[QUOTE=jediali;696322]not if you allow it to rev high. high power low weight and less torque too avoid a heavy drive line and less torque steer.[/QUOTE]
So, in other words, a Honda VTEC engine.
Printable View
[QUOTE=jediali;696322]not if you allow it to rev high. high power low weight and less torque too avoid a heavy drive line and less torque steer.[/QUOTE]
So, in other words, a Honda VTEC engine.
[QUOTE=Matra et Alpine;696289]Power is fine, but you also need to consider TORQUE.
Not surprised some skipped over that important point :)
Rotary are good but seriously lack grunt and need constant gear changes - not always feasible mid corner, so too easy to bog down.
I'd be seriously worried about a turbo in a small, light FWD. The risk of power understeer is very high.
SC is adding weight :(
I'd go n/a :D[/QUOTE]
I'm sure this has been described elsewhere in UCP but I have never understood the benefits of torque. What exactly does torque do to help the car go faster? I read that it waas horsepower at the wheels that determined the torque or something. I just don't understand the benefits of torque I guess! Can someone clue me in?
[quote=drakkie;696315]You will need to consider that a N/A engine producing the same power output, will be larger and heavier too :) Actually a pretty tough choice to make ;)[/quote]
true. 260hp is pushing it for n/a :)
I was thinking 200 HP :(
But rethinking it, if it's to be something like a Mini then if the engine stays in the front then a heavier engine with that amount of power will really be a BENEFIT and delay lift/wheelspin :)
Actually 260hp is too much for a small FWD :(
[quote=Kitdy;696359]I'm sure this has been described elsewhere in UCP but I have never understood the benefits of torque. What exactly does torque do to help the car go faster? I read that it waas horsepower at the wheels that determined the torque or something. I just don't understand the benefits of torque I guess! Can someone clue me in?[/quote]
Please fo to the torque thread and not raise this here :)
[QUOTE=Matra et Alpine;696365]true. 260hp is pushing it for n/a :)
I was thinking 200 HP :(
But rethinking it, if it's to be something like a Mini then if the engine stays in the front then a heavier engine with that amount of power will really be a BENEFIT and delay lift/wheelspin :)
Actually 260hp is too much for a small FWD :([/QUOTE]
And 200KW is actually a little bit over 270bhp...
270bhp is definitely overkill in a front wheel drive car, even with modern drivetrain technology.
[QUOTE=Ferrer;696373]And 200KW is actually a little bit over 270bhp...
270bhp is definitely overkill in a front wheel drive car, even with modern drivetrain technology.[/QUOTE]
The Civic Type R-R will have 260hp and apparently it copes with it fine.
I'll vote rotary,
lowest weight of all
lack of low end torque can be compensated by lower gearing which would not be a problem since rotarys tend to have very high redlines.
Besides, who needs a lot of torque in a subcompact FWD?
[QUOTE=2ndclasscitizen;696517]The Civic Type R-R will have 260hp and apparently it copes with it fine.[/QUOTE]
Will it still have a normally aspirated engine?
By the way the 3 MPS also has a 260bhp engine and apparently it's a bit of a mess. Altough being turbocharged it has mountains of torque...
[QUOTE=Ferrer;696565]Will it still have a normally aspirated engine?[/QUOTE]
Yes. [url]http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/autoexpressnews/208207/civic_cossie_blasts_off.html[/url] And it has a sequential gearbox...with a clutch pedal!!! Huzzah!!!
[QUOTE=Ferrer;696565]By the way the 3 MPS also has a 260bhp engine and apparently it's a bit of a mess. Altough being turbocharged it has mountains of torque...[/QUOTE]
Really? By the reviews I've read it's pretty good, especially condiering the massive power and torque of the engine.
[QUOTE=2ndclasscitizen;696568]Yes. [url]http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/autoexpressnews/208207/civic_cossie_blasts_off.html[/url] And it has a sequential gearbox...with a clutch pedal!!! Huzzah!!![/QUOTE]
This looks like a rally car. :eek:
[QUOTE=2ndclasscitizen;696568]
Really? By the reviews I've read it's pretty good, especially condiering the massive power and torque of the engine.[/QUOTE]
I currently don't have the magazine in which the 3 MPS is reviewed and don't remember exactly what it said, but I do remember that as a hot hatch it wasn't on the top. It was very fast yes, but not a fine tuned hot hatch.
[QUOTE=Ferrer;696570]This looks like a rally car. :eek:[/QUOTE]
I know, it's truly awesome.
Wow sweet car.
Honda must be proud of that!
130HP/L...
80ms shift time...
drool:D
I don't see how its a successor to a Cossie when its going to be barely any faster and a whole lot uglier.
Looks like it comes pre-riced too.
[QUOTE=Kitdy;696359]I'm sure this has been described elsewhere in UCP but I have never understood the benefits of torque. What exactly does torque do to help the car go faster? I read that it waas horsepower at the wheels that determined the torque or something. I just don't understand the benefits of torque I guess! Can someone clue me in?[/QUOTE]
[url]http://vettenet.org/torquehp.html[/url]
If the power output is the same for all engines then the torque output is the same for all engines... Think about it the wankel makes less torque at higher RPM to get it's peak power but because it is at a higher RPM then it can have a larger ratio and put just as much torque to the wheels as a NA piston engine could making the same power at lower RPM.
Fact of life.
The only reason you take something with a flatter torque curve is to increase average power... But in such a light car that doesn't really matter.