Understanding Torque

[pir4teParticipant Mallala640 HP hyper-cruising SS-V Flagonwagon View build HERE Member since: March 2, 2015 Posts: 154]

This is a good article explaining torque and diff gears and dyno:

http://www.thecartech.com/subjects/auto_eng/Tractive%20Effort.htm

Naturally as-pirated, all-motor.

[cava454Moderator 93 VR BT1 View build HERE Member since: February 20, 2015 Posts: 2 390]

Too many variables on a chassis dyno that effect the reading.

TRUE indication is ft-lb on engine dyno. everything else is a guessing game.

 

Toooooo many people get stuck up on the numbers game and then scratch their heads when a cam only VE runs a high 11

[VRSenator065Participant Adelaide SAVR Senator LSx454 1960 Kombi (project) 1921 Nash Hot Rod (future project) View build HERE Member since: February 17, 2015 Posts: 5 777]

cava454 wrote:

and then scratch their heads when a cam only VE runs a high 11

I recon a high 11 in a 2 ton cam only VE is pretty good.  Trouble is these days with so many guys running 9s and 10s the regular joe thinks running a 10 is easy which it isnt.  Not only does the guy running the high 11 in his cam only VE scratch his head, he usually mutters “it would have run better but I just couldn’t get traction”.  I mean as if the guys running 9s and 10s don’t have problems with traction…

[pir4teParticipant Mallala640 HP hyper-cruising SS-V Flagonwagon View build HERE Member since: March 2, 2015 Posts: 154]

VRSenator065 wrote:

cava454 wrote:

and then scratch their heads when a cam only VE runs a high 11

I recon a high 11 in a 2 ton cam only VE is pretty good. Trouble is these days with so many guys running 9s and 10s the regular joe thinks running a 10 is easy which it isnt. Not only does the guy running the high 11 in his cam only VE scratch his head, he usually mutters “it would have run better but I just couldn’t get traction”. I mean as if the guys running 9s and 10s don’t have problems with traction…

True. A lot of good info in that doc. particularly the factor of force in weight over the rear wheels to increase kinetic force vs static, and the different ways to look at diff gear choice to suit engine and driving need.

Good acceleration doesnt necessarily always follow an ill-timed torque dump.

Naturally as-pirated, all-motor.

[Dan811Participant SE Melbourne02 Monaro M6 LS1 View build HERE Member since: March 4, 2015 Posts: 124]

cava454 wrote:

Toooooo many people get stuck up on the numbers game and then scratch their heads when a cam only VE runs a high 11

Cam only running a high 11???? That’s surely not full weight on street tyres and std diff etc… I know it’s a stupid question but can you elaborate on “cam only”?

high 11s is a friggin quick time??

I’ve just got a Dus, full exhaust and 3.9s, and I just ran a 12.9 at 179km/h (pretty happy with the mph) at calder in the monaro exactly the way I drive it every day on 19s. My 60ft time was only 2.09 so there’s more in it, but i doubt a cam only would get me into the 11s without drag radials? (manual btw)

[cava454Moderator 93 VR BT1 View build HERE Member since: February 20, 2015 Posts: 2 390]

Built auto, stall etc. ET streets.

[ImmortalityParticipant 97 HSV Senator 185i 02 VX L67 Calais View build HERE Member since: August 31, 2015 Posts: 535]

VRSenator065 wrote:

cava454 wrote:

and then scratch their heads when a cam only VE runs a high 11

I recon a high 11 in a 2 ton cam only VE is pretty good. Trouble is these days with so many guys running 9s and 10s the regular joe thinks running a 10 is easy which it isnt. Not only does the guy running the high 11 in his cam only VE scratch his head, he usually mutters “it would have run better but I just couldn’t get traction”. I mean as if the guys running 9s and 10s don’t have problems with traction…

 

You’d be surprised.  My mate running high 13’s was struggling for traction, his issue is tyres.  Street tyres just won’t take the same hit as drag slicks or even a dot rated drag radial.  He had to drive it off the line and prevent wheel spin because a street type tyre will just light up where as a proper drag radial will still accelerate a car even with wheel slip.

The other issue would be suspension, car’s running 9’s and 10’s are set up much better to make use of all that power.

For comparison, there were a couple of HSV VF GTS’s   running mid 12’s at the same time.

[Dan811Participant SE Melbourne02 Monaro M6 LS1 View build HERE Member since: March 4, 2015 Posts: 124]

11.9 isn’t ridiculous if it’s set up properly.

The general rule is: if you take 0.1s off your 60ft, you can take 0.15s off your ET.

drag radials could drop your 60ft by 0.2s – 0.3s (even more in high-powered applications), and that could be worth half a second down the other end.

The true measure of how fast/powerful a car is in the real world is your MPH.

But getting a good ET takes not just power, but a well thought out tyre/diff/suspension combo that gets the power down as quickly as possible. The 11.9 VE mentioned above probably has a respectable, but not amazing trap speed. The setup and tyres would pay dividends. I wonder what that car would run on 20s?

[cava454Moderator 93 VR BT1 View build HERE Member since: February 20, 2015 Posts: 2 390]

17inch Et streets from memory. 3 speed 4500 + stall and 3.9 or 4.12 in the ass end.

I’ll see if he will reveal more secrets too me lol

like immortality said. The setup is very good on this thing.

[MichaelParticipant VY Calais 383ci GT42 turbo. View build HERE Member since: March 2, 2015 Posts: 208]

Lincoln ran high 11s in his tuned 6L VZ Calais. Diff gears, stall and full exhaust is all he did.

[cava454Moderator 93 VR BT1 View build HERE Member since: February 20, 2015 Posts: 2 390]

^^^yep and it didn’t make 400000rwkw either.

The only number that counts is MPH!!!

 

[Dan811Participant SE Melbourne02 Monaro M6 LS1 View build HERE Member since: March 4, 2015 Posts: 124]

I wonder if we could start a timeslip thread with a little more emphasis on the MPH rather than just the ET.

It would be interesting to compare some of the supposedly “quicker” cars against the MPH of the “slower” ones. Obviously whether you’re running low profile street rubber vs drag radials makes a huge difference to your ET, but it doesn’t make your car quicker.

Lincoln was that Black 6L calais back on SC yeah? Didn’t he cam his 6L as well??

[cava454Moderator 93 VR BT1 View build HERE Member since: February 20, 2015 Posts: 2 390]

That’s struggling off the line and I was only trapping @ 5900-6000ish.

I had 4.11 planned to dip it into the 11’s but I sold up.

Can tell you now it doesn’t make much torque.

[MichaelParticipant VY Calais 383ci GT42 turbo. View build HERE Member since: March 2, 2015 Posts: 208]

Dan811 wrote:

I wonder if we could start a timeslip thread with a little more emphasis on the MPH rather than just the ET. It would be interesting to compare some of the supposedly “quicker” cars against the MPH of the “slower” ones. Obviously whether you’re running low profile street rubber vs drag radials makes a huge difference to your ET, but it doesn’t make your car quicker. Lincoln was that Black 6L calais back on SC yeah? Didn’t he cam his 6L as well??

 

yes Black VZ 6L. After he put a cam in it, he never went 11 again before selling it.

[Dan811Participant SE Melbourne02 Monaro M6 LS1 View build HERE Member since: March 4, 2015 Posts: 124]

Interesting, there’s more than 0.7s difference in the ET, but only 1mph difference in trap speed…. Wanna roll race Cav???? :XD:

• This reply was modified 9 years ago by  Dan811.

[cava454Moderator 93 VR BT1 View build HERE Member since: February 20, 2015 Posts: 2 390]

I’ve run 114 mph. I don’t own the vehicle any more otherwise I’d be all for it. I’ll add another disappointed LS1 to the 304 hit list.

[Dan811Participant SE Melbourne02 Monaro M6 LS1 View build HERE Member since: March 4, 2015 Posts: 124]

cava454 wrote:

I’ve run 114 mph. I don’t own the vehicle any more otherwise I’d be all for it. I’ll add another disappointed LS1 to the 304 hit list.

awww that’s a shame  was it still a 304 at that stage?

[cava454Moderator 93 VR BT1 View build HERE Member since: February 20, 2015 Posts: 2 390]

It always was a 304

[sands vsParticipant vs commodore View build HERE Member since: March 1, 2015 Posts: 619]

http://ls1tech.com/forums/general-lsx-automobile-discussion/959368-whats-more-important-hp-torque.html

 

http://www.allpar.com/eek/hp-vs-torque.html

 

http://www.hotrod.com/how-to/engine/hrdp-0401-torque-horsepower-guide/

 

good discussion

 

 

 

• This reply was modified 8 years, 11 months ago by  sands vs.
• This reply was modified 8 years, 11 months ago by  sands vs.
• This reply was modified 8 years, 11 months ago by  sands vs.

[Author]

Posts