Posts by mellowtiger83

Frank Collins85 said:We've seen this exact debate pop up on various car forums countless times. It’s always the same pattern: some amateur tuner gets worked up, claiming their ride is suddenly a rocket ship just because they added 30 horsepower. Newsflash: it isn't. 🙂

Kyle Edwards5 said:There is absolutely no way they are equal. You've set them up with identical weight and an equally high-end suspension designed to tame their respective Newton meters just as effectively.
If we're talking about a classic naturally aspirated engine with more displacement than this 1.8 turbo—especially if there’s even a slight incline on the track—then maybe.

Kyle Edwards5 said:I will state that Audi will be faster; however, the exact degree of that advantage depends entirely on the track configuration. 😁

stormybadger8 said:No need for that. My vision is a bit blurry after quite a few Budweisers today.😁
Besides, just wait for Joe... he’ll listen to your little theory, then measure the horsepower, torque, acceleration, and so on just by listening to the engine, and then he'll explain what the actual reality is.😉

An interesting trick question, but I have an answer.
If Fernando Alonso drives both, both will be junk.☕
But regardless, Honda will be a bigger piece of junk than any other vehicle.😬
Therefore Honda will be slower.😉

Michael Diaz4 said:You clearly don't get it. There's an entire thread dedicated to horsepower and torque, so don't make me go over this AGAIN...
If the moderator moves these posts to the technical section, then we can provide a much more detailed explanation of what you failed to grasp and where exactly you're looking foolish...
No, the main thing is that you just constantly trash Sebastian Vettel regardless of what he's driving. Last year he had one of the best cars, and this year he's in something that's ALMOST the best...

stormybadger8 said:Read and listen to your own advice 😁

Roger Wright94 said:Power is power.
If it’s the same, it’s the same.
😵
Perhaps if you, mellowtiger83, put a bit more effort into writing this both technically correctly and with proper grammar.
It would be appreciated.

stormybadger8 said:Torque is damn important. If peak power hits at 12,000 RPM, that’s incredible—honestly, way better than having that same power sitting at 15,000 RPM...
for one very simple reason. In the real world of NASCAR, an engine peaking at 12,000 RPM is always going to be significantly more powerful than one peaking at 15,000.
That’s why a NASCAR car isn't running at 15,000 RPM throughout a single lap, nor even for 2% of it. If you actually bother to look at the telemetry on driver tracking, the RPMs peak around 13,000 to 14,000😉 , while they spend at least 30%, if not 50%, of the lap sitting between 10,000 and 12,000.
Furthermore, the setup with higher torque at lower RPMs is undoubtedly superior when accelerating out of a corner.

You can see this clearly in the gap between Williams and Ferrari. Ferrari might actually be faster over a solo lap, but if they're stuck behind a Williams, they’re stuck. The Williams just pulls away harder because its acceleration out of the turns is much better.
It doesn't even matter that Ferrari has practically the same top speed as Williams; the engines might be comparable in raw output... but the Williams reaches that top speed much faster than the Ferrari does.😉

Christian Harris11;54190156 said:It is quite simple. Engine power is measured using a dynamometer, which actually measures TORQUE. A basic setup would involve an electric brake motor where the stator sits on bearings, held by a single lever to prevent the engine being tested from spinning it. You measure the force required to hold that lever steady, multiply it by the length of the arm, and there you have it—the engine's torque in Nm. You can do this manually for various RPM ranges to find that equilibrium point... or, more realistically, a computer handles thousands of data points for you. In practice, the equipment is more sophisticated, but the principle remains the same.

Once you have that mountain of data, you apply the formula to every single point:

HP=(Nm * RPM)/5252

...and you generate the power curve. This is the graph everyone stares at and suffers through when buying a car, even though it tells you very little of substance, much like the peak numbers listed in the spec sheets, which are even less relevant.

On a related note, having an engine that produces the same horsepower at, say, 12,000 RPM versus 15,000 RPM is not the same thing. The former will have more torque, and regardless of how the transmission is tuned, it will always be the stronger unit. In the formula, every single RPM point matters significantly. While this might result in only a slight difference in peak figures, it provides a massive advantage on the track. Throw fuel flow restrictions per RPM range, varying turbo boost, and ERS systems into the mix—which you're constantly trying to balance to extract maximum performance without inducing wheelspin—and it becomes pure science fiction.
[/QUOT

If two engines deliver identical power, one at 12,000 RPM and the other at 15,000 RPM, they are equally fast; they just demand a different driving style. Power is power, and it is all about the curve.

Diesel engines generally produce the highest torque, but that doesn't make them the fastest. It simply means they have the raw strength needed to pull a heavy load—which explains why they are used for trucks. In a diesel, the mixture burns throughout the entire stroke toward TDC (top dead center), whereas in a gasoline engine, the mixture burns almost instantly.

Turbocharged engines generate higher torque because they pre-compress the air, leading to a more violent combustion of the mixture. Thus, higher torque.

Two-stroke engines also possess immense torque.

Having more torque does not inherently mean an engine is faster. Massive torque can actually be a liability in racing. We saw this during the turbo era of NASCAR, where cars struggled because the power wasn't delivered smoothly; instead, it arrived in uncontrollable surges of torque, which is the last thing a driver wants.

Therefore, if two engines share the same peak horsepower, they are equally fast, regardless of how much torque they develop at a specific RPM. They simply reach that power via different paths.

Power is the metric for the engine, not torque. Torque isn't "royal" power, and it depends on countless design factors: naturally aspirated, turbo, diesel, turbo-diesel, rotary, two-stroke, etc.
.

Consider this: a Ferrari V12 3500cc might have less torque than a Ford V8 3500cc. It has lower torque but higher peak power. You cannot conclude the Ford engine is slower just because its torque exceeds the Ferrari's. Theoretically, it is the opposite; the Ferrari engine is faster because it possesses more power (think Monza or Hockenheim), while the Ford engine is more versatile and operates across a broader RPM range.

So, power is one thing, and torque is another. Understood?

stormybadger8 said:Regrettably, third place...
Lewis Hamilton drove exactly what was required.
The issue is quite simple: to actually overtake a car with a Mercedes-Benz engine, you need a car that is roughly 1-2 seconds faster, otherwise your tires are completely shot within a lap or two.
He utilizes this perfectly by dictating the pace, knowing full well he can push whenever necessary...

I fear that, unfortunately, Kimi Räikkönen wasn't actually faster than Nico Rosberg, Sebastian Vettel, or Lewis Hamilton; rather, it was simply because Lewis Hamilton was playing the role of a Little train...

ruggedhawk20 said:I have never been one to care much about statistics

particularly those fast lap records—which are usually just the result of specific, fleeting circumstances

What actually matters to me is the average performance over 57 laps, not some single outlier lap. A fastest lap has never meant anything to me

Besides, if we're talking about extra points, they should go to the driver who secures Pole Position and the one who spends the most laps leading the race

Anthony Baker84 said:Just one potentially silly question—why didn't they switch Sebastian Vettel over to softs when he pitted for that front wing change?

Edward Howard2 said:The maestro takes a slap from Raikkonen in the mid-field. 😂🙏