View Poll Results: Who won the debate: MK (HP) or VR (Torque)
Mk won with a simple to understand concept that HP determines torque at the wheels at any speed.
25
17.48%
MK won: When comparing equal HP cars, the one with less torque COULD be better on the road course.
6
4.20%
VR won: When comparing equal HP cars, the one with more torque is better on a road course.
44
30.77%
Neither, as physics dont apply to race cars
18
12.59%
I don't want to open this can of worms again!
50
34.97%
Voters: 143. You may not vote on this poll
Poll: Who won the HP vs Torque debate?
03-19-2009, 01:43 PM
#301
Rennlist Member
Guys, I have had just about enough of this thread. Mark, if you'd stop repeating basic physics you'd see what those of us who selected " Don't open this can of worms" knew all along.
You and VR are saying pretty much the same thing. Isn't that a neat little summary without all the graphs, denigration, posturing and veiled insults?
You say that a higher RPM engine with less torque can produce more acceleration. VR says that he prefers a car with more torque since it pulls off the corners better.
You say that an engine with less torque can produce more torque due to RPMs and thew torque multiplication of a gear box. OK, more torque at the driving wheels is more torque. Period. Full stop.
OK now if we all take a deep breath and observe that VR's terse answers did not go into detail, one can interpret Dave's position as "I prefer to drive cars with more rear wheel torque". So whether it is a freaking weed wacker engine with 10 ft/lbs of torque but a red line of 200,000 RPM, there will be a lot of torque at the driving wheels providing a transmission can provide torque multiplication. Doh.
Since I have no skin in this game, I am not out to "WIN" anything. Had this dumb thread been anything but a peeing contest from the outset (winner or loser) we would have saved a lot of server space.
Thank you.
You and VR are saying pretty much the same thing. Isn't that a neat little summary without all the graphs, denigration, posturing and veiled insults?
You say that a higher RPM engine with less torque can produce more acceleration. VR says that he prefers a car with more torque since it pulls off the corners better.
You say that an engine with less torque can produce more torque due to RPMs and thew torque multiplication of a gear box. OK, more torque at the driving wheels is more torque. Period. Full stop.
OK now if we all take a deep breath and observe that VR's terse answers did not go into detail, one can interpret Dave's position as "I prefer to drive cars with more rear wheel torque". So whether it is a freaking weed wacker engine with 10 ft/lbs of torque but a red line of 200,000 RPM, there will be a lot of torque at the driving wheels providing a transmission can provide torque multiplication. Doh.
Since I have no skin in this game, I am not out to "WIN" anything. Had this dumb thread been anything but a peeing contest from the outset (winner or loser) we would have saved a lot of server space.
Thank you.
LOL! Well done!
But Bob...please do not throw water on our fervent effort to watch this get to 30 pages.
Professional Racing and Driving Coach
03-19-2009, 01:45 PM
#303
Yes, not the engine torque values but the wheel torque values. But the torque curve at the rear wheels will be identical to the torque at the engine just multiplied by some constant (total gear reduction)
I think you're looking at it backwards. The engine takes the linear force created in the cylinder and CREATES A TORQUE by spinning the crankshaft. This is the torque output you will see at the flywheel. What reaches the wheels is directly proportional to this due to the gearbox and differential and gives you the torque output at the rear wheels, which directly translates to the longitudinal force applied by the tire.
I think you're looking at it backwards. The engine takes the linear force created in the cylinder and CREATES A TORQUE by spinning the crankshaft. This is the torque output you will see at the flywheel. What reaches the wheels is directly proportional to this due to the gearbox and differential and gives you the torque output at the rear wheels, which directly translates to the longitudinal force applied by the tire.
The Spinning of the crankshaft is a result of the combustion force and the rate of ignitions.
03-19-2009, 01:45 PM
#304
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
the one example that makes the point and answers the question is the one that shows two equal HP engines , one with more torque than the other. the reason that the lower torque engine has more or equal torque at the rear wheels is due to its HP curve shape, thats it. can you refute this, at any speed on any track anywhere??
mk
mk
03-19-2009, 01:51 PM
#305
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Bob, I think we are keeping this civil now and mildly entertaining.
I know what VR is getting at and I think you do too. However I think there might be a little confustion on his or others that voted the other way in knowing that you CAN have more rear wheel torque with less engine torque , on an engine that has the same peak HP, as started with the question from Dez.
It only has to do with the shape of the HP curve. It alone, determines the rear wheel torque. sure, we all want more torque, force at the tires when we come off a turn. that is determined by engine HP, not nessarily, an engine torque value. thats the only point of all this. Power has been set . with the curve shape being the only variable besides the numerical engine torque, can rear wheel forces be higher or lower for either?? absolutely.
so, yes, you get it from your weed wacker analogy. and it can provide equal torque at a speed coming off a turn, in theory and in reality. More often, VR's instincts are correct. Big torque engines genearlly have more grunt off the turns at the lower rpms, BUT NOT Always, and that has always been the argument here.
Thanks
Mk
I know what VR is getting at and I think you do too. However I think there might be a little confustion on his or others that voted the other way in knowing that you CAN have more rear wheel torque with less engine torque , on an engine that has the same peak HP, as started with the question from Dez.
It only has to do with the shape of the HP curve. It alone, determines the rear wheel torque. sure, we all want more torque, force at the tires when we come off a turn. that is determined by engine HP, not nessarily, an engine torque value. thats the only point of all this. Power has been set . with the curve shape being the only variable besides the numerical engine torque, can rear wheel forces be higher or lower for either?? absolutely.
so, yes, you get it from your weed wacker analogy. and it can provide equal torque at a speed coming off a turn, in theory and in reality. More often, VR's instincts are correct. Big torque engines genearlly have more grunt off the turns at the lower rpms, BUT NOT Always, and that has always been the argument here.
Thanks
Mk
Guys, I have had just about enough of this thread. Mark, if you'd stop repeating basic physics you'd see what those of us who selected " Don't open this can of worms" knew all along.
You and VR are saying pretty much the same thing. Isn't that a neat little summary without all the graphs, denigration, posturing and veiled insults?
You say that a higher RPM engine with less torque can produce more acceleration. VR says that he prefers a car with more torque since it pulls off the corners better.
You say that an engine with less torque can produce more torque due to RPMs and thew torque multiplication of a gear box. OK, more torque at the driving wheels is more torque. Period. Full stop.
OK now if we all take a deep breath and observe that VR's terse answers did not go into detail, one can interpret Dave's position as "I prefer to drive cars with more rear wheel torque". So whether it is a freaking weed wacker engine with 10 ft/lbs of torque but a red line of 200,000 RPM, there will be a lot of torque at the driving wheels providing a transmission can provide torque multiplication. Doh.
Since I have no skin in this game, I am not out to "WIN" anything. Had this dumb thread been anything but a peeing contest from the outset (winner or loser) we would have saved a lot of server space.
Thank you.
You and VR are saying pretty much the same thing. Isn't that a neat little summary without all the graphs, denigration, posturing and veiled insults?
You say that a higher RPM engine with less torque can produce more acceleration. VR says that he prefers a car with more torque since it pulls off the corners better.
You say that an engine with less torque can produce more torque due to RPMs and thew torque multiplication of a gear box. OK, more torque at the driving wheels is more torque. Period. Full stop.
OK now if we all take a deep breath and observe that VR's terse answers did not go into detail, one can interpret Dave's position as "I prefer to drive cars with more rear wheel torque". So whether it is a freaking weed wacker engine with 10 ft/lbs of torque but a red line of 200,000 RPM, there will be a lot of torque at the driving wheels providing a transmission can provide torque multiplication. Doh.
Since I have no skin in this game, I am not out to "WIN" anything. Had this dumb thread been anything but a peeing contest from the outset (winner or loser) we would have saved a lot of server space.
Thank you.
03-19-2009, 01:54 PM
#306
Three Wheelin'
I also agree with Bob that this discussion has essentially gone nowhere. The only thing that really matters is the force at the tire and if you can adequately transmit the torque through the gear box the car with the greatest force at the tire wins.
03-19-2009, 01:57 PM
#307
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
again, symantics, but the power or energy is the exploding fuel and the rate and quantity at which it is burned
yes we all agree that what we want is rear wheel torque. here is a direct question for you. Do you not agree that two equal hp engines , one with lower vs higher engine torque, can produce equal rear wheel torque at ANY vehicle speed based on the same shaped HP curve?
Did you see the two curves I posted that showed exactly this?
Thanks,
Mk
yes we all agree that what we want is rear wheel torque. here is a direct question for you. Do you not agree that two equal hp engines , one with lower vs higher engine torque, can produce equal rear wheel torque at ANY vehicle speed based on the same shaped HP curve?
Did you see the two curves I posted that showed exactly this?
Thanks,
Mk
Yes, I agree and is what was meant. You have a linear force of the piston, caused by combustion that is applied to the crankshaft. Since the rod mounts at a distance away from the crankshaft centerline the resultant along the axial direction of the crank is a torque.
I also agree with Bob that this discussion has essentially gone nowhere. The only thing that really matters is the force at the tire and if you can adequately transmit the torque through the gear box the car with the greatest force at the tire wins.
I also agree with Bob that this discussion has essentially gone nowhere. The only thing that really matters is the force at the tire and if you can adequately transmit the torque through the gear box the car with the greatest force at the tire wins.
03-19-2009, 02:03 PM
#308
Yes, I agree and is what was meant. You have a linear force of the piston, caused by combustion that is applied to the crankshaft. Since the rod mounts at a distance away from the crankshaft centerline the resultant along the axial direction of the crank is a torque.
I also agree with Bob that this discussion has essentially gone nowhere. The only thing that really matters is the force at the tire and if you can adequately transmit the torque through the gear box the car with the greatest force at the tire wins.
I also agree with Bob that this discussion has essentially gone nowhere. The only thing that really matters is the force at the tire and if you can adequately transmit the torque through the gear box the car with the greatest force at the tire wins.
The more I can multiply this torque from the engine the better.
If we can discuss it in a civilized way. I'm sure Bob don't mind, if we don't go into a peeing contest.
03-19-2009, 02:05 PM
#309
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
What is great about this discussion in my mind, is that by an understanding of the concepts, you can now look at HP curve, telemetry output at a track and determine what engine mods or ENGINE, you want in your car to yeild the best results at any point on any track or overall as a series of trade offs. We talk about HP curves and area under the curves, etc. but it really is about HP-seconds. The more time you spend near maximum HP , the faster you will be.
To your argument of what came first, chicken or torque, you have to understand that yes, torque is being created at some rate in the engine. what caused the torque. expanding gases, fuel, heat, etc. It all starts with energy, and the rate of doing work is power. if power is equal, whether you have high torque or low torque at the engine traded off proportionaly to engine rpm, it doesnt matter, the rear wheel torque will be the same. (and accelerative forces will be as well)
39 still got it wrong, so I still think its a useful discussion.
mk
To your argument of what came first, chicken or torque, you have to understand that yes, torque is being created at some rate in the engine. what caused the torque. expanding gases, fuel, heat, etc. It all starts with energy, and the rate of doing work is power. if power is equal, whether you have high torque or low torque at the engine traded off proportionaly to engine rpm, it doesnt matter, the rear wheel torque will be the same. (and accelerative forces will be as well)
39 still got it wrong, so I still think its a useful discussion.
mk
Yes, I agree and is what was meant. You have a linear force of the piston, caused by combustion that is applied to the crankshaft. Since the rod mounts at a distance away from the crankshaft centerline the resultant along the axial direction of the crank is a torque.
I also agree with Bob that this discussion has essentially gone nowhere. The only thing that really matters is the force at the tire and if you can adequately transmit the torque through the gear box the car with the greatest force at the tire wins.
I also agree with Bob that this discussion has essentially gone nowhere. The only thing that really matters is the force at the tire and if you can adequately transmit the torque through the gear box the car with the greatest force at the tire wins.
03-19-2009, 02:06 PM
#310
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Great point!
The result is a torque, but it doesn't tell you how often the torque is done. If I add another cylinder or increase the ignitions to twice as much. I get "this torque" ~twice. The engine is producing the same amount of torque, but twice as fast.
If we can discuss it in a civilized way. I'm sure Bob don't mind, if we don't go into a peeing contest.
If we can discuss it in a civilized way. I'm sure Bob don't mind, if we don't go into a peeing contest.
03-19-2009, 02:12 PM
#311
The Penguin King
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
03-19-2009, 02:13 PM
#313
The Penguin King
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Ginger always had that rode-hard-and-put-up-wet look to her. I think the skipper was secretly working her pretty hard while everyone else was out collecting coconuts.
03-19-2009, 02:25 PM
#315
Three Wheelin'
A)If you add another cylinder you will increase the net torque output of the crankshaft. So now you've just increased both the net torque and power.
B)If you increase the ignitions by twice haven't you just doubled the engine speed. In which case you've moved this torque value to higher in the rev range and will have halved your power.