New 450HP 3rotor mid-engine Mazda Furai concept car.
Junior Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
From: So. Cal.
Let's hope this is just the start of things to come for Mazda and Mada Speed.
s4 Tails for Life!
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, TX
Mazda Furai Exposed!
This. is. sick.
It has a 3 rotor engine with 450 horsepower and Mazda wants to make this a "streetable" car.
*drool*
Linkage: http://mazdarxnews.com/rotary-news-mazda-furai-exposed
Cheers,
Cody
It has a 3 rotor engine with 450 horsepower and Mazda wants to make this a "streetable" car.
*drool*
Linkage: http://mazdarxnews.com/rotary-news-mazda-furai-exposed
Cheers,
Cody
My other car is a TVR
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
From: Calgary
I wish mazda would at least list torque. HP is meaningless!
The mack truck I drive at work (ch600) is only 427HP, but at the wheels at least 20 THOUSAND foot pounds of torque in 1st.
My 427HP Mack will pull 140k pounds. Your (2x + more HP) 1000 hp rotary 7 would blow up even trying.
Just once in my life I'd like to see a car maker print more accurate data like I just gave example to.
The mack truck I drive at work (ch600) is only 427HP, but at the wheels at least 20 THOUSAND foot pounds of torque in 1st.
My 427HP Mack will pull 140k pounds. Your (2x + more HP) 1000 hp rotary 7 would blow up even trying.
Just once in my life I'd like to see a car maker print more accurate data like I just gave example to.
I wish mazda would at least list torque. HP is meaningless!
The mack truck I drive at work (ch600) is only 427HP, but at the wheels at least 20 THOUSAND foot pounds of torque in 1st.
My 427HP Mack will pull 140k pounds. Your (2x + more HP) 1000 hp rotary 7 would blow up even trying.
Just once in my life I'd like to see a car maker print more accurate data like I just gave example to.
The mack truck I drive at work (ch600) is only 427HP, but at the wheels at least 20 THOUSAND foot pounds of torque in 1st.
My 427HP Mack will pull 140k pounds. Your (2x + more HP) 1000 hp rotary 7 would blow up even trying.
Just once in my life I'd like to see a car maker print more accurate data like I just gave example to.
Using your same logic. . .
you know that the wimpy little 787B with only has ~450ft. lbs. of torque. . .and I bet, going out on a limb here, that it might stand a chance against your mack truck at the track.
We're not talking about hauling (unless you mean hauling ***), that's why power is the relevant figure quoted.
My other car is a TVR
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
From: Calgary
You do know that hp and tq are related directly right?
Using your same logic. . .
you know that the wimpy little 787B with only has ~450ft. lbs. of torque. . .and I bet, going out on a limb here, that it might stand a chance against your mack truck at the track.
We're not talking about hauling (unless you mean hauling ***), that's why power is the relevant figure quoted.
Using your same logic. . .
you know that the wimpy little 787B with only has ~450ft. lbs. of torque. . .and I bet, going out on a limb here, that it might stand a chance against your mack truck at the track.
We're not talking about hauling (unless you mean hauling ***), that's why power is the relevant figure quoted.
My mack truck (139,700lbs GVW) will propell the weight of 30 rx-7's @ 1/3rd the speed.
If you do the math, the truck does more "work" yet has less HP when in fact HP is supposed to be a calculation of "work".
This is why I grasp hp=work, torque= twist but IRL sometimes it seems not to be so.
I need a new user title
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,646
Likes: 1
From: Yaizu, Japan
Ctrl is right. A lot of people misunderstand the relationship between horsepower and torque. I won't go into an in-depth explanation of why, but suffice it to say that torque is pretty much a meaningless number when comparing two cars. I'll post a link if someone really wants one.
My other car is a TVR
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
From: Calgary
Ctrl is right. A lot of people misunderstand the relationship between horsepower and torque. I won't go into an in-depth explanation of why, but suffice it to say that torque is pretty much a meaningless number when comparing two cars. I'll post a link if someone really wants one.
Originally Posted by Ctrl
I wish mazda would at least list torque. HP is meaningless!
The mack truck I drive at work (ch600) is only 427HP, but at the wheels at least 20 THOUSAND foot pounds of torque in 1st.
My 427HP Mack will pull 140k pounds. Your (2x + more HP) 1000 hp rotary 7 would blow up even trying.
Just once in my life I'd like to see a car maker print more accurate data like I just gave example to.
The mack truck I drive at work (ch600) is only 427HP, but at the wheels at least 20 THOUSAND foot pounds of torque in 1st.
My 427HP Mack will pull 140k pounds. Your (2x + more HP) 1000 hp rotary 7 would blow up even trying.
Just once in my life I'd like to see a car maker print more accurate data like I just gave example to.
Originally Posted by PercentSevenC
Ctrl is right. A lot of people misunderstand the relationship between horsepower and torque. I won't go into an in-depth explanation of why, but suffice it to say that torque is pretty much a meaningless number when comparing two cars. I'll post a link if someone really wants one.
Rotary Freak
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,402
Likes: 0
From: chandler, AZ
http://www.yawpower.com/tqvshp.html. The End.
My other car is a TVR
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
From: Calgary
Put it this way, if a genie popped out of a lamp and offered you either 100 lb's or 100hp at the flywheel but not both, which do you think would make you accelerate like a bat out of hell?
My point is this, if I were to build an engine torque is my objective, horsepower is an afterthought and the result of torque.
I'm not trying to split hairs here since you tend to get one providing the other, but rather I simply wish there was a better formula to truly express "power".