(TQ * RPM)/5252 = HP

Again, Horsepower is torque with a multiplier based on RPM.

Twin Turbo V12's do just fine revving to 1200 RPM, they're on almost every tractor-trailer on the road. They've got unbelieveable amounts of TQ to get the heavy loads moving, but, in essence, only have 1/5th of that value making into HP, due to the division factor.

And, low end torque for "pulling out of the turns" always applies, unles you're a perfect driver who can stay at over 6500 rpm in the same s2000, the only place where any power the car has is made. Lightness and suspension mods help, but there isn't a substitute.

 

so ur saying the s2000 doesnt make "any" power below 6500 rpms?

because that thinking is flawed

the point is that the s2000 is a 2.0 liter, that directly relates to its torque output, so its STUPID to be comparing a 4.6 liter ford or bigger chevy V8 to a 2.0 liter NA, in terms of torque.

i believe the argument started as whether torque or horsepower wins races. ive heard of torque personally, at least in the phrase
"torque wins races"
now i dont know if thats 100% true.
but before we go around getting opinionated about certain engines and manufacturers, why dont we get an agreed formula for torque and proof that its valid.
and go from there

~boom

 

What do you mean "based" on RPM. It IS RPM. A strong arguement for what I've already said. Torque is nothing without the RPMs. Therefore, torque figures... on their own, are no more significant than horsepower figures.

And how fast are these Semi's? Yeah, I thought so.
Spoken like someone who's never driven one, let alone raced in one. Its not hard to keep the rpms above 6500 because the damn thing revs to 9K, stock.

 

that truck comment was off base as far as racing because those motors are designed to pull over 100,000 pounds of dead weight

not to mention the gearing on a semi, like 16 gears. un-exagerated, those gears are how that thing is able to move that much weight, its not all engine in one gear going down the highway they have like 5 gears before they are doing 35 mph

~boom

 

The S2000 is not a great handler believe it or not. I can scan to e-mail you an article about that if you want to see it in print.

ANYWAY, this isn't about the S2000 or specific models.....agreed.

NOW, how do you propose to stay above 6000 rpm on a corner that is a very tight that would be found on a course like Sears point? Maybe if you are geared right, you could do it. BUT, a steep hill still provides a challenge. And comparing the 4.6 V8 to this S2000to show torque wins races is justified by that article I told you about with the Cobra. The Cobra ran 2 secs faster on the road course. I can let you see the article.

You still have not cited the point about stock car racing and short tracks where you run in one gear. You can not play in this league unless you have big torque. And also, in many racing leagues you have restrictions for horsepower like we talked about earlier.....in those cases (which is the norm) torque is the ticket. Only in short street races can you defy this rule where you can have any car race any other car......like a Civic vs an old heavy, underpowered V8 like a Caravelle station wagon or something.

Lastly, you can not exit the turn fast just cause you get in fast. Understeer prevents front wheel drive cars from being effective. And, getting the corner is all a driving talent..........anyone can drive hard into a corner if they are experienced.......watch short track stock car races and see who wins and watch their technique......mostly these guys are masters at braking hard in the corner.

 

I think that truck comment was right on point. Fact of the matter is, no one figure, be it torque or horsepower, is going to tell you sh*t about the outcome of a race. Too many other factors. The only one that comes close would be power to weight ratio, but thats two numbers. Besides, in my opinion, weight is the biggest factor. Considering its easier to reduce weight than it is to make more power.






Three things:

1. How do you suppose a GT Mustang would fair against the S2K on that same road course? It still has much more torque than the poor little Honda in question.

2. Nascar is not car racing and has no bearing on this conversation. Why the hell is it called "Stock car racing" when every ****ing car is the same and none of them have anything to do with their "stock" counterparts?

3. The S2K is RWD.

 

the s200 is geared right for staying about 6000 rpm everytime u shift the rpms drop to right after vtec engagment which i belive is right around 6,400 somin like that my gsr's vtec kicks about 5,800 and evertime i shift it drops to 6000 so it would be way to easy to stay above 6000 rpm in a s2000. and also the mustang gt is irrelevent becasue the s2k is faster in the straight line they run 13.9's well driven stock. don't say it doesn't handel it raps things around courses it just needs a good driver which i doubt u or many of us r.

 

i wasnt directing that at you, i quoted you because i didnt feel like quoting senseiturtle's whole thing, plus i agreed with your basic point about semi's. and my point was that it isnt a good way to determine a general outcome of a race :dunno:
although in the "original post" about the minivan vs civic i did say "its all about the torque", thats because in this case it is.
as in a lighter car with comparable HP to Weight lost to a heavier car with more torque

I say we figure HP to Weight as a ruler for performance and then look at torque figures after that, because i think that is going to make it clear who the winner would be.

yup :eh:

the VTEC explanation makes sense as far as track handling goes, i can speak from experience on my personal 2.2 DOHC VTEC, its just like having a turbo that turns on at the same RPM every time. the fact that it is constant makes it a better performer, because its predictable. Just like my kumho tires are predictable when swinging the back end.

BTW i fixed your grammar and spelling, didnt get around to the capitals though too tired.

~boom

 

GT Mustangs compete in a number of GT1 and GT2 classes rather well. If you take it stock, the back end has 1 inch of lateral travel.....which is very driveable, but you need to have the feel for it and get used to it to be effective. I didn't see a road course time for it but I imagine it would be 2 secs slower than the Cobra.....or on par with the S2k......not because it doesn't have more torque or power, but because poor anti-roll bars and weak control arms/bushings come as factory equipment. If in your example it would be ok to put better anti roll bars in the GT it would shave off time and allow it to put the power to the road better......and faster than the S2K. It already is faster in the 1/4 mile because it has more power and torque. You can also add the cobra's independant rear suspension to the GT. This is like I mentioned earlier about "street cars" there is a lot of varation in factory equipment. Put that Honda engine in the GT and race.......then the torque suddenly becomes an issue......or find a way to put the Mustang engine in the S2k and then the torque issue suddenly becomes a factor.....bacause you are running with equal bases and can have a serious comparason............just like Nascar.........

Now about Nascar, or late model stock car racing in general it is the best example of competition you can get. All chasis start out the same (a tube frame) to which you add a STOCK (as in production) rear end, differential and gears. (Ford stock car teams use the same 9.9 inch rear end you can buy from Ford for a Mustang. Then you must use a PRODUCTION block, heads and components. Ford Racing makes the 351 sportsman block, and heads which Nascar or whatever late model series approves. Chevy teams use the 350 powerplant. Teams can only have a maximum of 358 cubic inches. Daytonia and Talledega have air restrictor plates, so the teams need to find other ways to gain power. Sterling Marlin for example was dominant in the mid 1990's for using an X-Pipe from Dr Gas (the same one you can buy for late model V8 cars) to give him and edge.

Anyway, I'm not going to go through everything but they must use factory production parts. Machining techniques, piston and rod combinations are up to the teams. Much the same as if you built a hot rod engine, start with the sportsman block and heads, then chose your top combination. All those parts are available for your Mustang or hot rod.....see what I'm saying when I say that big racing series really do impact the street? And while the bodies and chasis of nascars and late model stock car series are prefabricated, the heart of the car is built from production parts. They are high performance parts yes, but not every car company offers this type of extreme diversity.

So back to the point, once you have equal restrictions on building an engine, put it in the same weight car as your competitors........it truely becoms a competition of massive scale between manufacturers. Make sense? What I'm saying, is that when you make all things equal such as with nascar) you can not compete without stump pulling torque because of the low end requirements. Street driving is similiar to this where low rpm is often used. BUT the big difference on the street is what you have to work with from the factory. At some point in the upgrade process you will be runing with somewhat equal bases (I would lighten the Mustang and cure the rear handling and you would add a turbo and maybe gears to the S2K)......once the two chasis were fixed to handle and weight was as good as it could get, it becomes an engine challenge........to which more CI's and torque always prevail. For the same reason, when you have equal bases like in nascar, 4 cyls don't race 8 cyls no matter how high they rev.

HOWEVER, put a Ford 4 cyl against a Honda 4 cyl and see how uncompetitive Ford is in that arena.

 

The S2K being RWD was directed at Fast-Ford, since he was talking about how bad FWD handles. Sorry about the mix up.


I didn't say they couldn't compete rather well. But if you look at the Mustang GT and the S2K, I feel they are much more comparable than the Cobra and S2K comparison. The GT still has more horsepower AND Torque, but the lighter, high reving, no torque having S2K will still compete if not beat out a stock GT on a road course. Blame it on the GT's suspension if you want, but it just goes to prove my point that torque DOES NOT win races.