Danglin

Glad you agree that you were ignorant. I'll give you a little credit for owning it.

Sorry I hurt your feelings, little man.

MavsAK

I also doubt his little 1.5 VW, pulled a 13 out of his ***. Not without serious modifications. Those things, even the turbo cars were pathetic.

Danglin

Probably, although I can't comment without really knowing what he did to his car. Anything is possible with enough money, so even a little hamster wheel-powered car like that can be made somewhat fast.

Anyway, my issue isn't with how fast his car is. It's the fact that he's making claims about having beaten this and that, without even really knowing what it was he was racing.

If the point of the thread is bench racing to discuss the HP vs. torque argument, then the examples being given should be credible, and the case of our ****-car loving friend, they are not.

sahhas

was watching a few of my classic car shows this weekend, one had an auction of an early 60s ferrari race car that sold for like $24 mil!

and then a bunch of classic 60s muscle cars. all of these cars had 330hp or a bit above, but i don't think any had 400 hp, all were below 400hp.

the other stat they always post with the cars is their 0-60mph times...
and all the cars were in the 6 sec range. they don't say what top speed of these cars are, b/c i doubt they are driven that fast with the price of these cars going for, etc.....all are restored in good condition selling for a lot of $$$$ now....

anyway, just looked up the stats for an '89 corvette:
how fast is this car ('89 Manual Corvette) ?
top speed: 253 km/h (157 mph) (theoretical)
accelerations: 0- 60 mph 5.8 s

(and i will grant the automatic times are a bit slower...)

i guess i don't know what the stigma of the early C4s is, why it's so looked down on with it's 245hp L98. but it's performance is matching all the muscle cars of the 60s...and even a ferrari race car of the 60s! (although i will submit that the purpose of the 2 cars is different!)

hogandtow

In 2010 I was one of the first to get my ss Camaro (ls3) ordered it first day. Fast yes and no, if you floored it yes but my 86 vette feels fast at all throttle positions a pleasure to drive. I sold the Camaro one month later and came out ok. Story is I like the feeling of a performance car when rolling through the gears at any speed and when I let of the throttle it pulls you back hard. Gear may have helped in the Camaro but it was not even close in that wow feeling!

volkswagens-for-life

camaro vs corvette l98: different heads, different size chambers, different exhausts, different compression ratios, and roller vs non-roller depending on year.

I drive my corvette 1x every 1-2 months... next.

I dont need to know about the car I beat, and by explaining it you have found it to be an XLR. I got my point across, which wraps up my discussion on the matter. Just because you know a car make/model and I dont, doesn't change the outcome. It merely enhances the story. And whats wrong with ****'s? Are you discriminating? You gonna tell me a sub 2-liter car has more torque than a big old cadillac northstar v8?

AgentEran

You need both hp & tq, so im not taking sides in this one..lol

Since this thread went to hell, why not post a video that was certainly a "horsepower musing" for me..

VW.. your going to love it.. its just for you!

sahhas

ok, the funny thing about the video above reminds me when a year ago i was looking at C3s, and was looking at a bunch of youtube vids of folks posting things about their C3s, anyway, one guy who was selling his car at the time was driving on the street with it, talking about how great it drove, and the engine did sound good. but at one point he talked about the engine felt good, had good speed and HP etc....and all the while he's praising the car, these little no-nothing cars are just BLOWING BY him, it was kind of funny to watch from a neutral perspective!!!!

86C4Z51

So yesterday I was driving home in my ancient 86 with the iron heads and 130k miles on it. A BMW X5 was in front of me, going too slow. We rounded a corner (he swung wide to make it faster), and of course I cornered inside of that, not trying to pass (that would've been stupid). There's a steep hill after that corner, goes about three blocks. He stomped on it after that corner -- I guess I was following too close and he was going to "show that old Corvette." I was still in 2nd gear (auto), somewhere in the low 2000 rpm range, and stomped on it, too.

Those X5s have good power. I stuck with him easily, but this morning I looked it up just for grins and those things get 300 HP to 445 HP, depending on what they have in them (I don't know exactly what he had in it).

I figure my slightly modified L98 makes more than stock, but nowhere near 300 HP (maybe 250, maybe). So at that point it was a torque battle. They make 300 to 480 lb/ft torque. And I could tell by the smell of catalytic converters he was pouring it on.

So I was happy my $6K, 29 year old Vette stuck with him pretty easily, even though he surprised me that an SUV could be as quick as it was. I have no idea what those things weigh.

So torque and HP and weight and gears -- it's always what adds up on the road that makes you grin. What makes me grin is just driving this 1986 world-beating car.

sahhas

re: the L98...
I was re-reading some parts in the "corvette from the inside" book looking for everything the author had to say about the L98.
and honestly he doesn't say much, but does point out that compared to the peer cars of the day that it did quite well (beat a lot of them!).

but the thing that I found frustrating (and granted I know it's a book of history, not a "projects book"), but they said that most of the corvette challenge cars, which had to use stock engines, but that they usually did some mods to them that boosted the cars to between 350 to 375 hp.
now when I re-read this I was wondering: what the heck were you doing to boost the L98 to this? but there is no discussion of it of course! oh well....

and honestly he really sort of glosses over the LT1 engine too, that gives a boost to 300hp....

but there is certainly a lot of discussion on the LT5 and the ZR1 car....

Tom400CFI

The author didn't write a lot about the L98 or the LT1, LIKELY, b/c he wasn't very involved in the development of either. My personal opinion is that he probably wan't excessively proud of either engine, but that is my opinion. Roy Midgley was "the man" w/regard to the L83, L98 and LT1...so if he'd written a book about '80's GM powertrains, we might get a lot more details about questions and rumors that fly around about these engines. Roy didn't though, unfortunately.



X5's weigh a lot. A mid 2000's, V8 4.4 X5 weighs in around 5000 lbs...nearly 2000 lbs more than your 'Vette.

86C4Z51

Well there you go, no doubt more horses but more to pull, too.

Paul Workman

Yep...

Any way one wants to define it, it always comes down to -

acceleration = Force/mass.

And, thanks to our wonderful, PC education system, some will never "get it" apparently...

Tom400CFI

Man. Volkswagens....PAGES later...you stil don't "get it". Many posters on here tell you (correctly) that you "don't get it"... you insult them and name call. Who do you suppose "gets it"; the many people calling out your garbage posts? Or the lone voice insulting everyone else?

Your car very likely weighs less than a Cadillac. Once again, you've picked a lighter car to "prove" something compared to a heavier car. Good work.

What's wrong w/****'s? You might want to go edjemicate yourself about what ****'s stand for and what they've done. Has nothing to do w/this thread, but if you're going to try to defend ****'s you'll be the lone soldier there too.

Mavs point about your TIRES, is just an example of the bogus crap you post, that destroys your credibility. Your tires, Cars you beat, F1 Cars vs. Challengers, Camaro/'Vette engine block misinformation, "What Tom said"....and on and on. The comments about your tires are meant to be one example (of many) where you self destruct your own credibility w/foolish actions or claims. In this thead (at least) you are a stock.

volkswagens-for-life

As I figured, more senseless, useless drivel. Let me help educate you:

Link1: https://www.physicsforums.com/thread...epower.153996/

Link2: http://www.elephantracing.com/techtopic/hpvstorque.htm
An excellent quote from link2:
"As an example recall our car with two speeds, flat torque curve, 100 foot pound engine. Imagine it has a 1:1 final drive ratio that propels the car at 107 mph (makes the math simple) at 1500 RPM in second gear using 24 inch diameter tires. We can also drive the car 107 mph at 3000 RPM in first gear. The engine is producing 100 foot pounds of torque in both cases. Which one accelerates the car faster? As a result of torque multiplication a car will accelerate fastest at any given MPH when a gear is selected that puts the engine at its horsepower peak and not its torque peak. This is one reason why small high-revving engines can often beat large low-revving engines. Despite a lower crankshaft torque, the high-revving engine can deliver greater drive axle torque through torque multiplication.

So there it is, torque and horsepower. It seems that horsepower is good for selling cars AND winning races.

Link3: http://www.bmcnamara.com/horsepower-...in-1000-words/

Quote: So, in a drag race between two well matched contenders:

The car with the higher horsepower number will win the race because its motor can accomplish more work in a given amount of time. The work, of course, is moving the car and its driver from the start line to the finish line.
The driver of the car with the higher torque number will experience periods of greater g-force, or ‘push’, against the driver’s back.
The car with the higher horsepower number may or may not be the car with the higher torque number.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Can you point to a real world example of a higher horsepower car beating a higher torque car?

Yes: look at the BMW 335i vs the 335d, which were both reviewed by Car and Driver. The 335i has a gasoline motor which spins to a 7000 RPM and outputs 300 horsepower and 300 lb-ft of torque. The BMW 335d has a diesel motor which spins to to 5000RPM and outputs 265 horsepower and 425 lb-ft of torque. The cars are of ‘apples to apples’ design and were independently tested by the same publication, so it’s easy to compare the test results and see that horsepower wins the drag race:

bmw diesel vs gasoline torque vs hp

The 335i is 0.8 second faster to 60mph and 0.8 second faster in the quarter mile, despite having a torque number that is 125 lb-ft lower. Thanks to its ability to spin at higher RPMs, the 335i has a 35 horsepower advantage.

That is also surprising! 125 lb-ft is a big difference!

As you can see, designing a motor to spin at higher RPMs really helps make horsepower.

Tom400CFI

YOU DON'T SAY? As the resident expert on useless drivel! Wow.

What did any of that happy horse **** have to do with you using light cars beating heavy cars to try to prove a failed point? I suggest you return to your Playstation, and avoid conversations that involve science, basic physics, and anything requiring a modicum of education.

volkswagens-for-life

It proved my whole point from weeks and weeks ago, from several pages back: HORSEPOWER WINS RACES, NOT TORQUE. Now get back to your post-lunch nap

Tom400CFI

Who said "Torque wins races"? Not me, so why are you referencing that....again?


Oh yeah. You "proved" it alright. To yourself.

"Hey look! This 1800 lb, 700 hp car can beat a 4000 lb, 700 hp car! That PROVES Torque means nothing. Zilch. Nada."

Nice links (above) BTW. If only you actually understood them.

volkswagens-for-life

I understand the links plenty. Horsepower wins races. And if you agree with me, you'd wise up and stop debating. Get over yourself. I admire your work on this forum, but you're just looking for a reason to swing your **** right now.

Tom400CFI

And you're not?? At least I have some knowledge to back up my "**** swinging", as you call it. What have YOU got? Camaro SS is "supercharged? Corvette and Camaro blocks are different? Heavy cars are slower than light cars?? You are completely FOS, man!

I could agree with you...but then we'd both be wrong. HP and TQ are mathematically connected. Can't have one w/o the other. If you had read my post, you'd have seen that I said nothing about HP or TQ...but instead, I called you out for (again) picking light cars that beat heavy cars as "proof"....which is folly.

Since you obviously didn't read it the first time, you might give THIS a look.


.