.

Taking the 2010 GSXR600 as an example, it produces peak torque at around 11.5k rpm and peak power at 14k rpm. At peak power, the torque level has dropped off just over 6%. The torque curve matches the power curve fairly well but, the torque starts to build around 2k rpm earlier.

The 2010 R6 seems to have a similarly flat torque curve too... :confused:

Paul

Edited by youngsyp, 01 Nov 2010 - 13:35.

Pioneer DEH-P88RS - Focal 165VB - Rockford Fosgate Punch 4080DSM - Alpine MRD-M1005 - Sundown Audio SA-8 D2 in an HBH ported enclosure

#48 HRC

HRC

    Stink-wheel-atar

  • Feedback: View
  • 13,751 posts
  • Location:Hertford

Posted 01 Nov 2010 - 14:29

I was taking 1 litre sports bikes like the S1000RR. Peak torque is still typically lower than peak power.

#49 youngsyp

youngsyp

    Regular Forum User

  • Feedback: View
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,199 posts
  • Location:Potterspury

Posted 02 Nov 2010 - 14:04

I was taking 1 litre sports bikes like the S1000RR. Peak torque is still typically lower than peak power.

Peak torque will almost always be at a lower rpm than peak bhp. That's not what we're disagreeing on though.

Using your example, the 2010 MY S1000RR produces peak power at 13300 prm and peak torque at 11500 rpm. From the graphs, it looks like at peak bhp rpm, it's still making around 90% of peak torque and is still making around 80% of peak torque at 14000 rpm.

It seems to be a similar scenario with the GSXR 1000 and Kawasaki's 1000cc inline four offering...

With that in mind, they will still be pulling hard onces they've gone past the rpm at which peak torque is produced.

Paul
Pioneer DEH-P88RS - Focal 165VB - Rockford Fosgate Punch 4080DSM - Alpine MRD-M1005 - Sundown Audio SA-8 D2 in an HBH ported enclosure

#50 HRC

HRC

    Stink-wheel-atar

  • Feedback: View
  • 13,751 posts
  • Location:Hertford

Posted 02 Nov 2010 - 14:35

Sorry, I thought you said the vehicle would feel like it was accelerating until the torque drops off?

P.S. I love yanking your chain in cars and motoring, as I know you are going to bite everytime :lol: ;)

#51 Shandy Sam

Shandy Sam

    Child

  • Feedback: View
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4,117 posts
  • Location:Oxford

Posted 02 Nov 2010 - 15:41

It is not torque, it is the rate of acceleration that pins you in your seat.

Saab Aero - 270ft lb Torque
BMW S 1000RR - 80ft lb Torque

Which will make you feel like you are pinned in your seat? The Saab that does 0-60mph in approx 8 seconds or the BMW that gets to 120mph in 7 seconds? :lol:



FAIL

There is no back of seat to be pushed into...

:ph34r:

Edited by Shandy Sam, 02 Nov 2010 - 15:43.

The early bird catches the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese!

#52 HRC

HRC

    Stink-wheel-atar

  • Feedback: View
  • 13,751 posts
  • Location:Hertford

Posted 02 Nov 2010 - 16:20

:P :P Surely the seat has a front and back? :P :P

#53 Shandy Sam

Shandy Sam

    Child

  • Feedback: View
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4,117 posts
  • Location:Oxford

Posted 02 Nov 2010 - 16:24

:ph34r:

FAIL ninja is never wrong.

But is willing to concede that you are technically correct (the best kind of correct), perhaps you could be pushed off the back of your seat instead.

Is this acceptable?
The early bird catches the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese!

#54 leepee

leepee

    Happiness

  • Feedback: View
  • 5,130 posts
  • Location:Southampton

Posted 02 Nov 2010 - 18:29

Technically, the seat pushes into the back of you.
200sx, project in progress...

#55 spanerman30

spanerman30

    Sadly no longer with us. We'll miss you Sam.

  • Feedback: View
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4,294 posts
  • Location:South Wales

Posted 02 Nov 2010 - 18:31

Technically, the seat pushes into the back of you.



Haha I was thinking this too.

#56 HRC

HRC

    Stink-wheel-atar

  • Feedback: View
  • 13,751 posts
  • Location:Hertford

Posted 02 Nov 2010 - 19:19

:ph34r:

FAIL ninja is never wrong.

But is willing to concede that you are technically correct (the best kind of correct), perhaps you could be pushed off the back of your seat instead.

Is this acceptable?


This is acceptable and I have accepted it. I hope you have accepted this message of acception?