Subject	Everything you said makes sense, but
Posted by	NytWolf on January 20, 2004 at 12:23 PM
	This message has been viewed 61 times.
In Reply To	Which is better? 1 horse or two horses? posted by AshsZ on January 19, 2004 at 11:25 PM
Message	theory is definitely theory, and it will apply to whatever application you are after. But please allow me to simplify everything into my own thoughts. If I had to build a car for a 1/4-mile track, I would build a motor that produces a peaky horsepower rating. Not that I wouldn't worry so much about the torque rating, but I would definitely focus on the peak horsepower. But on the other hand, if I wanted overall streetability, I would focus on something that produces a big torque number. Quite simply, torque produces lower 0-60 numbers, lower elapsed time (1/4-mile), and better street driveability. Whereas big horsepower numbers result in higher top speed and trap speed (1/4 mile). Motors with torque-to-horsepower ratings of closest to 1:1 will perform better.
Follow Ups	Which is better? 1 horse or two horses? - AshsZ 23:25:09 01/19/04 you think too much Ash, you need to get laid :) (n/m) - hey GotBo0st 23:28:57 01/19/04 Holy shit...im going to bed...*over the head it went* :p (n/m) - michaelkih 23:31:14 01/19/04 Why don't you answer my question below about - MikeH(Twin GT35BB Incon Z) 23:38:46 01/19/04 The difference would be like a drop into the ocean. - AshsZ 23:44:56 01/19/04 Hmm.. Passing thought: If you were to put the MAS element - AshsZ 23:55:45 01/19/04 How's the speed-density thing going? (n/m) - Kenny 00:26:01 01/20/04 Its still just an idea in mind... We made 811RWHP - AshsZ 00:46:43 01/20/04 What method did you use to calculate that? (n/m) - therin (Plum) 09:01:55 01/20/04 Yep - SAHTT 23:43:40 01/19/04 Thanks for the bed-time story. It was a good. (n/m) - bb0ys (Bean-town) 23:49:43 01/19/04 Interesting. Note the proper unit for torque is lb-ft. - SooperZ95 23:55:33 01/19/04 pound foot sounds painful. (n/m) - AshsZ 23:56:54 01/19/04 ditto (n/m) - Scotts94z32 10:30:13 01/20/04 I have a concern: - ALSODAIS 23:56:44 01/19/04 In the water pail example, they both are raising the same - AshsZ 00:06:14 01/20/04 I see: You are referring to the HP at a certain velocity - ALSODAIS 00:21:05 01/20/04 Exachery. And if car #2 were running at 6000RPM and 500TQ, - AshsZ 00:42:40 01/20/04 Hey ash do you play chess???? - rave 00:09:22 01/20/04 Gearing & torque multiplication effects.... - hickersb1 00:13:29 01/20/04 That is true-you are trading off torque for more RPM at the - AshsZ 00:39:11 01/20/04 We're saying the same thing except --> - hickersb1 09:51:11 01/20/04 I see what you mean. It goes without saying that if you - AshsZ 12:19:36 01/20/04 So what your saying is... - liverdamage 00:44:21 01/20/04 gotta modify your statement slightly... - JokerF_15 01:41:39 01/20/04 i am now on the road to ultamate enlightenment (sp) (n/m) - Z_animal 00:45:53 01/20/04 I just realized how stupid i am, thanks - AJ6630 01:20:21 01/20/04 Your a brain ash but you drink to much coffee....... :0 (n/m) - ChrisZNA (Sacto, CA) 01:43:51 01/20/04 God, I love this forum! Good work Ash! ;-) (n/m) - MarTTy4653 02:13:44 01/20/04 The equation "Tq = Hp*5252/rpm" has limited usability - Tredmil 03:28:18 01/20/04 What a hum dum about nothing - Carlos Ramirez 06:56:28 01/20/04 my 2cents here: if you would like to explain to a layman - JC_NS 09:33:32 01/20/04 :) - Rickytl 10:12:19 01/20/04 Theory and reality sometimes differ though. (My rebuttal) - Marshall 10:33:07 01/20/04 Re: Theory and reality sometimes differ though. (My rebuttal) (n/m) - krd 11:35:00 01/20/04 Here are some performance equations that might >>> - ZUL8TR 12:19:14 01/20/04 Everything you said makes sense, but - NytWolf 12:23:29 01/20/04 now for a real experiment... - TagZ 15:07:47 01/20/04
Post a Followup	You cannot reply to this message because you are not logged in.