Originally posted by Fast-Ford
I already agreed with you about factory cars.........please read what I said above. Sure, if you put a V8 in an "ok" handling package that does not put the power on the ground all that well, sure you can take an S2000 and have a reasonable comparason.......just not on the 1/4 mile.
Yes, even on the quarter mile. Lack of torque can still be made up for by other things. Drivetrain is an example.
Originally posted by Fast-Ford
I explained the basics of late model sports car racing also.....you can not make the S2000 powerplant competitive in that arena. V8's don't race 4cyls.
Ok.
Originally posted by Fast-Ford
Here is a question, if you take the Steeda Q400 and remove the supercharger so you have a bone stock motor, what is the reason that it will run the same road course as the stock GT in about 2.5 secs faster......and roast the S2000? It hasn't lost much weight either.........it just is able to hold the road better. It is because the torque is being delivered......which is the ticket in racing.
I'm not trying to be a dick or say the S2000 isn't a cool car. I'm just saying that when you look at serious racing with prepared cars, torque is the ticket........not with factory cars that have various compramises. The S2K compramises power, the Mustang compramises handling. Racing is all about taking comperable chasis and racing comperable powerplants. Stock car racing is the best example because the chasis are all the same and what makes one better from the other is power and of course the team being good.
I won't lie, I don't even know what a Q400 is. But it sounds to me like you want to only compare VERY high powered cars (like the Cobra) and not the GTs. However, your other arguement is that with ALL else being equal, more torque will win out (Nascar). Well my arguement is, with ALL else being equal, the car with less weight will win out. OR the car with more horsepower OR the car with etc...