andrew lohaus

some people are mature enough not to street race, thus they build their cars for the track.....high end hp.

von

Lots of mature poeple have raced on the street.

jimlab

What???

von

Just about jimlab. Who would you say then? Titan? I dont think so. He makes more power but I dont think he has won any national championships but if he did please show me a link. And your stupid smart *** laughing smiley can kiss my ***.

jimlab

That's funny... the RX-7s dominate the NHRA. RX-7s aside, "Pro" import racing in general is a joke. There are almost no rules to speak off that I've seen, short of chassis certification and licensing. Front drive and AWD cars become rear drive cars, and no one seems to care. Furthermore, none of them would be running as fast as they are without domestic drivetrain components, so it's a joke, in my opinion. A naturally aspirated Pro Stock car would blow the doors off 99% of the imports and you say the RX-7 is dominating NHRA?

That stupid smart *** laughing smiley is there for a reason. It means you don't know what the **** you're talking about, so shut up about it already. Here's another one for ya...

wanklin

iTrader: (2)

I bet my dad could beat up your dad. ;oP

wanklin

iTrader: (2)

speed is not a function or torque or HP it is a fuction of money. If you have the funds you can go as fast as technology and your body will let you. This reality can be restrained by regulations which are intended to promote competition but as soon as those barriers are removed you will see that the wealthier man will almost always have the faster car.
You can draw comparisons all day long but it is all relative. A big block top-fueler is worthless on an autocross course just as a Mazda Miata is suboptimal on the strip. There are applications where torque may be important be then again horsepower may be the key factor in a different application.
Now relatively speaking, the RX-7 is fast, handles exceptionally well and looks great compared to other cars in its class. We are not comparing it to an F1 car or a salt flat rocket car or even an Enzo.
There are obviously strengths and weaknesses, as with any car, but there are also a lot of things that you can do to lessen the effects of those weaknesses. But once again money obviously comes into play. Now this is not to say that the car is going to do anything but hit a wall if the driver sucks ***....

Allow me to touch on the V8 vs. rotary subject. If you think that a 1.3 liter rotary engine will make more power than an LT or LS you are smoking crack. Yes, you can make more power with a rotary if the same degree of modification is not employed on the V8. Go ahead and read up about the Lingenfelter twin turbo C5 Vett or how about a Viper V10 Venum which by the way are somewhat conservatively modified. So from a simply power based standpoint a large displacement engine has more potential for HP/torque. Ofcoarse rev potential comes into play but I think the rev potential of a 350 is grossly underestimated. Now I know what someone is thinking right now, "man that's BS because F1 and indy cars, which have relatively small engines, are way faster than most 350s and even bigblock cars because they can rev super-high." First of all you need to look at the application, they turn a great deal so obviously the cars need to be light and agile so they probably would not use a heavy-*** big-block even if they could. However, I assure you that these open wheel guys would be happy to use larger engines, which with their technological and financial resources, would be able to rev just as high as what they are using now and make more power. Now the last thing to consider is the drivers. Openwheelers have gotten so fast that they have to make them slower because G-forces are damn near blacking the drivers out. But that aside, if the rules allowed for larger engines to be used, you would see larger engines. Does that mean that an F1 car is supreme because of the nearly unlimited financial resources of the teams and the technoligically inviting rules? Obviously not in all forms of racing, but Ferrari has certainly pressed the limits for that form of racing and it is pointless to make the cars much faster because the drivers cannot handle the G-forces. All that they can do now if improve on the areas within the driver's threshhold. Take shoumauker's (?) car to the pro strip and he'll get eaten alive. Now go ahead and allow pro drag teams to use the technologies which are currently forbidden and you'll see records crumble. So as you see it's all relative. And I still think my dad could kick your dad's *** ;o)

jimlab

Actually, acceleration is always a function of torque, gearing, and weight (not to mention traction) no matter what the application.

F = ma, or more properly, a = F/m.

CHEF_EG_1

jimlab has studied physics, apparently.


But... torque, horsepower, g-forces, grip, braking, and handling... still all come down to the one multi-changing variable... THE DRIVER.


I know PLENTY of autoX drivers that could hand Schumacher his *** on an autoX course, but would get eaten alive on the road course. I also know plenty of semi-legit street racers that could hand John Force his *** on the street, but would again get eaten alive at the track, where budgets mean nothing.


Money is what makes racing better, more competitive. Lack of money forces the driver to overcompensate for what equipment they have to work with, while a superfluous amount of money allows the equipment to do a lot of the work.


V=D+S/M
V is the Victory
D is the Driver
S is the Skill level of other drivers
M is the money

turbojeff

iTrader: (30)

This is all BS. Horsepower is calculated from torque x RPM. That is it.

Torque provides no power unless coupled with RPM. If you've got a 300hp motor that has "a lot of torque" and a 300hp motor that revs a lot they are equal at there peak hp rating.

So from there racers look at the powerband to try and figure out which engine to use. Is the powerband wide and flat or peaky and narrow? Wide and flat might mean that the engine's power doesn't fall below 150hp in the rev range while peaky and narrow might mean that the engine's power is generally below 100hp in the rev range.

Ever ridden a small dirt bike? 125cc, peaky motor, easy to bog but decent power when you've got it in the right rev range.

I'll stand by my assertion that all the people talking against torque have never driven a fast V8 car.

von

Ok JimFag tell me who is dominating the import drag scene or who has held the most national champions? i asked you before but you did not put up. So shut up. No shut the "**** up" if you want to curse so much.

wanklin

iTrader: (2)

Actually there is an unlimited number of variables which come into play. I suppose drag has nothing to do with it, or even the ambient air pressure, humidity or even the weather. There are so many factors that your simple equation does not begin to incorporate.

wanklin

iTrader: (2)

You are exactly right. I can't disagree with any of that but you also point out that different engines are suited for different forms of racing. No one vehicle is omnipotent.

wanklin

iTrader: (2)

good input, you got it ***** on.

jimlab

My simple equation? Try Isaac Newton's Second Law of Motion.