Horsepower vs. Torque in the G's history
#16
03-25-2009, 07:56 PM
marketing... havent you noticed for the last several years that the primary part of the commercials is peak hp rating 260hp, 280 hp, 306h, 330 hp... most ppl dont know better and they get impressed with that peak hp number... apparelty it works for nissan - they sell sh!tloads of Gs and Zs...
#18
03-26-2009, 12:03 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Friendly advice....read up.
If you want a NA car with "equal" hp/tq figures (brush up on high school physics), but want bigger numbers ie: 325/325, you will need a relatively poorly tuned V6 or V8 with a displacement of 4 to 5 litres. A Viper ACR V10is a nice example of a nice even 500/500 figure but is a rather uncomplicated and antiquated pushrod engine.
Having a car with a proportionally higher hp/tq ratio means the engine is in a higher state of tune/engineering as it must accomodate much higher rpms to attain that hp figure while the tq figure remains relatively static through the rev range.
Your question is counterintuitive and dumb.
If you want a NA car with "equal" hp/tq figures (brush up on high school physics), but want bigger numbers ie: 325/325, you will need a relatively poorly tuned V6 or V8 with a displacement of 4 to 5 litres. A Viper ACR V10is a nice example of a nice even 500/500 figure but is a rather uncomplicated and antiquated pushrod engine.
Having a car with a proportionally higher hp/tq ratio means the engine is in a higher state of tune/engineering as it must accomodate much higher rpms to attain that hp figure while the tq figure remains relatively static through the rev range.
Your question is counterintuitive and dumb.
#19
03-26-2009, 02:22 AM
This thread sucks, it's based off of engines that aren't related to one another.
+324 on all the comments that suggest you do more research. 270+ ft lbs of torque a bad thing? My ***.
Not to mention, why would Nissan not evolve their VQ motor? That's what makes them great. Always getting better and keeping par with competition.
+324 on all the comments that suggest you do more research. 270+ ft lbs of torque a bad thing? My ***.
Not to mention, why would Nissan not evolve their VQ motor? That's what makes them great. Always getting better and keeping par with competition.
#20
03-26-2009, 05:53 PM
food for thought I have built a few chevy engines, a destroked 400ci(372ci) which loved to wind up(rpm) lots of hp, not a lot of torque.A 400ci plenty of torque and good hp, but liked to keep the rpms low(was not neccessary), a350 that had a bit of both characteristics, which I atribute to a very good rod to bore ratio(well balanced).I am personally use to both having a c5 putting out 412rwhp that flat out screams. btw tq. on it was 378 and will pin you to the seat. I would like to mod my g35 to pick up 30 or so rwhp but to get there seems difficult keeping it n/a.
#21
03-26-2009, 06:05 PM
Friendly advice....read up.
If you want a NA car with "equal" hp/tq figures (brush up on high school physics), but want bigger numbers ie: 325/325, you will need a relatively poorly tuned V6 or V8 with a displacement of 4 to 5 litres. A Viper ACR V10is a nice example of a nice even 500/500 figure but is a rather uncomplicated and antiquated pushrod engine.
Having a car with a proportionally higher hp/tq ratio means the engine is in a higher state of tune/engineering as it must accomodate much higher rpms to attain that hp figure while the tq figure remains relatively static through the rev range.
Your question is counterintuitive and dumb.
If you want a NA car with "equal" hp/tq figures (brush up on high school physics), but want bigger numbers ie: 325/325, you will need a relatively poorly tuned V6 or V8 with a displacement of 4 to 5 litres. A Viper ACR V10is a nice example of a nice even 500/500 figure but is a rather uncomplicated and antiquated pushrod engine.
Having a car with a proportionally higher hp/tq ratio means the engine is in a higher state of tune/engineering as it must accomodate much higher rpms to attain that hp figure while the tq figure remains relatively static through the rev range.
Your question is counterintuitive and dumb.
http://www.sae.org/automag/technewsl...ertrain/04.htm
#22
03-26-2009, 11:19 PM
I wouldn't call the LSX series of V8 engines "antiquated" either. GM makes a hell of a lot of power out of a simple design. Chrysler also seems to be doing quite well with it's pushrod Hemi engine too.
BTW, the first "pushrod" style engine built was in 1949 in an Oldsmobile....the first OHC engine?? 1919. OHC came first. Pushrod was cheaper to make however emmissions phased them out in the 80's and 90's.
BTW, the first "pushrod" style engine built was in 1949 in an Oldsmobile....the first OHC engine?? 1919. OHC came first. Pushrod was cheaper to make however emmissions phased them out in the 80's and 90's.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
