HP vs TORQUE? What's better??

I've heard very often on the forums that us mustang guys love torque. I've also heard that torque is what gets the car up and going out of the hole and it's derived from hp. But that's all I know, and don't understand the true difference. Oink's car has over 500 hp and about 800 or 900 tq, does he lose anything with so much torque and not enough hp. And Chris95SVT has about the same amount of both, why? If anyone would be so bad ass as to explain this to me, I'd really appreciate it. :flag:
 
"Let's say you have 380 ft/lbs of tq possible in the REAL world. Intake "X" makes it at 4000 RPM and intake "Y" makes it at 3000 RPM. We are talking the EXACT same TQ. Follow this.
380 X 3000/5252 = 217.06hp
380 X 4000/5252 = 289.41hp"

-quoted from Jay Allen


This is a set formula. You take your torque and multiply it by the rpm you make it at and divide by 5252. That will give you your horsepower. Now this goes with the argument of guys saying the Performer is best, or the RPM, or Street heat vs. Track heat. They all make the same torque, but the smaller intakes make it at a lower rpm but they give up horsepower on the big end. Now design a cam to go along with a 5-speed and 3.73's in the back and those big intakes should work great especially since you dont race below 4000 rpms where it matters what power you have. Guys say that they want that massive power down low for daily drivers, thats personal preference to me, but either way, the car wont be slow.

Now, i too am just getting started on learning this stuff so hopefully other guys can say what the difference is in terms of how the engine makes each one.
 
lol, man i wish my car made 800-900tq
its around 700ish now

Torque you can defintaly feel.. feel it as in the front end coming up on ya, when you nail it.. Ide probably vote for a torquey motor over a high HP motor for a street car...

Good example, (well maybe not the best)
Toyota Supras.. They all make crazy HP, but what are they making for torque? I dont have a clue, but i bet its not a whole lot, when compared to there HP.
They are great for high speed pursuits, but not so fast from light to light, or at the track ( most of them, not all)
 
Oooh, my favorite topic. You can't say which is better and be universally correct. It depends on too many factors to just say which is better. I'd say lots of torque is more fun though. If this topic goes further I'm always willing to put in my technical opinion :D
 
Torque is what throws you into your seat, and horsepower is how fast your engine can produce the torque to do just that. Simple explanation really, there's no comparison. The perfect car would have an abundance of both, and a hot chick in the passenger seat, maybe leaning over the console......
 
One more comparison I read somewhere....

Torque #'s tell you how much work an engine is capable of doing.
Horsepower #'s tell you how fast the engine is capable of doing that work.

which is better , your left nut or your right nut. Thats an equivilance to me ?
:lol: That's a good comparison.......you don't want one without the other! :D

Look at the specs for a Honda S2000 if you want an example of that;
240 Hp @ 8300 RPM :nice:
153 lb/ft Q at 7500 RPM :notnice:

Cheers
 
Or an Indy car: 900hp, 300 ft-lbs of torque :)

It's ALL in the gearing!! Think about it and you'll realize the speed/hp relationship. If you want to go fast, you need big tractive effort for as long as possible.
 
Zero Signal said:
Or an Indy car: 900hp, 300 ft-lbs of torque :)

It's ALL in the gearing!! Think about it and you'll realize the speed/hp relationship. If you want to go fast, you need big tractive effort for as long as possible.


what's tractive effort?
 
Pushrod said:
what's tractive effort?

Oh man, this post is making John sway back and forth in his chair. :rlaugh:

Here is the short & simple answer. Your engine produces torque. It produces a different amount of torque at each and every RPM.

Horsepower is the "work" done by the motor. It is derived from torque. From math class, "horsepower is a function of torque". A dyno measured torque, and uses those measurements to calculate horsepower.

When someone says their car puts out 285 ft/lbs of PEAK torque, and 215 PEAK HP, what you can INFER is that the car has a lot of LOW-MID range power, but the High range power is minimal. This is the case for the stock 5.0L. You need to shift very early (5000 rpm's). The torque shoots up at 2000 rpm's, and stays high until 3800 rpm's. After 3800, it falls VERY FAST.

So that means that at "lower" RPM's, you have a lot of power, but at "higher" RPM's, your power falls off. This is the conception that our cars are "torquey", or have great "low-end" power. The low-end refers to the fact that in the lower rpm range, you have lots of power.

So, then you look at a LS1, which has over ~320tq (guess, not correct), and ~320 hp. From this, You might think that the car has an even amount of power throughout the powerband. It's peak HP is close to it's peak torque. This probably means the torque curve is very flat, and stays that way until after 6000 rpm's. It's true. They have great low, mid, and high end power.

What makes the LS1 a much faster car than ours, it's the fact that they have high end power. Because they can stay in each gear until 6000+ rpm's, they can take advantage of each gear much more than we can.

Now, you take the 1999/2001 Cobra's. They put down about the same peak numbers as the LS1, but here is the catch. They have much greater high end power. They can take their motors all the way to 7000 rpm's. This means they can take an even greater advantage of gearing.

Thus, the 1999/2001 cobra's have a better "drag strip" motors. When you drag, you only see the lower section of your RPM's for a brief moment (1st gear for the launch). After that, it's all in the upper rpm's. Low/mid range torque will not help you at the track (realistically). It's all about the high range power.

Just to cover it, Horsepower is a very misused term, and can make things very confusing. Secondly, using peak numbers to describe a motors performance is absolutely rediculous. The real way to determine a motors power is to look at the torque numbers for the entire RPM range. Then, you can determine if the car has a low, mid, or high range of power.

If you know what you are looking at, you can use horsepower to get a good idea of the car's potential. But you really need to realize what the HP curve is telling you. If you just go straight to the peak HP point, and say the car has XXX HP, you will be extremely wrong.

The perfect, or ideal motor, would be one that produces the same amount of torque, for the entire RPM range. It's impossible, but a few motors get close. The 2003/2004 cobra motor is very close. The car puts out 400 ft-lbs of torque at 2000 rpm's, and it stays there until redline. This then defines the motor as having EQUAL low/mid/high range power.

For a more detailed explaination, go here.
Scott
 
The perfect, or ideal motor, would be one that produces the same amount of torque, for the entire RPM range. It's impossible, but a few motors get close. The 2003/2004 cobra motor is very close. The car puts out 400 ft-lbs of torque at 2000 rpm's, and it stays there until redline. This then defines the motor as having EQUAL low/mid/high range power.

Great reply,you summed it up perfectly. :nice:

Its not impossible,you just need $3700 for a whipple :D :p
458hp w/480ftpnds with a big fat curve is really fun on the street. :D
 
Nice post Scott!

A dyno measured torque, and uses those measurements to calculate horsepower.

Well technically it measures tractive effort and derives the torque from that. :D Just giving you a hard time!


So repeating what Scott said, but worded a little different: A high HP rating tends to imply that the torque extends all the way up into the high rpm range; which, implies that you can stay in the lower gear for much longer. Staying in the lower gear means you have more tractive effort for more time.

For simplicity, say my car has 275 lb-ft at the motor and a 9:1 total gear ratio. This means I have 2475 lb-ft of torque at the rear axle. Divide by the radius of the tire (say 11 inches or .9 ft.) and you get 2750 lbs of tractive effort (force pushing the car).

Now say Mr.RX8 has 160 lb-ft of torque at the motor and a 16:1 total gear ratio (1st 3.76:1, rearend 4.30:1). Do the same calc and you find he has 2844 lbs of tractive effort! Ooooh the magic of gearing (and HP). Not to mention that car weighs like 400 lbs less than mine and is alittle more aerodynamic so he'll finish alittle over 1/2s before me.

That's why you see alot of guys going with high-rpm setups for their stangs and lots of centrifugal blowers over KB's. They can just build the motor to spin, then, gear down like mad and you have yourself a screamer.

Then it comes down to the indy car vs. Mac truck analogy. The truck will have more tractive effort, but becuase of the narrow, low rpm power band (and weight of course), you'd only see that force for a brief moment before you have to shift. And every time you shift, the tractive effort goes down while the indy car is still in the lower gear pulling hard becuase it has lots of rpm headroom.
I still want a KB tho :D