Here I am

Competition 11.36 @ 120, #2 only and runs clean

Attention: TDR Forum Junkies
To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.

Thanks, TDR Staff

Competition First in the 8's! WOW GO BANKS GO!!!

Competition spec clutch

Dockboy said:
This is like argueing which came first, the chicken or the egg! :-{} :-laf



Torque is merely a function of where in the rpm range you make Horsepower ;)



Hint:



A Dynojet measures the Horsepower it takes to accelerate a known weight over a given period of time. It doesn't care about gearing or torque. Now, give that acceleration a corelation to rpm's (tach signal), and it will calculate the torque for you. ;)



So, the more Horsepower you make lower in the rpm range means more Torque and a faster initial acceleration. The more Horsepower you make in the upper rpm range means less Torque but a faster acceleration once moving. :D

torque is a measure of power per revolution-- that is why if an engine has a flat torque curve the horsepower climbs in a line with the rpms until the torque falls off

on the typical gasser horsepower peak is achieved about 1500 rpms after the torque peak. even though at the power peak there is less torque there is more power because of the more rpms: example 500ftlbs at 5000 is less power than 450ftlbs at 6500. another example 500ftlb at 5000rpm is double the hp that 500ftlbs at 2500rpm is. same torque or power per revolution, but double the revolutions. some people confuse the term torque with low end power, but it is only a measurement of power per revolution
 
If it were all based on horsepower then it would be completely irrelevant for engines like the Warsila-Sulzer to make almost 20 times more torque than it does horespower. It's something like 55,000 hp and almost a million ft lbs of torque at like 102 rpm. So what's moving the boat-----torque or horesepower? If you had an air tool that was rated at 20 hp and 1 ft lb of torque, would it break loose a bolt that was torqued to 15 ft lbs? What if it was a 1 hp air tool that made 20 ft lbs of torque? If I'm right, hp is a measure of rate and torque is a measure of amount. F1 engines make WAY less torque than they do hp but they rev to 20,000 rpm. The Audi R10s make less hp but more torque than the gassers they race against and not a single gasser could trump one all year even though the Audi is both heavier and longer than any of its competitors. It also revs out at a much lower rpm. What made the Audi so dominant----------hp or torque? Personally, I think diesels are making a full frontal assault on conventional wisdom in racing and "torque" is a word we'll be hearing a lot more about! ;)
 
EMD-Run8 said:
If it were all based on horsepower then it would be completely irrelevant for engines like the Warsila-Sulzer to make almost 20 times more torque than it does horespower. It's something like 55,000 hp and almost a million ft lbs of torque at like 102 rpm. So what's moving the boat-----torque or horesepower?



It's actually 2,831,960 ft/lbs of torque ;)



Again... ... ... ... ... ... ...





It's simple algebra!! :confused: T = HP * 5252 / RPM



http://www.metaris.com/hydCal/Torque.asp
 
Last edited by a moderator:
boat motors are camed to run at lower rpm with higher torque then a car motor. How do I know this? Two year ago bought a boat that needed alot of work and fixed it back up I researched this info because I had to rebuild a Ford 351 Windsor motor for it and at the time used a car motor till I got money to buy a new marine motor the car motor has to rev a full 1000rpm more to move the boat at the same speed do to torque value the prop need the torque of the motor to spin it with the force of the water on it. That is one reason volvo penta dual prop outdrive work so awesome the first prop help pick up water and feeds it to the main prop so the motor is using less energy to move the boat so it will run stronger and faster in the water then standard outdrive. Sorry long but to answer it is more torque to move the boat but horsepower and gearing play in there to.
 
torque is a measurement of twist or power per revolution---1ftlb is exactly the force of 1lb of weight at 1ft of leverage--what moves a car or boat is power, torque and horsepower are means of measuring it. at any specific rpm, the engine with the highest torque also has the highest hp. i suspect that the audi race car wins not because it has more torque, but because it has the highest average hp in its rpm range. peak numbers only win on dyno sheets, highest average hp wins races.
 
Torque is momentary power.

As soon as you add time you´re talking HP



And the Audi won because they didn´t have to fill her up as many times!
 
That's incorrect. Audi was the fastest car on the track at practically every race. In fact, it was faster at LeMans than the R8 it replaced while simultaneously using less fuel. It beat the track record at Sebring by two seconds. If horsepower is the king then how did this car beat everyone so bad? It is longer, heavier, revs less, and makes LESS hp than the cars it runs against. I'm saying torque is the key. I don't see a pro horsepower argument made yet that makes the Audi's case. The R10 even uses a 5spd box compared to its competitor's 6 speeds. I don't see horsepower making this car so dominant when its competitor's weighed less AND made more hp than it did! Some of the cars even rev'd to twice the rpm of the Audi and yet the Audi could pull any of them off the turns. It's torque man!
 
A little history for your thinking. Enjoy ;)



The word horsepower was introduced by James Watt, the inventor of the steam engine in about 1775. Watt learned that "a strong horse could lift 150 pounds a height of 220 feet in 1 minute. " One horsepower is also commonly expressed as 550 pounds one foot in one second or 33,000 pounds one foot in one minute. These are just different ways of saying the same thing. Notice these definitions includes force (pounds), distance (feet), and time, (minute, second). A horse could hold weight in a static position but this would not be considered horsepower, it would be similar to what we call torque. Adding time and distance to a static force (or to torque) results in horsepower. RPM, revolutions (distance) per minute (time), is today's equivalent of time and distance. Back to horses, imagine a horse raising coal out of a coal mine. A horse exerting one horsepower could raise 550 pounds of coal one foot every second.



Here is an example of another way horsepower could be directly measured. Say you have a horse hitched to a plow. In the hitch is a spring scale (like a fish scale). The horse pulls the plow one foot every second and you see 550 pounds on the scale. That horse would be generating one horsepower.



We see horsepower can be directly measured. However there is a problem directly measuring horsepower of modern day internal combustion engines because they produce rotary motion not linear motion, and unless the engine is geared down, the speed at which they do work (time and distance or RPM) is too great for practical direct measurement of horsepower. It seems logical then that the solution was to directly measure torque (rotational force eventually expressed in pounds at one foot radius) and RPM (time and distance, i. e. distance in circumference at the one foot radius) and from these calculate horsepower. Torque and RPM are easily measured directly. Early dynamometers used a brake device to load the engine. A torque arm was attached to this brake's stator. The brake's rotor was coupled to the engine's crankshaft. A spring scale or other measuring device connected the torque arm to the stationary fixture holding the engine and brake. During a test the brake's application loaded the engine. Torque and engine rpm were observed and recorded. Click here for a description of how this happens on our dyno.



On modern day dynamometers horsepower is a calculated value. It's important to remember the dyno measures torque and rpm and then from these calculates horsepower. On the dyno it takes more water flow to the water brake to increase the load on the engine being tested. As the test engine's torque rises more water flow is needed. As the test engine's torque drops less water flow is needed. The dyno's water brake does not respond to Horsepower. Major adjustments to water flow are needed as an engine crosses its torque peak but none are needed as it crosses its horsepower peak. In other words the water flow to the brake during a dyno test follows the engines torque curve and not its horsepower curve. Torque is what twists the tire, prop, or pump. Horsepower helps us understand an amount or quantity of torque. (Torque + time and distance)



Now if we are measuring torque and RPM how can we calculate horsepower? Where does the equation HP=TORQUE * RPM / 5252 come from? We will use Watts observation of one horsepower as 150 pounds, 220 feet in one minute. First we need express 150 pounds of force as foot pounds torque.



Pretend the force of 150 pounds is "applied" tangentially to a one foot radius circle. This would be 150 foot pounds torque.

Next we need to express 220 feet in one minute as RPM.



The circumference of a one foot radius circle is 6. 283186 feet. ft. (Pi x diameter 3. 141593 * 2 feet)

The distance of 220 feet, divided by 6. 283185 feet, gives us a RPM of 35. 014.

We are then talking about 150 pounds of force (150 foot pounds torque), 35 RPM, and one horsepower.



Constant (X) = 150 ft. lbs. * 35. 014 RPM / 1hp



35. 014 * 150 / 1 = 5252. 1



5252 is the constant.



So then hp = torque * RPM / 5252





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Here is another way; Remember we know 150 foot pounds and 35. 014 RPM = one horsepower



1hp is to 150 ft. lbs. * 35. 014 RPM as X hp is to observed ft. lbs. torque * observed RPM



Example; We dyno test and observe 400 ft. lbs. torque at 5000 RPM



1 hp is to 150 ft. lbs. * 35. 014 RPM as X hp is to 400 ft. lbs. * 5000 RPM



When we cross multiply X hp * (150 ft. lbs. * 35. 014 RPM) = 1hp * (400 ft. lbs. * 5000 RPM)



X hp * (5252 ft. lbs. RPM) = 1 hp * (2,000,000 ft. lbs. RPM)



Divide both sides by 5252 ft. lbs. RPM



X hp = 1 hp * 380. 80



X hp = 380. 80 hp



Horsepower = torque x rpm / 5252



Here's an interesting bit of trivia; below 5252 rpm any engine's torque number will always be higher than its horsepower number, and above 5252 rpm any engine's horsepower number will always be higher than its torque number. At 5252 rpm the horsepower and torque numbers will be exactly the same.
 
Anyway, I forgot to say that an 11. 36 is a d*#@ impressive 1/4 mile time for #2 only! When a guy makes a run like that on fuel only-------Oh yeah! That's good tuning work.
 
EMD-Run8 said:
When the Audi R10 made its debut at the Sebring 12 hour, one announcer asked Dorsey Schroeder which he would prefer in a race car----torque or horsepower. His answer---"Torque every time. Its what gets you off the turns". ...



To bring this back to drag racing, Gary Scelzi , at the Hayes Mopar drag races at Atlanta in September, 2006 while Jeremy Hayes had him on the mic in the tower, said it's torque that gets you down the 1/4 mile.
 
take two exact same trucks... equal weight, etc.



one has 450hp/1000tq



the other has 550hp/900tq



with both trucks dialed in to the nth degree (torque converter set up perfect, shift points set to maximize the powerband, etc. ) the 550hp truck is gonna drag the 450hp truck down the track every time



we have MORE than enough torque with these engines... focus on horsepower if you want to win at the strip
 
I'd say that's right, but torque can't be considered irrelevant. How else does a 6500 pound truck get down the 1/4 in 11. 36? It takes torque to move that kind of weight that quickly. If it was hp, you could put a Renault V10 F1 engine (because it makes more hp) in it and do something very similar. Am I right or wrong? Forgive me. I'm NOT a very experienced racer, engine builder or whatever but I'm scratchin my head here a little. It seems to me that the main thing with diesels is their TORQUE advantage. It sure as heck ain't rpm's! No gasser engine could turn 4500 rpm and get down the 1/4 that quick in a 6500lb truck right?
 
Here's a little more trivia:



The linear equivalent formula for the familar HP = (Torque x RPM) / 5252 is:



HP = (P x L x A x N) / 33000



Where:



P = mean effective pressure on the piston crown during the power stroke (in psi)



L = length of stroke (in feet)



A = area of piston crown (in square inches)



N = total number of power strokes/minute (for a 4-cycle engine, this is equal to RPM/2 times the number of cylinders)



Notice that torque in the rotational equation becomes a function of (P x L x A) in the linear equation, but for a given engine, L and A are constants. Therefore, BMEP or IMEP is a key variable that engine designers utilize to compare the internal loading on engines of various sizes and numbers of cylinders - a 150 BMEP industrial diesel engine is very conservatively loaded, whereas a 250 BMEP diesel engine is somewhat more of a "hot rod". In stock configuration, my 245 BHP/505 lb-ft 2002 Cummins HO was approximately a 200 BMEP engine at 2700 RPM, or peak BHP rating.



Also, the mysterious 5252 constant in the rotational equation is simply 33000 lb-ft/minute (the definition of 1 hp) divided by 2 x pi radians per revolution.



Rusty
 
Last edited:
Like I said earlier, it looks to me that the very nature of how a diesel makes power is turning the conventional wisdom of many different forms of motor competition on its head. I used the Audi R10 as an example because it took the idea of what a race car "should" be and smacked a whole bunch of people in the face. I wasn't really keepin' up with the early days of diesel drags but I'll bet there were a whole lot of laughs and snickers from people who aren't laughing any more! Show me a gasser that makes nearly twice as much torque as it does hp. The list is very short! I'm sure a lot of people said that a 500+ hp Cummins making 900+ ft lbs of torque but only rev'd to a little over 4000 rpms would never move a 6500 lb truck down the 1/4 the way its being done today! When Audi debuted at Sebring, you could hear the muted sarcasm of the announcers. People were quoted as saying the car wouldn't make the grade. There WERE a lot of doubters! Now they're crying about an unfair advantage over a car that is longer, heavier, makes less hp and revs out at less than 6,000 rpm. Not to mention it was undefeated in its debut year-----never been done before! Now, they're even talking about the idea of using a diesel in a MotoGP bike! You drag guys (and gals) I think really started the whole thing here and we will see the fruits of it for a very long time. ;)
 
Last edited:
We went playing a few weeks ago at the track and blew one of the slicks on a launch. Threw the street tires on it and put me behind the wheel.



My second run was a 12. 83 with the back end sliding over about a foot each time I shifted it. COuld have gotten a better time, but they shut the track down due to fog. You could barely see the lighted scoreboard at the end of the track.



This truck can run 10's with more fuel, and possibly adding nitrous. Still using the stock block with almost 220,000 miles on it.
 
Back
Top