More Horsepower!

[Braces]

Originally Posted by Ashikabi

You got rekt by a stock Honda LOLOLOL

Sounds like driver error to me.

[Ashikabi]

Originally Posted by Braces

Sounds like driver error to me.

Yeah, he thought he could outrun a 24 year old Honda

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by shiumai

Well, that's when you're supposed to step on your brakes, slip in behind him, and exit.

Or maybe a downshift was in order. That automatic Honda probably kicked down as soon as he floored it. The FRS is also capable of being down shifted in both the AT and MT.

[mdm]

Originally Posted by brandonblt2

I agree as you indicated rpm cross over where torque and hp switch is a variable depending on the engine itself and not a constant that I thought it was.

No, the cross-over point does not depend on the engine at all. It depends on the units used to express torque and power, and on the axis scales used for torque and power in the plot.


It's actually unfortunate that by the pure chance of how the units of foot, pound, and hp were historically created (which was completely arbitrary, obviously), combined with the typical rpm range of car gasoline engine, the maximum hp and torque value of an engine are often numerically similar (in US units), like 200 and 150 (twins), or 200 and 250 (VW GTI), or 140 and 120 (Hyundai Accent), or 650 and 650 (Corvette Z06).


This causes people to use common vertical axis for both. Which is technically incorrect.


As a consequence, other people wrongly assume that torque and power are two similar "forces" that contribute together to the same effect (car moving/accelerating), just one dominates in the low rpm range, and the other one in the higher range.

[brandonblt2]

Originally Posted by mdm

No, the cross-over point does not depend on the engine at all. It depends on the units used to express torque and power, and on the axis scales used for torque and power in the plot.


It's actually unfortunate that by the pure chance of how the units of foot, pound, and hp were historically created (which was completely arbitrary, obviously), combined with the typical rpm range of car gasoline engine, the maximum hp and torque value of an engine are often numerically similar (in US units), like 200 and 150 (twins), or 200 and 250 (VW GTI), or 140 and 120 (Hyundai Accent), or 650 and 650 (Corvette Z06).


This causes people to use common vertical axis for both. Which is technically incorrect.


As a consequence, other people wrongly assume that torque and power are two similar "forces" that contribute together to the same effect (car moving/accelerating), just one dominates in the low rpm range, and the other one in the higher range.

I think you are misunderstanding to what I am referring to has the cross over point. When I say cross over point I'm referring to where torque becomes less dominant and horsepower becomes more dominant for determining speed and acceleration. This actually does depend on the engine itself.

[mdm]

Originally Posted by brandonblt2

I think you are misunderstanding to what I am referring to has the cross over point.

Maybe. Initially you implied that torque is "dominant" or whatever below 5252 rpm, and HP above.


Using the 5252 figure suggests that you are simply looking at which curve is higher on the plot, which is not meaningful.

[brandonblt2]

Originally Posted by mdm

Maybe. Initially you implied that torque is "dominant" or whatever below 5252 rpm, and HP above.


Using the 5252 figure suggests that you are simply looking at which curve is higher on the plot, which is not meaningful.

Initially I did until you said something and I realized it wouldn't be a fixed rpm range for each car and engine. I wasn't looking at the graph initially just the formula which is why I choose 5252 rpm.

[ezion]

Originally Posted by mdm

Maybe. Initially you implied that torque is "dominant" or whatever below 5252 rpm, and HP above.


Using the 5252 figure suggests that you are simply looking at which curve is higher on the plot, which is not meaningful.

This.

If you have one graphed, you can solve for the other with the equation. Area under the curve is critically important. To me, the horsepower curve, weight of vehicle, and gearing tell most all of the story in how well a car should accelerate.

[bcj]

Newton Kilometers x Fortnight / 42

[Spacemane969]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Or maybe a downshift was in order. That automatic Honda probably kicked down as soon as he floored it. The FRS is also capable of being down shifted in both the AT and MT.

I was beaten by some old ford taurus or similar p.o.s. at the light once. I probably would have been fine if I was comfortable enough to just floor it, but that one still hurt my ego

With that being said though as soon as I hit the backroads I could give two hoots about how many people try to race me in any given day. I still get a smile when I turn into an empty woodsy road and rev it to the ceiling. This car is plenty fast for my liking.

[shiumai]

I enjoy my forced induction most when there's no one else around. I'd love to have empty city streets as my playground.

Turn up the volume for this clip - I love the sound of the engine echoing through the derelict buildings.
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLeix0ZYSCE"]I Am Legend Opening scene - YouTube[/ame]

[Quentin]

I'd probably wreck more.


Sent from Tandy 400

[SoCal80six]

[SoCal80six]