Much Torque+much Hp = No Traction?!
10-01-2003, 05:14 PM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Jensen Beach, FL / Sylva, NC
Posts: 2,934
Originally Posted by epion2985' date='Oct 1 2003, 02:41 PM
its pretty interesting, you guys all have incredible knowledge and yet contradic eachother:
Jims5543:
but once I am clear of the turn I can wind my 2nd gear out and not hit my rev limiter plus I am accelerating every bit as good as him if not better
(torque is same if not better at high rpms)
its nice to have such diverse input, not sure at times what to think of it all when it differs but all coming from credible and experienced people.
Jims5543:
but once I am clear of the turn I can wind my 2nd gear out and not hit my rev limiter plus I am accelerating every bit as good as him if not better
its nice to have such diverse input, not sure at times what to think of it all when it differs but all coming from credible and experienced people.
Torque down low is good for Autocross but not necessary. When I had my first engine (225RWHP 200TQ) I could destroy Z-06's and Vipers.
When I stated I could eccelerate as good as the Cobra. I should have stated he has more pull down low but peters out up high. He weighs 400 lbs less than me but I could accelerate every bit as good as him if not better with my 320RWHP and 300TQ in my car and that is a feat because his Cobra is supposed to be faster than me.
A V-8 is perfect for point and shoot. My point before still stands my Mustang and my RX-7 with identicle tires. Mustang will smoke the tires with even a hint of throttle RX-7 just pulled. Mustang weighed over 800 lbs more it should have had a herder time breaking the tires loose until you factor in it had big torque down low.
Like I said both scenerios are good it what you prefer. LS-1 = lots of tire smoke, you'll need a quick right foot to hook it up. Unless of course you want to throw on some 12" Hoosier slicks.
10-01-2003, 05:18 PM
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Jensen Beach, FL / Sylva, NC
Posts: 2,934
also Jim Downing himself once said he wished his Argo car had more torque. He said the piston cars were killing him out of the corners but he would catch them at the end of the straight and he could brake later.
I remember him saying that in an interview before a Rolex 24 Hours race asking what his game plan was.
He basically said reliability is what gets him his wins not raw speed.
Now why is everyone swapping in V-8's again??
I remember him saying that in an interview before a Rolex 24 Hours race asking what his game plan was.
He basically said reliability is what gets him his wins not raw speed.
Now why is everyone swapping in V-8's again??
10-01-2003, 05:54 PM
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: fredneck MD
Posts: 4,107
Originally Posted by Jims5543' date='Oct 1 2003, 06:14 PM
[quote name='epion2985' date='Oct 1 2003, 02:41 PM'] its pretty interesting, you guys all have incredible knowledge and yet contradic eachother:
Jims5543:
but once I am clear of the turn I can wind my 2nd gear out and not hit my rev limiter plus I am accelerating every bit as good as him if not better
(torque is same if not better at high rpms)
its nice to have such diverse input, not sure at times what to think of it all when it differs but all coming from credible and experienced people.
Jims5543:
but once I am clear of the turn I can wind my 2nd gear out and not hit my rev limiter plus I am accelerating every bit as good as him if not better
its nice to have such diverse input, not sure at times what to think of it all when it differs but all coming from credible and experienced people.
Torque down low is good for Autocross but not necessary. When I had my first engine (225RWHP 200TQ) I could destroy Z-06's and Vipers.
When I stated I could eccelerate as good as the Cobra. I should have stated he has more pull down low but peters out up high. He weighs 400 lbs less than me but I could accelerate every bit as good as him if not better with my 320RWHP and 300TQ in my car and that is a feat because his Cobra is supposed to be faster than me.
A V-8 is perfect for point and shoot. My point before still stands my Mustang and my RX-7 with identicle tires. Mustang will smoke the tires with even a hint of throttle RX-7 just pulled. Mustang weighed over 800 lbs more it should have had a herder time breaking the tires loose until you factor in it had big torque down low.
Like I said both scenerios are good it what you prefer. LS-1 = lots of tire smoke, you'll need a quick right foot to hook it up. Unless of course you want to throw on some 12" Hoosier slicks. [/quote]
Well put. There have been a few shakey explanations of torque.
10-01-2003, 07:53 PM
#36
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in my pants
Posts: 227
LT1 does not equil LS1 BTW.
I know but you guys said all v8's right here:
rfreeman27:
Ls1's (or most v8's for that matter) will put down more torque down low
so I posted the graph you guys posted in another thread which seems to contradict what you just said...
10-01-2003, 07:54 PM
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Jensen Beach, FL / Sylva, NC
Posts: 2,934
Originally Posted by rfreeman27' date='Oct 1 2003, 07:44 PM
any engine can be tuned to make power in different ranges. LT1 does not equil LS1 BTW.
Looks like an LT-1 is the engine to use. Sell me your shitty rotary engines!!!
I would love to Autocross against a LS-1 powered FD just to see if its really the **** though. In all honesty though even if I lost I would not change my mind my car has the unique engine in it. Boingers are everywhere.
10-01-2003, 09:04 PM
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Sunny South Florida :)
Posts: 1,963
Originally Posted by epion2985' date='Oct 1 2003, 04:42 PM
btw one last thing, you guys said v8's put power down at the low rpms, wel acording to this graph 88IntegraLS posted on this forum it hauls *** low and high and just about all over:
I can't tell if you want information or an arguement
10-01-2003, 09:11 PM
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Sunny South Florida :)
Posts: 1,963
also I'd like to know what makes a "modified" (kindof a broad term don't you think?) FD's hp band shoot up at any certain rpm? Secondary turbo?? The twin turbo setup was designed for smooth transition, so if that was a TT it wasn't working properly, and if it were a single it would transition more smoothly. Must've been the v tech 
The more I look at that graph the more it looks like eye candy, and little information.
The more I look at that graph the more it looks like eye candy, and little information.
10-01-2003, 09:12 PM
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: fredneck MD
Posts: 4,107
Originally Posted by epion2985' date='Oct 1 2003, 08:53 PM
I know but you guys said all v8's right here:
rfreeman27:
so I posted the graph you guys posted in another thread which seems to contradict what you just said...
rfreeman27:
so I posted the graph you guys posted in another thread which seems to contradict what you just said...
Take a look at the torque graph. See how the V8's graph has high values way down low in the RPM range? That =tire smoke on a similary set up car.
Now look at the rotarys. Its torque is higher up, so when you plant the gas pedal you dont burn the tires off.