Low Torque on Integras?

[1SLIKTEG]

I did a search for this subject but found nothing. I was just curious as to why the torque (128 ft-lbs) on integras gs-r's or generally all integras is so low. Is there a good reason? Lemme know. Thanks!

[g290ls]

well to make a long story short, our cars main purpose life beside us building the shit out them, was that they were to help you save on better fuel comsumption, thats why we can have 300+ hp and still get 30-32mpg think of it this way...2006 ford f350 powerstroke 14-15 cityand 17-18 hywy 2006 acura tsx 27-28 city 31-32 hywy mainly motorsize and displacement bigger motor means more fuel so back to your question, we have smaller motors so we dont put out that much torque straight of the bat, again displacement....

[rugsr]

SO, when stroking the motor your building TQ...thus making your MPG drop?

[Provocateur]

SO, when stroking the motor your building TQ...thus making your MPG drop?

Any modification is going to affect gas mileage.

The only way you will get a decent amount of low end torque is with a small, quick spooling turbo.

[1SLIKTEG]

Das Schmoo, what kind of turbo set up are you running and did you do it yourself? and how much is the setup?

[Provocateur]

Das Schmoo, what kind of turbo set up are you running and did you do it yourself? and how much is the setup?

I'm running a Greddy kit with some extras and better fuel management. The basic turbo kit without blow off valve and half assed tuning was 2750. The total cost of my setup is unknown, but too damn much that I try not to think about it. I installed everything myself and street tuned it myself, so the cost is cut significantly since I don't have to pay any labor.

It sure is nice having over 180 ft/lbs of torque by 4000 rpm, though. If you want low end torque with a decent high end, a small turbo like the 18G or equivalent is something that you should look into.

[sherwood]

the reason the torque is down is because it's a low displacement engine.


horsepower is what tells you the true power of an engine. torque is a misconception that many people have

say one engine makes a constant 100 ft-lbs of torque up to 8000 rpm and another makes 200 ft-lbs up to 4000 rpm

when gearing is applied, both engines have the same exact power. and infact will have the same horespower reading-- the reason behind this is the first engine can do 100ft-lbs twice at twice the speed the second can make 200ft-lbs.


it's also the reason why people are not correct when they say that compared to the LS the GSR has no low end torque, the dearing is completely diffferent, the gsr has more power thourhgout the band.

[97teg]

Here is a good article on one tuners take on hp and tq.
http://www.evans-tuning.com/tech2.html
another decent article
http://www.team-integra.net/sections...?ArticleID=467

I wouldnt take low tq to mean that the car cant be fast. A lot has to do with gearing also. The gearing needs to match the power band of the engine as well as the racing conditions. Also typically to get high torque you need to increase the throw of the crankshaft. When this happens it increases the loading on the side of the piston and thus on the cylinder walls. You can also make the ports smaller to increase velocity of the air to give better low end responce but then you usally give up breathing in the top end thus dont make as much power in the top. For example ls engine vs gsr engine. Anyways, you can increase throw or as with low displacement engines you spin them very fast and then gear the transmission closer so the engine can stay in its powerband. Here is another good link. There are good links at the bottom of the first page. I hope some of this helps.

http://www.team-integra.net/forum/di...urnPage=Search

[97teg]

Here is another good thread.

http://www.team-integra.net/forum/di...PagePosition=3

[reno96teg]

horsepower is what tells you the true power of an engine. torque is a misconception that many people have

uhhh.. horsepower alone is just as valid a measurement as torque alone, given that one is just a calculation of the other. neither alone tell you "the true power of an engine."

say one engine makes a constant 100 ft-lbs of torque up to 8000 rpm and another makes 200 ft-lbs up to 4000 rpm

when gearing is applied, both engines have the same exact power. and infact will have the same horespower reading-- the reason behind this is the first engine can do 100ft-lbs twice at twice the speed the second can make 200ft-lbs.

not sure what you're getting at here except showing that the weaker engine will have to work twice as hard to put out the same horsepower. so what's the point?

it's also the reason why people are not correct when they say that compared to the LS the GSR has no low end torque, the dearing is completely diffferent, the gsr has more power thourhgout the band.

meaning there are more factors than horsepower alone, or torque alone, to consider.


your post there sounds like something a honda fanboy would say to justify their low torque engine.

[97teg]

I think that there are really two different arguments here.
1. Why dont hondas make much torque relative to other engines? This is mostly just physics. They choose to make engines that make less torque but can keep it up to a lot farther out in the rev range.
2. Which is better? As my teacher would say "yeah". How much an engine characteristic impacts how fast the car is dependends on a lot of other factors.

[bnuk]

the real measure of a motor is the area under horse power curve over the usable range of the motor.

[sherwood]

the real measure of a motor is the area under horse power curve over the usable range of the motor.

wrong, because 100 horsepower at 8xxx rpm will accelerate the same as 60hp at 4xxx rpm because the torque is the same

the true measure would be the integral of the torque curve between 0 and the max RPM, or the area under the torque curve.

[Buyimports2]

I think that there are really two different arguments here.
1. Why dont hondas make much torque relative to other engines? This is mostly just physics. They choose to make engines that make less torque but can keep it up to a lot farther out in the rev range.
2. Which is better? As my teacher would say "yeah". How much an engine characteristic impacts how fast the car is dependends on a lot of other factors.

Your teacher is right. There is no "better". There is only what you prefer. Big engines make mad torque but can be about as efficient as a pile of poop(not good gas mileage). Small engines make no torque, but can be just at fast if you are willing to wait until the powerband hits. They also get better gas mileage.

[sherwood]

uhhh.. .

the GSR and LS have completely different gearing. yes the LS engines might have more low end torque but the gearing changes that torque value when calculated at the wheels.

the reason horsepower is more valid is because it's calculated from both torque and engine RPM. the inclusion of engine rpm in the equation allows for gearing to be considered in the number, making it more valid than a peak torque number.

a smaller engine needednt work twice as hard, merely twice as fast. it's just like anything else.

Spoiler for analogy.. please read if you really don't get it:

heres an analogy. you are sitting at a table with your little brother. you are 10 and he is 4, there is a bowl infront of you with 4 peices of candy in it.

his hands are small, so he can only grab one peice at a time. you have bigger hands so you can grab two. imagine this as your "candy torque"

now imagine he is twice as fast as you are. this is the "candy RPM"
you grab 2 peices as he grabs one.
he grabs another.
there is now no more candy left and you are both left with two peices.

what i am saying is not that a small engine must work twice as hard, but i'm saying if it does it will be able to make up for the loss in torque. it's the reason why it's inconsequential to just know and compare torque values.

not that it is perfect comparing horsepower values, but they are much more correct than torque values. the absoloute would be the integral of the torque curve from 0 to the maximum rpm.

using horsepower is just a shortcut which assumes many things to be true because technicians dont want to deal with calculating integrals and the area under a curve. and gear ratios...

[reno96teg]

please read if you really don't get it

thanks.. i "get it". i don't think you do. but i appreciate you talking down to me with your silly candy analogy.

you obviously do realize that horsepower is a calculation of torque and rpm. well, by the same definition, you do realize that it's vice versa for torque as well, right?

hp = (torque * rpm) / 5252
torque = (hp * 5252) / rpm

now think about that for a little, then read this statement of yours.. "the reason horsepower is more valid is because it's calculated from both torque and engine RPM. "

[sherwood]

what i should have said was contains a "per time" element

:edit:

hp:ft-lbs is the same as j/s:j --but the problem is that i'm trying to simplify things here... if you understand why are you giving me such a hard time?