Wasn't me.
That car, IIRC as it's been over ten years, gained almost a half second overall with just the converter.
Some may be attributable to the weather, but the datalogs don't lie. Definitely much better recovery on the shift.
Moderator: Team
Wasn't me.
Similar experience 4.5 ths 1 mph going from stock 2200 stall th700r4 to 10" 3600 converter th350.
Right? I guess all the SS, Comp, and Pro Stock guys have it all wrong?ClassAct wrote: ↑Thu Nov 17, 2022 11:20 pmfrnkeore wrote: ↑Thu Nov 17, 2022 7:59 pm You have to remember that hp is only about the rate that a engine produces tq. Tq rules, it what moves the car, not hp! Not necessarily max tq but, the rate that it falls off. When the tq falls off, faster than gear ratio can multiply it, you loose hp. Hp is a formula but, tq is what actually moves the car. Hp works, because of gear reduction.
The hp concept, was how FAST a horse could lift 660 lb. The time frame they used was one second. In other words, how FAST you can create tq and not the tq, itself. But, you can not have hp w/o tq.
A way to look at it is: Say a F1 engine makes only 200 lb/ft of tq, with a 213 ci engine @ 20,000 rpm, that's 762 hp BUT, you can not use it @ that rpm so, you have to gear it down, to were the engine rpm, will get the wheel rpm, to the speed you need (gear reduction).
So, that engine needs a final drive of 7/1, to get 212 mph, with 25" tires. 7 x 200 = 1400 lb/ft of tq. Again, tq is what got the car there.
If a street/strip car, has 400 lb/ft @ 6000, that's 457 hp. Geared at 4.11, with 28" tires, that's 1644 lb/ft tq and 122 mph. This, geared to wheel rpm, still equals 457 hp.
If this engine has 502 lb/ft of tq, at 4200, with the same 4.11 gear, it has 2063 lb/ft tq, at the wheels. Hp for that tq @ that, wheel rpm is 401.
The above is minus parasitic lose, of course.
When tuning a engine, you need to look for ways to decrease the tq drop off, or increase average tq, between max tq & max hp rpms or at least between your widest shift splits. That's why peaky engines won't do as well.
I'm not sure I've explained it well but, those are my thoughts on it.
Geesus. How can we be on this forum and not know that horsepower moves the car.
Force moves the car which comes from torque at wheels but max hp is a better metric than max torque for performance potential.frnkeore wrote: ↑Sun Nov 27, 2022 2:41 pm Show me where I'm wrong, please.
The only reason that HP works, is because you mechanically, multiply the torque. I think it's been shown here, that tq at the wheel, is what moves the car.
If HP moves the car, then you should be able to launch at max HP/rpm and rigid drive train, with the same gear than you cross the line with.
Can't do it, well, how come.
My whole point, in this discussion, is to watch how the tq falls off, after max tq and try to raise that curve. In turn, that will raise hp, be cause of the hp formula.
The car crusher action is slow, but it takes the same amount of horsepower to chew up all that metal at that speed whether it's a ridiculously gear reduced 1000HP Turbo 2 litre, a not so gear reduced massive lump of a 1000HP Diesel or a 1000HP Electric Motor.rapidride2 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 27, 2022 11:13 pm Isn't horsepower the rate (speed) at which full torque is achieved?
Car crusher....major torque...lower horsepower. Moves slow....
You can't go from zero to 200mph without a time factor. Well you can but you won't be you after you drop the clutch, you will be dead.
OH WOW.David Redszus wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 1:26 pm By now we should all be able to agree that the acceleration curve, in each gear, tracks to the torque curve not the horsepower curve. And that peak torque or peak horsepower have little or no contribution.
I think your mis-reading that Tom. Please correct me if I'm wrong, David but, I read it as saying that the short time it's at peak, as opposed to the whole curve, can/will add little to a speed or et.Tom68 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 1:01 amOH WOW.David Redszus wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 1:26 pm By now we should all be able to agree that the acceleration curve, in each gear, tracks to the torque curve not the horsepower curve. And that peak torque or peak horsepower have little or no contribution.
True. A dyno session never represents track performance. Even the dyno power curves are bogus. But some engine builders (F1) have built dyno cells with rolling roads and actual climatic conditions that closely mimic track conditions anywhere in the world.The data you need to create a drag strip simulation is nearly impossible to nail down, especially considering a dyno session is not conducted under real world conditions.
Yes you will using the proper sensors. In addition to engine data, driveline data, wheel slippage, and vehicle dynamics data will be available for every foot of track.Put a data recorder in an actual car, then the car itself becomes the dyno. You won't
get torque/hp numbers to play with,
Obviously very true and quite apparent. So then why do so few racers make use of data as a tool? Why do they piss away thousands on engines and yet fail to understand what is actually happening on the track?but you will get actual data that tells you what variation was quicker, as well as where it was quicker, in real world conditions.