That's fantastic and all, but in the end power is power and torque is torque. Two cars putting out different power/torque levels which are dynoed on the same dyno on the same day run on the same tracks... so on and so forth. It's the best comparo between two cars to discuss Bret's theory.
Didn't Bret say you had "experiences" you could share to back his theory? If so I'd like to read them instead of the soapbox stuff. What you've stated with the "same car/driver/track/road etc..." is all quite obvious. What else do you have?
Hook a brotha up?

Bret... asked question. Would like answer. Thanks.

 

I asked one as well????????

 

Yes I do, however Im trying to get my bastard child tuned port LT1 to run right so it can get painted while Im gone... I deploy in less than a week. I'll post it up in a bit here. Been waiting for almost a decade to do this... so it's kind of a priority to me right now

 

I'm not sure I see your question?
But that does play into my example. That was a best on 4.10's. Switched to 3.73 gears and ran 12.0 at 115.5.
So, hence my question... Do you have an answer?
And a 211/219 emissions legal cam which made 370rwhp and 355rwtq on a stock bottom end done over seven years ago. From that 12-sec list there are not a whole lot of stock block LT1 N/A combos going any faster it looks like. Especially using such a mild cam so I really don't understand your point. Are you one of those who believe having LT4 heads magically give you a great boost of power?
I really don't think you are at a place where you can bash other combos. Probably not your brightest move. Could we stick to the topic here regarding gearing/torque/power/rpm/faster please?

 

I'm kinda wondering if I then can pull that "variables" card that you and Bret seem to like so much.

 

Anyway.. here's my take. If what you say holds true then you would see astounding results by putting a diesel engine into a f-body.

 

Brian,

Oh jesus, you really don't get it! I guess you should look to swap in a 6.5L GM Diesel to get that hunk moving!

Your running a 211/219 cam, picked up with less gear and you wonder why I have told guys running LE3 cams in 350's that they need gear? (at least one of you nut swingers was asking about that)

I honestly don't care that you picked up from less gear, but how many guys with just bolt ons pick up going from 3.73's to 4.11's! A ****ING LOT!

Have you ever been to a local circle track? The motors out there most of the time have 2bbl carbs on them choking them off. It's a lot like stock class drag racing where you have limits on carbs and head volume to choke the motors off, well it is in terms of acceleration/setup they are very similar. The lap times and ET's of those cars will drop by putting more and more gear in them AND they regularly run the motor way over HP peak. For example some of the drag motors will peak at 6700rpm or less and they go thru the lights at over 8300rpm!, and the 2bbl circle track motors will make peak at 6200-6300rpm and the tell tale tach will say they hit 8300rpm during a race, oh and BTW WIN!

It's all about getting the most TQ to the tires and getting the car to accelerate quicker initially, even if it dies at the top end. If you get up to say 100mph and can't go faster but get to that speed 100ft from the corner/finish line then ya think that's going to be faster than just reaching 102mph at the corner/finish line?

What's your answer mullet boy?

Bret

 

hey hey hey now.........
you have to be more clear......

I build a class restricted car with a 305 ci in a 3rd gen with a quadrajet.....only ran 106 on the top end, and a 12.60......Who can tell me what that means?

I also ran a cam only LT1 stock heads and bottom end 119 mph......and when I say stock I mean from the factory.

Did another LT1 car cam only 116mph

None of them were race cars either they all drove to and from the track over an hour each way.....

Bottom line I is smart

 

According to you, yes.
Wasn't me.
That's fine, however your "but how many..." proves you are not correct in your theorizing.
After reading this I really don't think you have a grasp on the difference between hp and torque.... or maybe you just aren't explaining yourself correctly. Torque is nothing more than a static value. It is not what you see when a car moves. You aren't putting "more" torque to the wheels by merely installing gears. You are simply making the available power more useful given traction is not an issue. No matter what the given car will still have the same torque value no matter the leverage used.
I'll have to get with someone who knows a bit more about circle track cars than you or myself before I can answer what you've asked even though that scenario doesn't seem necessary to explain your theory. I've been told, however that NASCAR will gear a car to run at it's torque peak for best engine efficiency reasons, thus giving it the power to accellerate when need be.
I've always been told that power is what needs to be considered when studying straight line performance, which is what this is about, correct?

 

This isin't your mods Brian?

"Motor Lingenfelter/Accel 58mm throttle body Hooker 1 3/4" Super Competition long tube headers with 3" collectors, 3" to 3 1/2" Y-pipe into existing 3" SLP intermediate pipe. LPE LT4 ported heads LPE LT4 ported/portmatched intake Hardened pushrods and guideplates Compcams 1.6 Roller Rockers LPE/Accel cam 211/219@.050 lift, .533/.560 lift, 1.6RR's, with 112 lobe seperation. LT4 Timing chain Ported Mass Air Flow Sensor Ed "Fastchip" Wright dyno tune. Cooling fans relayed to a 2 speed switch. Stock Ignition Stock Fuel Pressure Suspension/Drivetrain Motive Genuine GM 4.10 gears 1LE Driveshaft BFG Drag Radials Bilstien Level II Susp (Bilstein shocks rear only/Eibach Springs all around) Koni 1 way adjustables front only Hotchkis control arms/panhard rod/strut tower brace "

Running a 12.12 @ 114.20 http://www.f-body.org/timeslips/display_more.cfm?id=449

Looks like that was you to me...... or where you reffering to the "nutswingers" comment... either way at least you come when your called. Good boy.

The rest of your post REALLY makes me laugh, you need to go argue with the "others" who don't get it on speedtalk.com. HP and TQ aren't the same thing? HP is just TQ relative to a RPM value, TQ which is WORK, TQ is relative to DISTANCE (revolutions) and TIME (minutes) = HP (aka POWER)


NASCAR guys and Pro Stock guys gear the car to go around the track fastest. In fact don't even run the motors at TQ peak, but well beyond.

Bret

 

It was in reference to your "nutswingers" reply. Sorry. Don't swing that way.

No they are not. I would hope you don't think they are. If so, I'd like to see what physics book you are reading from.
Interesting. Horsepower is a measure of work. Torque is a force applied to accomplish that meausure of work. Torque is not the motion of an object. It is a force applied to an object to move that given object. When you see something moving it's not torque that you see in motion. It's the power generated from a given force (or torque).
Another example.
You apply a given amount of pressure onto a torque wrench and hold it at a given pressure that is torque. If you move that torque wrench from one point to the next then that motion is power therefore hp and torque are not the same. You follow so far? I'd think someone of your caliber would've already studied on this elementary content.

I'm not sure there's any more need for me to reply. I've proven you to be incorrect w/ your original theory and now it would appear you are doing nothing more than trying to deflect from the original subject in the most sensationalistic, flamboyant way possible. However I am morbidly curious as to your reasoning behind this "breakthrough" information you are supplying. I still have yet to receive an acceptable answer as to why I was quicker and faster gearing down. Could you please explain rather than throw yet another scenario together? Thanks.

 

So can someone tell me how to get more torque? Or whatever I need to spin my tires...I can't spin them

I was told h.p. is how fast you hit the wall tq is how hard you hit the wall.......does that make sense?

 

LOL....yes it does kinda.

 

Gears... naturally. Gears give you "more torque," thus told by Bret. You put gears in you'll spin the tires "quicker everywhere..."
For at least the first 1.5 seconds.
Sure... well.. now that I'm being informed that TQ and HP are the same thing then maybe I'm lost. I don't know. I think I'm going to watch TV now.

 

Brian, Brian, Brian.......

Well you got one thing right, TQ is a FORCE.

How about we open up the online version of a Physics book:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horsepower



That's kind of hard to follow since to get HP you would have to relate that to TIME and DISTANCE. You didn't put those in there. You gave a undefined amount of distance "one point to the next" and no amount of time, so I (and a lot of others) would label what you did as WORK. Then again I guess you are speaking nutswinger again, so I guess I'm translating to the rest here.

This is why you use a dial type TQ wrench when building a engine to turn a motor over and see the maxium amount of TQ it takes to turn it over due to drag. You don't have a set distance in there other than the radians, which really is not set, or a set amount of time.... so that's not the amount of HP friction you get. It's the amount of friction you get in ft. lbs which last I checked was TQ.

Is that so?

I guess that's what happens in nutswinger dreamland (it is 5am), either way looking around the net a lot of guys wish you WOULDN'T respond.

Brian aka Tapdown, SS RRR, SS Junk

http://www.corvettekillstories.com/f...aded&pid=62871

Thanks Capitian Obvious


Average TQ at the tire over the 1/4 mile of your run was higher with the lower gear set, don't ask me why.... You do live in nutswingerville, could be weather, could be traction, could be driver etc... most times when you increase the final drive ratio the increase in multiplication gives you more average TQ at the tire. Do we have to explain how multiplication works now?



Since we can agree on one thing....

Notice that's a:

Force (Average TQ) x Distance (1/4mile) / Time (12.12sec) = Power (Average HP)

Force x Distance = WORK (the distance is always in some form of radians, a motor has to turn over to give you a TQ reading so it is traveling a distance, hence why I call it work. That might not be "proper" but for the average fornicator it seems to work, not so much for the substandard fornicators I guess )

Work / Time = Power

Better YET the textbook on TQ relative to HP is here



Now do you see how TQ and HP are related? To quote old blue eyes "ya can't have one without the other"

What we all want to do is increase the average TQ and decrease the time since our distances in racing are set. If we increase our average TQ then over a set distance the time will decrease and the net change will be a increase in average power. Problem for me is I need a timed distance to cover to get that average power.

Does this have to keep on contiuning now????? I did say that this would take forever already..... oh yeah post #100

Bret