How do you increase Torque?

[98Lude]

haha well that sounds great FOR YOU. i'm still in a pickle here. I think i'm just gonna get the GReddy Ti-C Catback and say F the duals

[Bob]

For anyone who was involved in the torque vs. power argument (which I don't want to start again) take a look at post 35, 42&44 at the link. I think I've done a very good job integrating both sides, and come out with what you'll all accept as the "correct" answer.


torque and power explained

If you want to talk about it any further pm me though... I'm really not looking for another 37 pages of....

[henk4]

you are surely aware of the introduction of the diesel powered LMP1 cars in sportscar racing. The comments of petrol engined driven LMP1 cars boil down to: "Because of their massive torque advantage they reach topspeed already after 200-300 meters at the long straights, we can only get to them at the end of the straight, when it is too late to overtake them....."

[hightower99]

Yes and that torque advantage is also a massive power advantage at low RPM... Giving them much greater launch power from corners.... Also from what you said I would think the diesel engined cars have a lower top speed?...

BTW I love the Audi and Peugeot diesel racers...


And Bob has got the right idea... thanks for the link

[Matra et Alpine]

Yes and that torque advantage is also a massive power advantage at low RPM.

No ... it's a great TORQUE advantage ... torque is what gets you going.
Power is what keeps you going.

Also from what you said I would think the diesel engined cars have a lower top speed?...

The regs limit the number of gears so the diesels have an artificial limit applied

And Bob has got the right idea... thanks for the link

Let's leave the on-going 37 pages to that thread then Just it forgot about the dynamics of gearing and has mixed advantage and disadvantage

[hightower99]

No ... it's a great TORQUE advantage ... torque is what gets you going.
Power is what keeps you going.

hahaha so having more torque doesn't make any more power in your world? Torque and power are inseperable the only difference is that Power includes a time variable.... but lets leave that for the proper thread

The regs limit the number of gears so the diesels have an artificial limit applied

So why can't they have a tall final gear to achieve a higher top speed?

[Matra et Alpine]

hahaha so having more torque doesn't make any more power in your world?

Didn't say that. I recommend reading the 37 pages worth of coverage on why TORQUE is important in acceleration

So why can't they have a tall final gear to achieve a higher top speed?

Because then you either have a horrible gap before top or you compromise even MORE the lower gears by making them wider.
This is why most discussions on torque v power get confused. Gearing plays a part and the DYNAMIC issues involved in ratio selection are very difficult to resolve. Hence why TORQUE helps

[hightower99]

Didn't say that. I recommend reading the 37 pages worth of coverage on why TORQUE is important in acceleration

then you realise that because torque is important to acceleration so is power... you do understand that right?

Because then you either have a horrible gap before top or you compromise even MORE the lower gears by making them wider.
This is why most discussions on torque v power get confused. Gearing plays a part and the DYNAMIC issues involved in ratio selection are very difficult to resolve. Hence why TORQUE helps

and why power is important

[Matra et Alpine]

then you realise that because torque is important to acceleration so is power... you do understand that right?

I'm not the one that says torque isn't.

and why power is important

Correct, for speed in a gear you need power. For acceleration you need torque. It's this connection you dont' seem to understand
Nobody has EVER said power wasn't important.
Only you are saying torque is NOT important.
Do YOU now understand

[henk4]

Correct, for speed in a gear you need power. For acceleration you need torque. It's this connection you dont' seem to understand
Nobody has EVER said power wasn't important.
Only you are saying torque is NOT important.
Do YOU now understand

I am sure Bob ain't going to like this....

[hightower99]

Correct, for speed in a gear you need power. For acceleration you need torque. It's this connection you dont' seem to understand
Nobody has EVER said power wasn't important.
Only you are saying torque is NOT important.
Do YOU now understand

Power is for both speed and acceleration... I never said torque isn't important simply that it isn't the numerical value of torque that decides acceleration. Torque has a great importance and you should know it by now....

:To Make POWER!

[Matra et Alpine]

Power is for both speed and acceleration... I never said torque isn't important simply that it isn't the numerical value of torque that decides acceleration. Torque has a great importance and you should know it by now....

:To Make POWER!

Oh dear, do we REALLY need to go over this.

PLEASE stop thinking the theoretical here.
In the world of PRACTICAL application you can't have a huge power, little torque solution. Why not ? Because you don't manage to get enough torque to overcome friction. So you see you never REACH reasonable power coz you can't move ... or accelerate very very slowly until you have enough gearing ratio in your favour for the gearbox to multiply the torque.

So torque is a MUST to get moving. You can chose to imagine you are generating torque by using power and a reduction gearbox. But then you've broken the power/torque calculation relationship for the closed system. So it's NOT comparable.

As I'd said. THinking of gears and engines in a static configuration is flawed. They are a dynamic.

[hightower99]

In the world of PRACTICAL application you can't have a huge power, little torque solution. Why not ? Because you don't manage to get enough torque to overcome friction. So you see you never REACH reasonable power coz you can't move ... or accelerate very very slowly until you have enough gearing ratio in your favour for the gearbox to multiply the torque.

So torque is a MUST to get moving. You can chose to imagine you are generating torque by using power and a reduction gearbox. But then you've broken the power/torque calculation relationship for the closed system. So it's NOT comparable.

You make it sound like power and torque are not infact bound to each other...

Yes you need to have enough torque to make enough power at low rpm to overcome friction to get moving... This is what I have always said. The engine makes the torque and the power. A gearbox trades RPM for torque in a locked ratio(ie. if you half the rpm you get twice the torque you can't half the rpm and get 4 times the torque).

For someone who likes thinking about dynamic systems you certainly like clinging to static forces... Power is dynamic torque is not.

[Matra et Alpine]

You make it sound like power and torque are not infact bound to each other...

In what way ? I've NEVER seperated them. Only you say torque doesn't provide the force that THEN over time provides the power. So without enough torque no power ( ie work done )

Yes you need to have enough torque to make enough power at low rpm to overcome friction to get moving... This is what I have always said.

and aero drag ( that's a friction )
Oops, there we go torque is a must
Finally thinking outside of the engineering book. A vehicle is a closed system WITH it's environment.

The engine makes the torque and the power. A gearbox trades RPM for torque in a locked ratio(ie. if you half the rpm you get twice the torque you can't half the rpm and get 4 times the torque).

"locked ratio" ... :burst into tears: It's folly to consider only one gear. A gearbox has a range of ratios and in each of these TORQUE is requried to overcome the "friction" in the closed system - ie hills, air and mating surfaces.

For someone who likes thinking about dynamic systems you certainly like clinging to static forces... Power is dynamic torque is not.

No. You are making HUGE assumption.
YOU keep on about it's only power.
Power is a CALCULATION of the application of a force over TIME.
BUT acceleration is determiend by FORCE.
So Q-E-D
Now to grasp this you may have to think a little harder on the quantisation of dynamic systems, but that shoudln't be too hard for a 20 year old. Only us octogenarians "struggle" with stuff

[henk4]

I don't get the fascination with torque...

then then then

then:

Power does everything, from accelerating to maintaining top speed. Torque is simply a factor involved and getting hot under the collar about peak torque figures is ridiculous at best.

Dear HT
It might be useful to recall your first post in this thread....I have quoted it before but you always seem to have forgotten about it...