F1 cars, pretty much no torque.
F1 cars, pretty much no torque.
That's because they're limited to 2 liter engines. They can't produce torque, so they go for the other half of the equation, RPMs.Originally Posted by scottie300z
Horsepower is just as important as Torque is. When looking for performance numbers though, horsepower will always matter more. (Hp/weight that is)
Sometimes the best view of heaven is from hell.
Hmm...oohh....Wow!! These are delectible! Good news, Flappy! I'm not going to kill you!
its wrc that are limited to 2.0 litre not F1
is horsepower actually a comparison to the amount of power a horse produces?
TVR, Heres to Peter wheeler and his last creationg of the Scamander.
Coventry seriously sucks....
That was exactly my point, thank you. Now i didnt have to type itHorsepower is just as important as Torque is. When looking for performance numbers though, horsepower will always matter more. (Hp/weight that is)
Yes.Originally Posted by matek
Although several people have tried to estimate the power produced by a horse, it is James Watt's experimentally obtained value that is associated with today’s horsepower unit.
Watt found that a horse could do approximately 33,000 ft-lb of work per minute. Standardizing this unit helped him to market his steam engine, as it allowed him to compare his engine to horses a common source of power at that time.
A brief explanation can be found here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horsepo...2horsepower.22
"In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not."
so in effect they could have called it what ever energy unit it is per distance.
TVR, Heres to Peter wheeler and his last creationg of the Scamander.
Coventry seriously sucks....
33,000 ft-lb
use that and just multiply it by the number of horsepower.
but for todays usage i would change it to metric so metres/ Kg
TVR, Heres to Peter wheeler and his last creationg of the Scamander.
Coventry seriously sucks....
Originally Posted by Godlaus
err nope
torque at the engine is useless, torque at the wheels is what matters, horsepower means nothing without other variables fixed (there are alot) while torque and mass alone can calculate acceleration (less air resistance, which is negligible to a certain point)
that's interesting, if you had 500 horses, would they really pull the same weight as the car that has 500 HP?
12 cylinders or walk!
It depends on the type and age of horses.
Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races.Originally Posted by Sweeney921
FORZA, VODKA, CHIX!
One horsepower is the power that a horse which height is 1 metre long and 1 kg weight can make)))
FORZA, VODKA, CHIX!
Except that torque at the engine is half of the equation of torque at the wheels. Without torque, there can not be horsepower. Without horsepower, there can not be movement.Originally Posted by KnifeEdge_2K1
Plain and simple, when looking at performance, a high HP stat will always matter more than high Torque stat. Including at the wheels. (Take that! K/E)
Sometimes the best view of heaven is from hell.
Hmm...oohh....Wow!! These are delectible! Good news, Flappy! I'm not going to kill you!
horsepower doesnt move nethingOriginally Posted by Godlaus
torque is the force that drives the wheels which move the car, i can output any amount of torque at the wheels from any given engine using gear ratios, this is what determines acceleration, what speed im going at will depend on the horsepower of the engine true
then explain to me why a wrc car with only 300 hp can post faster lap times then open cars which output 400hp ??
why does an f1 car with over 900 hp hit speeds of only 180 mph while a maclaren f1 with like 600 hp can hit 240 mph??
no single stat can determine top speed, or acceleration, you need ALL OF THEm, torque, horsepower, drag, tranny ratios
thats why diesel is so unpopular, right?Originally Posted by Godlaus
pondering things
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)