Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 14:16:42 -0000 From: "Paul J Johnson" <pauljnopsam.mersinet.co.uk> Subject: Re: torque vs. horsepower
Roy Björkstrand wrote in message <36CD4E50.69BE3AFEnopsamut.fi>... > > >Julian Sweet wrote: > >> Could someone give me a technical, yet concise explanation as to why >> torque is responsible for acceleration and horsepower for top speed? I >> understand that torque is a rotational force and horsepower is power -- >> but explain the connection please.... <<SNIP>> >It is not easy to explain what I´m meaning. I bet you can find some >litterature about engines and what kind of demands there are for the >transmission ratios. For every car you can draw a "drivepowergraph" (I >don´t know what it is in english). It contains graphs about the power >engine can create on wheels on every gear. There are also graphs for all >resistances (air, wheels, friction...). From combination of graphs you can >estimate the top speed and how does your transmission ratios work (+some >more). I think that that graph and some additional meterial about the >definitions of power and torque could answer your question more thoroughly. > >Roy > >PS. I know that this was not a sientifically bullet proof explanation. > Getting back to Saabs, it has been said that the 8v B201 engine is more 'torquey' and 'responsive' than the 16v B202 (I'm thinking about classic 900 turbos here) at the expense of a lower top end. Considering the engines are pretty much the same apart from the head, why do 16v engines differ in this way from 8 valvers? Is it simply a bigger overall valve area? Or is it the different drivetrain gearing on the 16/8v cars? P.J.J.J.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
