| Author | Topic |
|---|
Location:
Hobart, Tas
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
Fri, 13 September 2002 05:09
 
|
 |
There is a very good, long detailed explaination of torque vs HP somewhere on the net, but i can't find the link.
To add to what others have said, I'll try to explain torque a little. The 22RE in my celica doesn't have many horses at all really (116 hp, or 87 kw) but is a very torquey engine (140lb/ft, or 198nm), and makes a lot of it early on. It is torque than gets the heavy chassis going in the first place, which means it is quite 'driveable'. The celi might not have a very powerful engine, but it does take off the line fast - good low end.
You don't have to change gears all that often and can go up hills in 5th with ease. One thing I notice compared to other cars (with the same HP) is the way the engine doesn't car about going up hills at all, whereas other cars on the same hill have to shift down a gear or 2. Putting, say, a 4age in an ra65 is not recommened because, although the peak power is higher (say 100kw), they are nowhere near as torquey normally aspirated and the car would most likely be a bit of a dog to drive.
A lot of smaller engined modern cars have a much higher listed HP, but the peak torque reading is bugger all.
I also think (but not sure) that the higher rpm your peak torque is at, the more HP you have.
|
|
|
| | Subject | Poster | Date |
|---|
 |
More Torque or more Horses ?
|
Les | Thu, 12 September 2002 23:15 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
TurboRG | Thu, 12 September 2002 23:49 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
E30-323ti | Fri, 13 September 2002 00:16 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
Norbie | Fri, 13 September 2002 00:31 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
GIN51E | Fri, 13 September 2002 01:13 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
Corvid | Fri, 13 September 2002 01:26 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
kassma | Fri, 13 September 2002 02:33 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
Les | Fri, 13 September 2002 04:15 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
Stefan | Fri, 13 September 2002 05:12 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
Norbie | Fri, 13 September 2002 06:03 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
Stefan | Sat, 14 September 2002 13:49 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
Stefan | Fri, 13 September 2002 05:09 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
Norbie | Fri, 13 September 2002 06:01 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
Seadog | Fri, 13 September 2002 06:10 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
justcallmefrank | Fri, 13 September 2002 06:52 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
Blown86 | Fri, 13 September 2002 18:37 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
mrshin | Sat, 14 September 2002 12:09 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
mrshin | Sat, 14 September 2002 12:11 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
mrshin | Sat, 14 September 2002 12:14 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
Norbie | Sat, 14 September 2002 23:40 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
5KinKP60 | Sun, 15 September 2002 00:45 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
GIN51E | Sun, 15 September 2002 08:36 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
Fattony | Sun, 15 September 2002 02:28 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
Jonny2TG | Sun, 15 September 2002 07:41 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
celicamad85 | Sun, 15 September 2002 12:03 |
|
Re: More Torque or more Horses ?
|
mattc | Tue, 17 September 2002 01:56 |
