AF's DREAM TEAM!
Pages :
1 [2]
2strokebloke
06-01-2003, 12:36 AM
What do you mean taught? They spent several pages arguing over whether or not stroke had any relation to piston travel!!!
DblOvrhedCamron
06-01-2003, 01:00 AM
Originally posted by 2strokebloke
What do you mean taught? They spent several pages arguing over whether or not stroke had any relation to piston travel!!!
You can't tell me you think that torque has no relation and is not dependant at all on time......
What do you mean taught? They spent several pages arguing over whether or not stroke had any relation to piston travel!!!
You can't tell me you think that torque has no relation and is not dependant at all on time......
2strokebloke
06-01-2003, 01:09 AM
No, that's not what I'm saying, in fact I'll quote you to get my point across.
Well if the arm is taking longer due to a longer stroke, its going to take a longer period of time for the full movement of the arm.
Exactly. The longer the stroke, the further the piston travel, the more time power (torque) is exerted upon the crank - duh.
Well if the arm is taking longer due to a longer stroke, its going to take a longer period of time for the full movement of the arm.
Exactly. The longer the stroke, the further the piston travel, the more time power (torque) is exerted upon the crank - duh.
Neutrino
06-01-2003, 04:12 AM
Originally posted by DblOvrhedCamron
You can't tell me you think that torque has no relation and is not dependant at all on time......
ok from what i unmdesrtand in your posts is that you try to point out that without aplying the toque you have over time you get not power....am i close to what you are trying to say?
but i do agree with 2strokebloke torque is not dependant on time but as you said it yourself it has a relationship with time...IMO that is better way to put it
You can't tell me you think that torque has no relation and is not dependant at all on time......
ok from what i unmdesrtand in your posts is that you try to point out that without aplying the toque you have over time you get not power....am i close to what you are trying to say?
but i do agree with 2strokebloke torque is not dependant on time but as you said it yourself it has a relationship with time...IMO that is better way to put it
DblOvrhedCamron
06-01-2003, 05:58 AM
Originally posted by Neutrino
ok from what i unmdesrtand in your posts is that you try to point out that without aplying the toque you have over time you get not power....am i close to what you are trying to say?
but i do agree with 2strokebloke torque is not dependant on time but as you said it yourself it has a relationship with time...IMO that is better way to put it
I was trying to show 911 gt 2 that he was wrong in saying that long stroke VS short stroke are not comparable through torque over time, I saw nothing wrong with what hybrid wrote.
without time torque woulden't exsist...... the definition of dependant is something that relies on another something/ exsistance or activation reliance.
ok from what i unmdesrtand in your posts is that you try to point out that without aplying the toque you have over time you get not power....am i close to what you are trying to say?
but i do agree with 2strokebloke torque is not dependant on time but as you said it yourself it has a relationship with time...IMO that is better way to put it
I was trying to show 911 gt 2 that he was wrong in saying that long stroke VS short stroke are not comparable through torque over time, I saw nothing wrong with what hybrid wrote.
without time torque woulden't exsist...... the definition of dependant is something that relies on another something/ exsistance or activation reliance.
flylwsi
06-01-2003, 10:35 AM
What do you mean taught? They spent several pages arguing over whether or not stroke had any relation to piston travel!!!
which is a stupid argument. how could it not have any relation to it?
it's almost common sense.
hybrid wins here.
but that's not the point of this thread. i'm glad we decided to make this one a mirror of that other thread.
which is a stupid argument. how could it not have any relation to it?
it's almost common sense.
hybrid wins here.
but that's not the point of this thread. i'm glad we decided to make this one a mirror of that other thread.
2strokebloke
06-01-2003, 11:09 AM
Almost? it is common sense. They also seem to be confusing how torque is created in an engine, with what torque actually is.
Polygon
06-01-2003, 12:36 PM
Perhaps if you guys wanted to discuss the physics of HP and torque you should have started another thread. This one has gone way off course. I'm now closing it since the original topic has been left behind.
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2026