How do you increase Torque?

[Cyco]

Originally Posted by hightower99

The motive force (the force at the contact patch between the tire and the ground) is derived from power and speed.

Well done - you have finally realised that the motive force is a torque.

That is what you measure as the when you try and twist a wheel to propel the object it is supporting.

Originally Posted by hightower99

Really so you can tell me exactly how long my neck and back are? Yes head room and leg room is tight (oddly still comfortable in the mini) but not impossible. Still a comic thing, seeing me getting into and outof those cars.

I don't know who long your neck and back are, but with a car like the 512 (in either TR or M variant) you will not (if your the 6'10" you have claimed previously) be able to fit. If you're short in the body your legs won't fit under the dash, and if you're long in the body you won't fit head wise. I'm a lot shorter than you state and I don't fit, as much as I wanted it too, I can't buy one - well not if I ever want to drive it. The Gallardo, I don't fit in and I only just get in the original Mini and Murci.

I'll have to have a chat to the guys at Lambo Denmark when I'm in Kopenhaven in a few months - I'm sure they will remember you......

Originally Posted by hightower99

When you think up a theory you then try to check if it actually works, if it works in the experiment you made then you check the other variables that were not checked in the original experiment. If everything stands up then there is no reason to change your theory. You change theories when you hit problems that give results that don't agree with the theory. I do not think that every theory is perfect, I believe that theories that have been tested to exhaustion testing all variables involved will in the end stand the test of time. Theories that have proven themselves become laws. I believe Laws to be perfect and more than able to hold up to close scrutiny.

The Scientific method is to create a theory. Try and prove yourself wrong. When you have exhausted every possibility you can think of then hand it off to others to try and find fault with it. If and only if you pass all these tests then publish with all relevant information and have others try and prove you wrong. If and when this comes out in your favour it can become a named theory or law. Remembering at any point these can be disproved.

Those of us who have done many years at uni doing science degrees have this drummed into us that this works.

If you follow your flawed methodology you end up looking rather silly, like say Fleischmann and Pons. Unless that is how you would like to be remembered.......

[Slicks]

Originally Posted by -What-

You have got to be kidding me.

Got to be.

This throws you and everything you've said before this in the garbage. You are so wrong...buddy.

But you aren't the only one wrong.

Uhhh, getting more top end torque will result it more power, you do know this right?

Why do you think Ferrari, Saleen and such strive to achieve high power outputs? Why doesn't torque/lb estimate acceleration as effectively as hp/lb? Certainly you have noticed that there are many cars with higher torque/lb ratings LOSING in acceleration "races" to cars with significantly lower torque/lb rating....Viper...*cough*....F430....*cough*....sh ouldn't the Viper stomp ALL Ferraris?

You left out one major important thing, gearing. If the Viper was geared like the peaky F430, the Ferrari would be left in the dust. Its WHEEL torque that matters. Either way, stock the Viper is still just as quick...

Why do trucks get off the line with so much ease? Because they have plenty torque down low that multiplies with the rpm to provide instant, plentiful power....while something like a RX-8 has to wait until 7000 or so rpm to "go" because it doesn't have the low-end torque of a truck. Top-end power would work for a truck, but it would be impractical. The engine would stress way too hard and not last very long...and burn hella fuel.

Were not talking about practicallity though, just acceleration.

THIS WILL BLOW YOUR MIND
Yes, the "g" graph will follow the torque curve. Why? Because acceleration increases fastest at the maximum torque point...but don't be confused. Hold on for this...acceleration is HIGHEST at the maximum power output. The acceleration may not be increasing as fast after the torque maximum, but it is increasing...all the way up until MAX POWER. The "feeling" that this gives you can confuse you. As the acceleration slows, it "feels" like you are slowing, but you aren't. YOU ARE STILL INCREASING YOUR ACCELERATION after the torque max...just at a slower rate...but you ARE accelerating faster up until the power peak. I hope you aren't confused.


To sum it up...
"Rate of acceleration" max occurs at torque peak.
"Acceleration max" occurs at power peak.

That really makes no sense. Wouldnt the G graph show this? Your peak acceleration occurs when your peak torque does, before and after that your not accelerating as hard.

This is why the Viper feels faster than the F430 to some, but in reality, the F430's can accelerate as fast or faster than a Viper despite the F430's major torque disadvantage.

Once again, gearing.

[Slicks]

Originally Posted by hightower99

Of the turbo cars only the 944 had noticable lag... Did you miss the part where I said I have driven a corvette stingray... that would be a 1968 one with a L88 in it. Not exactly a "peaky" engine. Even that one didn't accelerate on the torque curve.

PHHHHH AHAHAHAHAHHA, now I know your lieing. So your saying you drove one of 115 '68 L88 Corvette(you probably didnt know, but they make around 600hp...), none of which sold in Europe? Those cars could easily net 3 figures, and some guy let you romp on it? ok...

They don't match! look at them they don't touch, the shapes are different and you have cut the thrust graph to fit as best you could. HP doesn't accelerate the car on it's own it is highly dependant on velocity. I have explained why several times I have shown the math which is standard text book stuff.

OMFG, they dont touch because I plotted them like that so you could see both lines. They match EXACTLY. You are in such denial.

By Trucks I mean tractor trailers, 18 wheelers, Semis, that sort of thing. You will be hard pressed to find a diesel (anywhere) that redlines at 6000rpm. the highest I have heard is 5500rpm.

You need to say semis then, "trucks" are pickups. And I wasnt talking about diesel engines.

By the way here is a quote from the website you posted:
Thanks for proof of the theory

What a surprise you skip over the section on torque...go re-read.

Also about the Tesla website. They are not giving any specific information, they simply say "constant acceleration to 6000rpm" but seeing as it is just commercial text that could mean strong, roughly uniform acceleration to 6000rpm. Anyways it is a mute point because you will notice that to achieve a constant rate of acceleration (according to the laws of physics) the power needs to increase with speed. In the tesla car it does just that, increasing at a linear rate with speed. Unfortunately this won't lead to constant acceleration (as power required goes up exponentially not linearly). To validate the result an actual test needs to take place.

Again your confusing "power" with "force", in which force is torque.
To achieve constant acceleration you need a flat torque curve, end of story.

[Alastor]

Originally Posted by Slicks

To achieve constant acceleration you need a flat torque curve, end of story.

Almost, the part that you are leaving out is that it takes more power to maintain a given amount of torque as speed increases.

This is why torque by itself is not useful, because it may be a large amount at a very low speed or very small amount at a very high speed. Power is a convenient way of evaluating the combination of torque and speed.

[SlickHolden]

Originally Posted by hightower99

First, for me quick acceleration is <6 sec. to 100km/h. So even the 500+ hp trucks without the extra sleeper cabin and without a trailer struggle to get anywhere near that.

So to answer your first question yes 300hp is more than enough to achieve the acceleration rates that 3 ton+ trucks can do. Do you realise how much power 300hp is? (roughly 226200 Joules per sec. !!!)

Trucks have alot of gears because they have a really short operating range (maybe 3000rpm) so they can't make big jumps in ratio like a car does.

How does it question the theory (it isn't mine) that power over speed is what gets you going? When I plug the numbers into the math they work.

To answer you second question: It doesn't matter what peak torque the engine makes if the peak power is the same then they have the ability to do the same amount of work.

First off i see your biggest floor.. Maths does and means jack shit in real world testing, I don't care how many times you try to convince people this maths statistic is the bees knees it's nothing in real world testing.. As as drivers of many cars as we all are we are telling you here and now this is real world car testing.. We are all in agrence well almost all that for best acceleration it's in the Best Torque range, Not the Best power range.. Race drivers have said it Truck drivers also what more do you need?.. Mathematics doesn't drive a car or truck.

For me quick acceleration is under 6 seconds, But talking trucks and V6's under 8 is pretty normal around for cars and trucks well anything under 13 would scare shit out of some.

You say how does it question the theory it isn't yours? Well you act like it's your life and you need to defend it without question like blind faith..

Does these theory ad that trucks use 2nd gear for starting off only 1st on hills and some skip gears and don't use clutches when they hit the right RPM etc? A theory is that theory and it's got no merits against real world live testing.

Noone is saying Power is nothing, We are more saying Torque is what pulls the car it accelerates the car faster it's better to stay closer to the Torque area rather then high RPM where the larger power is found.

[-What-]

Originally Posted by Slicks

That really makes no sense. Your peak acceleration occurs when your peak torque does, before and after that your not accelerating as hard.

Research this and you will find that you are wrong.


Since everyone is sooooo against power, someone please tell me what is the point of horsepower. Please, what happens at max horsepower? Why is horsepower measured? What does horsepower do?

Originally Posted by Slicks

You left out one major important thing, gearing. If the Viper was geared like the peaky F430, the Ferrari would be left in the dust. Its WHEEL torque that matters. Either way, stock the Viper is still just as quick.

Why doesn't dodge gear the Viper to leave the F430 and the Enzo in the dust? The Viper does have a superior torque/lb advantage over both of those cars...why would Dodge handicap the Viper? How suck-ass is the Viper gearing if it can only "hang" with the F430 despite its HUGE torque advantage? Think about this...

Isn't it ironic that cars with similar power/weight ratios accelerate similarily? I find that the torque/weight ratio does not indicate acceleration efficiently AT ALL. Can you explain this phenom? Is this some type of life-long conspiracy to lessen the value of torque?

[Cyco]

Originally Posted by -What-

Research this and you will find that you are wrong.

He did. He is right. Look at the graph posted by the other "power" advocate in this thread, it displays exactly that peak acceleration occurs at peak torque.

[Quiggs]

Originally Posted by -What-

Why doesn't dodge gear the Viper to leave the F430 and the Enzo in the dust? The Viper does have a superior torque/lb advantage over both of those cars...why would Dodge handicap the Viper? How suck-ass is the Viper gearing if it can only "hang" with the F430 despite its HUGE torque advantage? Think about this...

Because they didn't need to gear the shit out of it to get it moving?

Isn't it ironic that cars with similar power/weight ratios accelerate similarily? I find that the torque/weight ratio does not indicate acceleration efficiently AT ALL. Can you explain this phenom? Is this some type of life-long conspiracy to lessen the value of torque?

Gear ratios > you apparently.

[-What-]

Originally Posted by Quiggs

Because they didn't need to gear the shit out of it to get it moving?

Well, of course. But why didn't they gear the sh*t out of it to beat the Enzo? They've got enough torque, right?

Why are the fastest cars in the world power freaks?

What is the point of horsepower?

Originally Posted by Cyco

He did. He is right. Look at the graph posted by the other "power" advocate in this thread, it displays exactly that peak acceleration occurs at peak torque.

You can't read a graph, can you? Those graphs are childish representation of something the posters don't know.


So again, what is the point of horsepower?

[Cyco]

Originally Posted by -What-

You can't read a graph, can you? Those graphs are childish representation of something the posters don't know.

Apparently I can, and those childish representation look an aweful lot like measurement, not representations.

Originally Posted by -What-

So again, what is the point of horsepower?

Thats what we are trying to work out, maybe you should tell us - or are you also just stupidly promoting it without knowledge too?

[Slicks]

Originally Posted by -What-

Research this and you will find that you are wrong.

How do you increase Torque?

Since everyone is sooooo against power, someone please tell me what is the point of horsepower. Please, what happens at max horsepower? Why is horsepower measured? What does horsepower do?

No one is "against" hp, we just dont belive that a car accelerates on the hp curve. HP is "work done" because your going a higher speed making the same amount of torque (assuming a flat torque curve).

Why doesn't dodge gear the Viper to leave the F430 and the Enzo in the dust? The Viper does have a superior torque/lb advantage over both of those cars...why would Dodge handicap the Viper? How suck-ass is the Viper gearing if it can only "hang" with the F430 despite its HUGE torque advantage? Think about this...

You seem to keep confusing that its wheel torque that matters.
Ill make it simple, using peak torque in first gear:
F430: 4852ft-lbs
SRT-10: 4287ft-lbs

Viper with F430's 1st gear & final drive ratio: 7427ft-lbs...

Also put into consideration the Ferrari has launch control, and rear weight bias (read traction) while the Viper has no electronic traction control systems at all.

Isn't it ironic that cars with similar power/weight ratios accelerate similarily? I find that the torque/weight ratio does not indicate acceleration efficiently AT ALL. Can you explain this phenom? Is this some type of life-long conspiracy to lessen the value of torque?

Believe it or not, car manufactueers try to achieve a flat torque curve, and with all else equil you can get a general idea of how fast they accelerate using peak hp, because a flat torque curve is already assumed to exist.

Have you ever heard the joke "What do 1000hp Supra's and 500hp Supra's have in common? They both run high 11s!"
This is making fun of the kids that thow on the biggest turbos to their near stock Supra to make high peak hp for bragging, but the car has a very peaky torque curve, resulting in bad acceleration.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/TOYOT...QQcmdZViewItem

[Quiggs]

Originally Posted by Slicks

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/TOYOT...QQcmdZViewItem

Roflwagen. I need one of those.

[henk4]

Originally Posted by hightower99

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.

A 500HP engine is going to do exactly the same about of work and get you exactly the same performance whether it produces 100lbs-ft. or 2000lbs-ft. of torque.

then:

maybe for those who entered this debate a little later it might be good to re-read the first entry of Mr. HT, where he sort of denounced the role of torque in car propulsion, claiming power does everything. So this thread, Mr. What is not about the gospel of torque, but serves to help understanding the role of torque as one of the components that is essential in the every day use of a car.

[Old Sage]

If you spin an electric pencil sharpener fast enough it will make 500hp.

Who thinks you can bolt that into a 3600 pound Chevelle and run a 12?
Raise your hand.

[hightower99]

Originally Posted by Slicks

PHHHHH AHAHAHAHAHHA, now I know your lieing. So your saying you drove one of 115 '68 L88 Corvette(you probably didnt know, but they make around 600hp...), none of which sold in Europe? Those cars could easily net 3 figures, and some guy let you romp on it? ok...

Actually it isn't one of the original 115. It is a 68 stingray with a L88. He (the guy who let me drive it) said it had 430hp not 600hp... It isn't registered yet so driving it at all on public roads is illegal still...

Originally Posted by Slicks

OMFG, they dont touch because I plotted them like that so you could see both lines. They match EXACTLY.

try again then...

Originally Posted by Slicks

What a surprise you skip over the section on torque...go re-read.

why is that a surprise when the website says "It's simpler using the power curve" BTW I´did read the part on torque... nothing that didn't fit into the theory.

Originally Posted by Slicks

Again your confusing "power" with "force", in which force is torque.
To achieve constant acceleration you need a flat torque curve, end of story.

No I said you calculate the force from power. Also Force is not always a torque. In order to be a torque a lever arm is needed. The Motive force at the wheels is the force pushing the car forwards, no lever arm needed or used.

Originally Posted by SlickHolden

First off i see your biggest floor.. Maths does and means jack shit in real world testing, I don't care how many times you try to convince people this maths statistic is the bees knees it's nothing in real world testing.. As as drivers of many cars as we all are we are telling you here and now this is real world car testing.. We are all in agrence well almost all that for best acceleration it's in the Best Torque range, Not the Best power range.. Race drivers have said it Truck drivers also what more do you need?.. Mathematics doesn't drive a car or truck.

Thats sad... You are probably the type of person who thinks that "real-life" is indescribable using math...

Fortunately there are mathmatic laws of physics that govern this universe (and more locally this earth). These are unbreakable laws, you know the stuff keeping us from driving around in perpetual motion machines....

Anyways simplistic, inaccurate math is pretty useless but good math is of great value when trying to figure out what is going to happen without actually going out and doing it.

Yes the highest rate of acceleration (m/s2) in any given gear coincides with peak torque (because you are making the most power per rpm) but that does not mean that to accelerate to 100km/h as fast as possible you should short shift to keep it in the peak torque. To accelerate to any given speed as fast as you can you must change gear so that when the new gear is engaged you are going directly into peak power again. Think about it.

Originally Posted by SlickHolden

Does these theory ad that trucks use 2nd gear for starting off only 1st on hills and some skip gears and don't use clutches when they hit the right RPM etc? A theory is that theory and it's got no merits against real world live testing.

Yes changing gears changes the value used for the coefficient of rotational inertia, as well as the value for running resistence. The accuracy of the results from the math compared to real life is directly proportional to how accurate you are at providing the neccessary values.

I say it again:

Power has ALL the Torque in it!
Torque has NO Power in it!