Area under the power curve

[drftk1d]

whats torque?

[BullDog71ss]

Originally Posted by drftk1d

whats torque?

Something that VTEC guys never use.
Heh, j/p.



Since my powerband goes up at a very flat and even rate untill redline, I'm never in peak power untill I hit redline. Which is why I wanna get that revlimiter bumped up from 6500-6800 to 7200-7400. I wonder if it would still pull more power on the stock setup with the higher revs???

I really like the smooth powerband of the s/c ecotec tho, as it's easy to figure out where you need to be rev-wise to acheive optimum shift points...as high as friggin possible.

[Mr. Luos]

Originally Posted by nissanfanatic

I personally don't value something that starts low with a bunch of torque, but rather something that doesn't fall out of power between shifts. I know of cars that don't begin making power until like 5k and peak power occurs at like 6k. So when they shift, they fall out of the powerband.

Don't do much drag time??

Mine starts out low with a good amount of torque, maintains it throughout the powerband, then horsepower takes over for the LS1's crazy top end. If I shift at 6250 (stock limiter) I drop back down to 5200 or so. Still very much so in my powerband. But you see, my powerband is HUGE thanks to the torque. A car that will pull uphill in 6th gear from 65 MPH. And not just any hill....I-70 heading into the mountains is a good slope.
I guess I just prefer both.

[-Josh-]

Originally Posted by nissanfanatic

I personally don't value something that starts low with a bunch of torque, but rather something that doesn't fall out of power between shifts. I know of cars that don't begin making power until like 5k and peak power occurs at like 6k. So when they shift, they fall out of the powerband.

That's really the whole point of the article though, they're saying that when you have a car with such a broad power band and a flat curve, you wont be out of it with one misshift or if you're just cruising and decide to punch it. For instance if that car shifts at 6K and RPM's drop out at around 4500 they're going to be out of their band as apposed to a car that gets its power around 2400 and peaks at 6K. Unless you can change the gearing in a way that RPM's would only drop down to 5K after a 6K shift i suppose.

[TheStang00]

heh... my torque peaks out at 2750...

[CBFryman]

Originally Posted by Mr. Luos

Expand the graph so it looks like my graph. It wouldn't look as flat.

Before anyone gets pissy about that statement, I am saying the dyno is a bad dyno. Just saying it isn't as flat as it looks.
My older dyno's looked better than the one I posted. Lack of tune kept that one from being a flat torque curve....

Lid and Catback dynograph....

you know you drive an american V8 when you have a greater peak torque number than peak power

Originally Posted by BullDog71ss

Since my powerband goes up at a very flat and even rate untill redline, I'm never in peak power untill I hit redline. Which is why I wanna get that revlimiter bumped up from 6500-6800 to 7200-7400. I wonder if it would still pull more power on the stock setup with the higher revs???

I really like the smooth powerband of the s/c ecotec tho, as it's easy to figure out where you need to be rev-wise to acheive optimum shift points...as high as friggin possible.

steady hp curve means very consistant toque throughout the entire RPM range, i didnt know the colbalt's power plant was that good.

[TheStang00]

Originally Posted by CBFryman

you know you drive an american V8 when you have a greater peak torque number than peak power

thats where all the fun is

[nissanfanatic]

Originally Posted by Mr. Luos

Don't do much drag time??

Not a whole lot. But when I do, I launch at 4k and end up feathering the clutch as is. So I guess it works. Busted out a 2.09 60' on 205 street tires and open differential.

Ah well, its another preference thing...

[eps]

Originally Posted by CBFryman

you know you drive an american V8 when you have a greater peak torque number than peak power

Hey I have 10 more rwtq than rwhp and I only have a 2.5 liter!

[Mr. Luos]

Originally Posted by CBFryman

you know you drive an american V8 when you have a greater peak torque number than peak power

Mine is actually slightly more HP than torque right now. Not by much though. Both are right around 375-380.

[mason_RsX]

Originally Posted by -Josh-

That's really the whole point of the article though, they're saying that when you have a car with such a broad power band and a flat curve, you wont be out of it with one misshift or if you're just cruising and decide to punch it. For instance if that car shifts at 6K and RPM's drop out at around 4500 they're going to be out of their band as apposed to a car that gets its power around 2400 and peaks at 6K. Unless you can change the gearing in a way that RPM's would only drop down to 5K after a 6K shift i suppose.

Thats exactly my point, a borad powerband can correct an error you made, while a narrow one costs you the race...not to say that ppl who drive cars with torque everywhere are poor drivers, their just more able to make a mistake without paying for it

[-Josh-]

This one's for nissanfanatic, same article except on page 45. I thought you would like this one man.

Horsepower is what gets you down the track quickly, and world class professional race engines are built to achieve maximum horsepower. Unless they are giant mountain motors, inevitably this means they're spinners. The extreme example are the tiny formula 1 motors that make big power numbers but turn upwards of 18,000 rpm to do it, and use seven speed close ratio gear boxes to stay within their narrow operating bands. With a "spinner," the bottom end must be up to the task (that means premium parts, dead-nuts machining, and meticulous assembly), the compression ratio should be as high as practical for the available fuel, the cam needs to have sufficient lift and duration, the valve train must be stable at rpm, and the cylinder heads must be capable of flowing sufficient air at high rpm- or the engine wont live long enough to reach it's full potential. All that costs money... lots of money.

And the inevitable result is that raising the torque peak to make more top end horsepower means less torque down low. That's OK in a relatively lightweight car, where more bottom end may just overpower available traction anyway. But to get up into the usable powerband, steep (high numerical) rear end gears and (if running an auto tranny) a really high stall speed torque converter are required.

[nissanfanatic]

lol nice....

Must work too because I just saw a show on Speed channel today where Michael Schumaker and the Ferrari F1 team raced a fighter jet. It was a 900m race IIRC and Schumaker was already doing 195mph at the 400m mark... Plus they sound so damn sweet....

[TheStang00]

Originally Posted by nissanfanatic

lol nice....

Must work too because I just saw a show on Speed channel today where Michael Schumaker and the Ferrari F1 team raced a fighter jet. It was a 900m race IIRC and Schumaker was already doing 195mph at the 400m mark... Plus they sound so damn sweet....

Ive actually seen a similar test in a magazine. road&track raced a champ car against a f-18 in a full mile. I think the champ car was actually winning at the 3/4 mile mark. but in the full mile mark the f-18 surpassed it.