Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion Automotive news and discussion about upcoming vehicles

Since Ford F-150 is now last in V8 HP/tq, why don't they make the 6.8L V10 an option?

Old Mar 21, 2007 | 01:58 PM
  #91  
90rocz's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,947
From: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Originally Posted by rlchv70:
You can't have 300hp and 300 lbft at both 3000rpm and 6000 rpm.

300 lbft @ 3000rpm = 171 hp.

300 lbft @ 6000rpm = 343 hp.

hp = torque * rpm / 5252.
I know they cross @ 5252, I just tried to pick numbers that would make the math simpler.
Power is also;
Power (hp) = Force (lb) * Velocity (MPH) / 374
I guess I was trying to see if that "power" increased, not horsepower?...since I'm not an engineer, but I can go through the math and see what it tells me.
Old Mar 21, 2007 | 02:25 PM
  #92  
90rocz's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,947
From: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
I found some interesting tid-bits on this:....
Horsepower and Torque
by Matthew Kramer :
Take two engines, one that develops 220ft-lbs from 3,000 RPM to 6,000 RPM and one that only holds its 220ft-lbs of torque from 4,000 RPM to 5,500 RPM. Beyond those ranges, both engines fall off quickly. While they have the same torque from 4,000 RPM to 5,500 RPM (meaning they will accelerate at the same rate then), from 3,000 to 4,000 RPM and 5,500 to 6,000 RPM the first engine has more torque and will therefor accelerate faster. In a race that takes each engine from 2,000 RPM to 6,500 RPM, the first will clearly win, despite the fact both owners can boast about having 220ft-lbs of torque.


Once again, though, it needs to be noted that a car's quoted power is at one specific place in the engine's range of operation. Let's say it takes a certain car 160HP to go 120mph and 200HP to go 150mph. The manufacturer claims the car makes over 200HP at 6,500 RPM. As luck would have it, this car's gearing is set up so that it travels 150mph at 6,500 RPM, which would lead one to believe that this car can do 150MPH, since it has enough HP to reach that speed. However, through lack of engineering, the gearing is setup so that the engine runs at 4,000 RPM at 120mph, and it is only capable of 150HP at 4,000 RPM. The car could never hit 150mph, because it doesn't have the power in the right place to climb pass 120mph.
As RPMs get higher, there is less torque for a given amount of power. For example, compare two engines that make 250HP at their peaks. The first peaks at 5,000 RPM, the second at 7,000 RPM. At the time the first engine is making its peak horsepower, it will be making 263ft-lbs of torque. Where at its power peak, the second engine only makes 188ft-lbs of torque. Even though both engines boast the same peak power, the first is going to have higher torque the majority of its power band, meaning quicker acceleration. This is complicated some by gearing, though, as the second engine has a much longer range of operation before it needs to shift to a slower gear.
Conclusion:

A car's performance isn't as cut and dry as simple peak horsepower and torque statistics. It's mainly a result of the area under an engine's torque curve, a car's weight, and its gearing. Horsepower, it turns out, is really only useful as an indicator of a car's top speed. However, because of the relationship between torque and power, horsepower can also be used as an indicator of the engine's torque band. In the real world, though, the best way to figure out a car's performance is to drive it, or read results from others who have driven it.
Old Mar 21, 2007 | 03:41 PM
  #93  
muckz's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,402
From: Toronto, ON Canada
The above post explains why a 3500 lbs AWD Audi A4 with a 2.0L turbo 4 engine producing 200 HP is capable of low 15 sec quater mile (actually, some have done even 14.9 @ 94 mph).

Quite mindboggling, as my car (V8, 300 HP, 295 lb-ft of torque, 4000 lbs) does the quater mile in 15.0 (wish it was faster), with nearly 50% more HP and torque.

A simple look at the torque curve of the 2.0T engine reveals that it has a flat curve, delivering 100% of its torque from 1850 RPM to 5500 RPM. I'm sure my torque, being in a naturally aspirated engine, starts off low, peaks at 3500 - 4000 rpm, then dips again.
Old Mar 21, 2007 | 05:14 PM
  #94  
Eric Bryant's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,400
From: Michigan's left coast
If only more sources were available for thrust graphs (like some of the motorcycle magazines publish). That takes everything and distills it down to the only thing that matters - how much accelerative force is available at the drive wheels throughout the vehicle's speed range. Alas, we must usually deal only with peak power and torque numbers, which are pretty much useless in and of themselves.
Old Mar 22, 2007 | 02:24 PM
  #95  
Ken S's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 1999
Posts: 2,368
From: OR
Originally Posted by Eric Bryant
If only more sources were available for thrust graphs (like some of the motorcycle magazines publish). That takes everything and distills it down to the only thing that matters - how much accelerative force is available at the drive wheels throughout the vehicle's speed range. Alas, we must usually deal only with peak power and torque numbers, which are pretty much useless in and of themselves.
Yup.. not to mention the factor of how aggressive the powertrain management will allow the trans to kick up and down, and the throttle and engine to be set for full acceleration, in real life scenarios..
Old Mar 26, 2007 | 02:15 PM
  #96  
SSCamaro99_3's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,179
From: Ballwin, MO
Originally Posted by Bob Cosby
Speaking of N/A mod motor HP....good friend of mine runs a stock bore 5.4L 4V in his N/A 97 Cobra. Spins it to ~8500 rpm, makes in excess of 700 HP, and runs 9.3s @ 140+ mph at ~3200 lbs. If you know anything about the 5.4....imagine the piston speed at that kind of rpm. Ouch!!

Bob


My biggest complaint of the Mod motors is physical size, and the fact that all the rpm capibilty of an OHC setup seems to be negated (in stock applications) by the undersquare dimension.
Old Mar 26, 2007 | 04:42 PM
  #97  
bossco's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,977
From: SeVa
You mean that really long stroke negates the RPM potential of the mod motors, the 4v heads flow plenty of air for a 330 CI motor. Oversquare, Undersquare, or Square is not to big a deal - being oversquare helps mind you.
Old Mar 26, 2007 | 04:44 PM
  #98  
Bob Cosby's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 3,252
From: Knoxville, TN
My single biggest complaint is indeed size and weight. Would be nice if they could be bored (easily) too.

Bob
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
F'n1996Z28SS
Cars For Sale
8
Aug 23, 2023 11:19 PM
dbusch22
Forced Induction
6
Oct 31, 2016 11:09 AM
ChrisFrez
CamaroZ28.Com Podcast
2
Dec 7, 2014 06:01 PM
NewsBot
2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia
0
Dec 3, 2014 12:30 PM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:44 AM.