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?
03-17-2009, 06:02 PM
#121
Rennlist Member
03-17-2009, 06:08 PM
#122
Drifting
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 2,585
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see where this is going...Mark is about to reveal his 400,000 year old rock that is going to change the way we understand the history of the human race while giving off all sorts of chi energy. 
03-17-2009, 06:09 PM
#123
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
For all to see.
VR going down in flames.
The graph of the parameters set by Dez shown below.
Can anyone dispute the advantage of the lower torque engine by using the graphs or values used below?
VR, no matter how much you want and pray, you are exposed. And how does that mis-information work for you in the coaching world, when you cant even advice a student of the correct car for the race track? I think your value would skyrocket if you could admit you are wrong, that you needed more information (provided) and changed the answer. I encourage this!
mk
[QUOTE=mark kibort;6390460]VR, you said below in response to Dez's question:
However I made a quick graph that shows what Dez had outlined for his question below. What you advise is not the case at all and not backed up with the numbers he has provided. It seems at first glance, the lower torque engine powered car, would have more torque at any speed, due to a flatter HP curve. it would better at any point at any track at any speed.
In fact, by Dez's outline of torque and HP values, he just happened to make a very strong case for low torque, high rpm engines. Notice that the average HP over a 27% rpm drop for both yeilds much more HP at any spot on the curves for the lower torque engine! (350-400hp for the lower torque engine and 300 to 400hp for the higher torque engine.) Pretty hard to argue with these value of the guy ASKING the question to begin with.
At worst case, a "depends" could have been offered to Dez, rather than a wrong and misinformed answer.
Take a look, y'all.
Mk
VR SAID:
Good question.
In your example:
Car A (supercharged)
400 hp 396 torque
Peak torque at 3800 rpm
Peak hp at 6000 rpm
Car B (N/A)
400 hp 300 torque
Peak torque at 6100 rpm
Peak hp at 8200 rpm
Both cars make same HP, but car A makes it much lower in the rev range, which is much more useful on a road course (IMO) especially a very technical one such as Barber. In addition, car A also makes peak torque (which is also a lot more than car B's) much MUCH lower in the revs, which is a lot more useful getting out of corners even on more open road courses such as Road Atlanta and VIR.
[QUOTE=Veloce Raptor;6390330]Um....sure you did, Mark. Whatever you say.
Professional Racing and Driving Coach
VR going down in flames.
The graph of the parameters set by Dez shown below.
Can anyone dispute the advantage of the lower torque engine by using the graphs or values used below?
VR, no matter how much you want and pray, you are exposed. And how does that mis-information work for you in the coaching world, when you cant even advice a student of the correct car for the race track? I think your value would skyrocket if you could admit you are wrong, that you needed more information (provided) and changed the answer. I encourage this!
mk
[QUOTE=mark kibort;6390460]VR, you said below in response to Dez's question:
However I made a quick graph that shows what Dez had outlined for his question below. What you advise is not the case at all and not backed up with the numbers he has provided. It seems at first glance, the lower torque engine powered car, would have more torque at any speed, due to a flatter HP curve. it would better at any point at any track at any speed.
In fact, by Dez's outline of torque and HP values, he just happened to make a very strong case for low torque, high rpm engines. Notice that the average HP over a 27% rpm drop for both yeilds much more HP at any spot on the curves for the lower torque engine! (350-400hp for the lower torque engine and 300 to 400hp for the higher torque engine.) Pretty hard to argue with these value of the guy ASKING the question to begin with.
At worst case, a "depends" could have been offered to Dez, rather than a wrong and misinformed answer.
Take a look, y'all.
Mk
VR SAID:
Good question.
In your example:
Car A (supercharged)
400 hp 396 torque
Peak torque at 3800 rpm
Peak hp at 6000 rpm
Car B (N/A)
400 hp 300 torque
Peak torque at 6100 rpm
Peak hp at 8200 rpm
Both cars make same HP, but car A makes it much lower in the rev range, which is much more useful on a road course (IMO) especially a very technical one such as Barber. In addition, car A also makes peak torque (which is also a lot more than car B's) much MUCH lower in the revs, which is a lot more useful getting out of corners even on more open road courses such as Road Atlanta and VIR.
[QUOTE=Veloce Raptor;6390330]Um....sure you did, Mark. Whatever you say.
Professional Racing and Driving Coach
03-17-2009, 06:15 PM
#124
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Not quite, but this moment does parallel a recent point in time where the earth was thought to be only several hundred million years old. when they found the "rock" with radioactive, dense materials, they not only were able to find the age of the earth, (over 4 billion years old) but that the Sun once supernova'ed due to those materials not being able to be formed in an Sun as small and as dense as ours today.
New, but previous information, available since the first post is now available to make graphs anyway you want, yet still sheding light on the truth of the subject matter.
Now some still refute new information and get stuck in their ways, but others with open minds, generally teachers, scientists, students, and others, learn from information relivant to any discussion or debate.
Are you listening or just talking?
mk
New, but previous information, available since the first post is now available to make graphs anyway you want, yet still sheding light on the truth of the subject matter.
Now some still refute new information and get stuck in their ways, but others with open minds, generally teachers, scientists, students, and others, learn from information relivant to any discussion or debate.
Are you listening or just talking?
mk
03-17-2009, 06:20 PM
#127
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Then, here is the original recap that started it all.
https://rennlist.com/forums/6251784-post24.html
https://rennlist.com/forums/6251784-post24.html
03-17-2009, 06:22 PM
#128
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
03-17-2009, 06:26 PM
#129
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Arvada, CO
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Entertaining thread. If I've learned anything from the Internet, it's that these "debates" are rarely won with things like facts or science... Instead, it's all about who can win over the audience by misrepresenting his opponent's position so that it appears to be ridiculous or all confused, or just by frustrating the other person enough to realize that it isn't worth their time and give up. The winner can also be determined by some sort of pissing contest, such as a race, which is irrelevant of course, but also highly entertaining for the rest of us.
03-17-2009, 06:34 PM
#130
Rennlist Member
And once, again, on cue, Mark resorts to his pathological habit of deriding what I do as over-compensation for the fact that no one is willing to pay him for his on track "expertise". For this, he has my most sincere sympathies.
Professional Racing and Driving Coach
03-17-2009, 06:51 PM
#131
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
You making much money today VR??
Anyway, hey, like you, I just love a good bantering session. I have to be honest with you. my graph was unitentionally skewed toward the "lower torque engine " side (it was easy to do with dez's requirement of max torque found at 6100rpm) when i bowed out the High torque engine torque curve, i could get both to be pretty even. You really cant change the shape of the lower torque HP curve that much due to the constraints of the values provided.
Again, even with the guidelines set up by Dez, it still depends on the shape of the HP curves to make any decision on which one is best on a road course.
Best case, the lower torque engine will have an advantage over the higher torque engine on any road course. worst case, they will be near even.
Guess its still one of those things that "Depends".
mk
Anyway, hey, like you, I just love a good bantering session. I have to be honest with you. my graph was unitentionally skewed toward the "lower torque engine " side (it was easy to do with dez's requirement of max torque found at 6100rpm) when i bowed out the High torque engine torque curve, i could get both to be pretty even. You really cant change the shape of the lower torque HP curve that much due to the constraints of the values provided.
Again, even with the guidelines set up by Dez, it still depends on the shape of the HP curves to make any decision on which one is best on a road course.
Best case, the lower torque engine will have an advantage over the higher torque engine on any road course. worst case, they will be near even.
Guess its still one of those things that "Depends".
mk
No matter how many times you repeat it, Mark, it does not magically become true.
And once, again, on cue, Mark resorts to his pathological habit of deriding what I do as over-compensation for the fact that no one is willing to pay him for his on track "expertise". For this, he has my most sincere sympathies.
Professional Racing and Driving Coach
And once, again, on cue, Mark resorts to his pathological habit of deriding what I do as over-compensation for the fact that no one is willing to pay him for his on track "expertise". For this, he has my most sincere sympathies.
Professional Racing and Driving Coach
03-17-2009, 07:03 PM
#132
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
03-17-2009, 07:06 PM
#133
Rennlist Member
03-17-2009, 07:08 PM
#134
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
My bad...my reading comprehension must suck. I could have sworn you said that IT WAS WRITTEN IN THE BIBLE...
...and then went on to provide quotes from the Bible to prove your point, including a KAPOW at the end as if you had won the argument. Oh wait...
Seriously, nice try at backing yourself out of that one though. A+ for effort. P- for popcorn!
...and then went on to provide quotes from the Bible to prove your point, including a KAPOW at the end as if you had won the argument. Oh wait...
Seriously, nice try at backing yourself out of that one though. A+ for effort. P- for popcorn!
03-17-2009, 07:10 PM
#135
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Right you are! Mark's often displayed insecurity even caused him to offer two choices that would favor him in his own poll, yet he still is a LOSER!