To rev or to torque???

Scotsman · 05-31-2008, 05:09 PM

I drove the 135i again and this time it wasn't as much fun... I think it's down to the loss of sensation of speed, you feel it's fast but it's so incredibly smooth it feels slightly detached. Driving the non-turbo charged model you get to wring the engine out more as it likes to rev in the upper end of the rpm band. For some reason I like the ability to rev the engine more than I like just having a bunch of artificially aspirated torque under my right foot. I'm sure with the Camaro V8 I'll be able to do all the engine straining I want but still having the naturally aspirated power too.

TFord · 06-01-2008, 01:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scotsman

artificially aspirated torque

this my friend gets quote of the day! For me its gotta have torque, just dosent feel like a real car without it. my buddy has some CLR??? AMG coupe I never even felt the thing shift. Its fast but not fun. those cars tend to be in the upper rpm levels, so wouldent that hurt gas mileage??? (not a import car guy) I know I can cruse at 65 mph and be at less than 2K rpm.

Scotsman · 06-01-2008, 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TFord

this my friend gets quote of the day! For me its gotta have torque, just dosent feel like a real car without it. my buddy has some CLR??? AMG coupe I never even felt the thing shift. Its fast but not fun. those cars tend to be in the upper rpm levels, so wouldent that hurt gas mileage??? (not a import car guy) I know I can cruse at 65 mph and be at less than 2K rpm.

It would hurt gas mileage because you have to accelerate harder to get the car moving.

TFord · 06-01-2008, 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scotsman

It would hurt gas mileage because you have to accelerate harder to get the car moving.

I guess that there answers the question TORQUE!

camaro5 · 06-01-2008, 02:14 AM

I'm staying with Chevy for torque. The Infiniti G37 is lacking low-end torque: 330 horsepower and 270 lb-ft of torque-and that's about all it's lacking. But it just doesn't have that instant hit of 400lbs/ft of torque.

Even the new BMW M3 with V8 engine is lacking torque:

420 horsepower/ 295 lb-ft at 3900 rpm, 8400 rpm max engine speed

Sterling · 06-01-2008, 06:45 AM

In my mind, there is no replacement for low end torque.

*CamaroSpike23* · 06-01-2008, 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sterlingnotes

In my mind, there is no replacement for low end torque.

how would you know.... you drive a civic...

jk.

seriously tho, you want a torque motor? drive an LT1 Camaro. the dyno curve...isnt a curve. it spikes at 1800 rpms and stays flat all the way up to 5500

Scotsman · 06-01-2008, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23

seriously tho, you want a torque motor? drive an LT1 Camaro. the dyno curve...isnt a curve. it spikes at 1800 rpms and stays flat all the way up to 5500

Wow! Must be hard to drive smoothly?

*DGthe3* · 06-01-2008, 11:25 PM

Torque for me. I started a similar thread a few months ago, but they are different enough.

I've thought about this often enough and I always come to the same conclusion. For the same power, more torque is better than more rpm. The engine has more power availible at any speed, hp=tq*rpm/5252. So a high reving engine gets its power from revs, thereby losing some of its low and mid range power. A torquey motor will still build power as you go through the rpms, but it will have alot more at 3k than a screamer will have at 4k.
Add to it the fact that the higher the rpms, the faster things break. And if they don't break faster they are an awful lot more expensive.

My thoughts are summed up by a quote that I've heard was made in a magazine about the corvette in the mid 80's. Any corner, any gear, any time. Or words to that effect.

Scotsman · 06-01-2008, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Torque for me. I started a similar thread a few months ago, but they are different enough.

I've thought about this often enough and I always come to the same conclusion. For the same power, more torque is better than more rpm. The engine has more power availible at any speed, hp=tq*rpm/5252. So a high reving engine gets its power from revs, thereby losing some of its low and mid range power. A torquey motor will still build power as you go through the rpms, but it will have alot more at 3k than a screamer will have at 4k.
Add to it the fact that the higher the rpms, the faster things break. And if they don't break faster they are an awful lot more expensive.

My thoughts are summed up by a quote that I've heard was made in a magazine about the corvette in the mid 80's. Any corner, any gear, any time. Or words to that effect.

I agree with you completely. In this specific instance however, great the N54 bi turbo inline six may be it's simply too smooth too feel like a serious performance engine should.

Rock36 · 06-02-2008, 03:27 AM

Just so eveyone knows the 135i and 335i make its max torque of 300ft-lbs from 1400-5000 rpm. That is a very broad and flat torque curve.

If making max torque at a rediculously low 1400 rpm isn't enough, then I think the issue is that 300ft-lbs isn't enough or that it is just too smooth for you.

Rock36 · 06-02-2008, 05:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Torque for me. I started a similar thread a few months ago, but they are different enough.

I've thought about this often enough and I always come to the same conclusion. For the same power, more torque is better than more rpm. The engine has more power availible at any speed, hp=tq*rpm/5252. So a high reving engine gets its power from revs, thereby losing some of its low and mid range power. A torquey motor will still build power as you go through the rpms, but it will have alot more at 3k than a screamer will have at 4k.
Add to it the fact that the higher the rpms, the faster things break. And if they don't break faster they are an awful lot more expensive.

My thoughts are summed up by a quote that I've heard was made in a magazine about the corvette in the mid 80's. Any corner, any gear, any time. Or words to that effect.

I agree for the most part too, but there is another quote/concept that is pretty valid. You want an engine to be torquey because that means basically more power, but....

"It is better to make torque at high rpm, because you can take advantage of gearing."

This is from a Corvette forum (thus has credibility as a GM site LOL), and I recommend this reading to anyone who is into cars and racing.

http://www.vettenet.org/torquehp.html

It does an awesome job describing why a LT1 vette is faster and more powerful than an L98 vette eventhough both engines make a rated 340 ft-lbs of torque.

So really the answer to the question....to rev or to torque? Both

05-31-2008, 05:09 PM	#1
Scotsman Auto Pilot Drives: Gunmetal Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: L.A. Posts: 1,307	To rev or to torque??? I drove the 135i again and this time it wasn't as much fun... I think it's down to the loss of sensation of speed, you feel it's fast but it's so incredibly smooth it feels slightly detached. Driving the non-turbo charged model you get to wring the engine out more as it likes to rev in the upper end of the rpm band. For some reason I like the ability to rev the engine more than I like just having a bunch of artificially aspirated torque under my right foot. I'm sure with the Camaro V8 I'll be able to do all the engine straining I want but still having the naturally aspirated power too. __________________ "Let the rest of the world dream of Ferraris, Lamborghinis and dinky little British two-seaters. In this country speed doesn't look like that." Got SS?

06-01-2008, 02:14 AM	#5
camaro5 Drives: X-15 Velocipede Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: SW Florida Posts: 4,630	I'm staying with Chevy for torque. The Infiniti G37 is lacking low-end torque: 330 horsepower and 270 lb-ft of torque-and that's about all it's lacking. But it just doesn't have that instant hit of 400lbs/ft of torque. Even the new BMW M3 with V8 engine is lacking torque: 420 horsepower/ 295 lb-ft at 3900 rpm, 8400 rpm max engine speed __________________ Go from the presence of a foolish man, when thou perceivest not in him the lips of knowledge General Motors ASEP, A.S. Automotive Technology, Telecommunications Specialist, CISCO Network Engineer STANDARD DISCLAIMER camaro5 is furnishing this information "as is". camaro5 does not provide any warranty of the information whatsoever, whether express, implied, or statutory, including, but not limited to, any warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose or any warranty that the contents of the information will be error-free.

06-01-2008, 11:25 PM	#9
DGthe3 Moderator.ca Drives: 05 Grand Am GT Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Niagara, Canada Posts: 25,366	Torque for me. I started a similar thread a few months ago, but they are different enough. I've thought about this often enough and I always come to the same conclusion. For the same power, more torque is better than more rpm. The engine has more power availible at any speed, hp=tqrpm/5252. So a high reving engine gets its power from revs, thereby losing some of its low and mid range power. A torquey motor will still build power as you go through the rpms, but it will have alot more at 3k than a screamer will have at 4k. Add to it the fact that the higher the rpms, the faster things break. And if they don't break faster they are an awful lot more expensive. My thoughts are summed up by a quote that I've heard was made in a magazine about the corvette in the mid 80's. Any corner, any gear, any time. Or words to that effect. __________________ Note, if I've gotten any facts wrong in the above, just ignore any points I made with them __________________ Originally Posted by FbodFather My sister's dentist's brother's cousin's housekeeper's dog-breeder's nephew sells coffee filters to the company that provides coffee to General Motors......* ........and HE WOULD KNOW!!!! __________________ Camaro Fest sub-forum

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Whats the advantage of high revs with the same power?	DGthe3	General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion	29	04-03-2008 12:19 AM
Yeeha!! 2008 Corvette Gets Big Boosts of Both Power and Torque	frodo	General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion	24	10-02-2007 03:20 PM
Chevy Rev It Up in Alameda...	Mindz	Camaro Photos \| Spyshots \| Video \| Media Gallery	20	07-30-2007 04:09 AM
Pics now in the Rev it up thread!	Mindz	Camaro Photos \| Spyshots \| Video \| Media Gallery	0	07-11-2007 05:06 PM
Chevy Rev It Up Tour Dates-Featuring the 5th Gen Concept	TAG UR IT	5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions	3	06-29-2007 04:30 AM

06-01-2008, 06:45 AM	#6
Sterling Drives: 2010 Camaro 1LT/RS M6 Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Fairhaven, MA Posts: 5,882 View My Garage	In my mind, there is no replacement for low end torque.

06-02-2008, 03:27 AM	#11
Rock36 I just like V8s Drives: 2007 Corvette Z06 Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Stuttgart, Germany Posts: 919	Just so eveyone knows the 135i and 335i make its max torque of 300ft-lbs from 1400-5000 rpm. That is a very broad and flat torque curve. If making max torque at a rediculously low 1400 rpm isn't enough, then I think the issue is that 300ft-lbs isn't enough or that it is just too smooth for you.