Originally posted by Kestrel
Your argument about modifying Mustangs so they can handle as well as S2000's only tells us that any car can be modified to help its shortcomings...in this case the Mustang's handling characteristics and the S2000's relative lack of power. The extent of modifications depends on money, time, interest, etc. So it's like comparing apples to oranges, if the S2000 were to win then you could say the Mustang's handling needs to be improved, but if the S2000 loses you could say that torque is superior. Really, you haven't proved one way or the other whether torque wins races.
Torque is important no doubt. Mass is important too, no doubt. These two factors govern basic physics of turning (centripetal) and straightline acceleration. A lighter car requires less torque to accelerate than a heavier car. However, in the first approximation a lighter car (given that both cars have the same tire friction coefficient) does not have an advantage in turning (lateral tire force is proportional to mass, as is centripetal force necessary to maintain a turn).
One other thing that hasn't been mentioned is CG height and body roll coupled with suspension deflection. A heavier car rolls more for a given CG height and suspension stiffness because of the larger moment associated with its inertia and lateral force, which usually results in a deformation of the tire patch. Another thing is torsional rigidity. Smaller cars usually have similar torsional rigidities as larger cars, and as a result twist less as they turn resulting in less suspension deformation.
I think we all agree that torque is the dominant factor in a drag race, handling means squat. A road race, though, I don't think torque is the sole factor that wins races. Torque can make up for handling problems, but a smaller, nimbler car with enough torque (not necessarily more) can still win. So the question is, who's willing to take their S2000's engine to newer and greater heights (or boost levels)?
These are all things i mentioned earlier when I said in "STREET CARS" Tastes and other things come into play.
A racing series isn't just some free for all with every car being allowed to compete. there are weight restrictions, power restrictions and classes for a reason. I sure did explain how torque is superior when I explained Nascar setups:
When the chasis are equally prepared it becomes an engine race, then with horsepower or CI restrictions it becomes a torque race.
Lets try this to take the spin off domestic focus:
Take two Honda race teams runing civics at a short track. Both teams meet the NA restrictions and weight restrictions (face it, in a racing series you won't see a cement truck race a civic so weight isn't as far off as people think) If one team builds a better engine because of their combination that can put out more torque, they will get off the corner faster and be more dominant.
Also with short track racing, how else can you explain a Ford Fairlane or Chevy Nova being able to go faster than a Civic or CRX? When you strip the cars down for racing in strict classes (4 cyl, 6cyl, and V8) more torque and power makes more speed....period. The few extra pounds from the heavier engine and chasis makes marginal difference.
This same scenerio is applicable on a road course, because you need that forward bite off the corner. 4 cyls don't race 8 cyls because serious racing series take a lot of these other factors out of the equation, extra weight, poor factory suspension etc.
The whole modifying street cars issue is why I didn't want to go to far into that (S2000 vs Mustang VS Camaro etc) and why I mentioned Nascar or short track racing. When you have a series with restrictions and equal chasis, it becomes a race to build the best engine with big torque. You simply can not make less torque and win. Then when all cars are on par with torque, the team with the car that sticks to the track the best, and has good luck will win.