Jeff,
Thanks for the information. I do believe most have yet to grasp the
mathematical relationship between
torque and horsepower, or the physical one. Dr. Palmer has made some
erudite postings on this subject,
and a close re-reading of his information is recommended to everyone who
does not intuitively feel the
relationship in the pit of his stomach, and the beating in his chest.
I will concede that this relationship is unclear to most, and takes some
effort to fathom.
It is a mathematical and physical reality, and no amount of "belief",
"opinion" or "historical experience"
will change it.
Re-read Bob's postings. Most Tiger owners are such because they "feel"
the result of massive torque,
and have lived with this vehicle design concept. Those who have had the
fortune to drive a really high
performance car with out-of-sight rpm's will understand. The OSCA I
drove had a factory sign above
the tach. "Please do not exceed 10,000 rpm, unless necessary". (8-)
One fast drive and your world view
will change on this subject.
Just my $0.02
Steve
jxnichols@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>I was reading the November Car and Driver and they have an update on the 2004
>Honda S2000. Along with various chassis changes, tire changes, etc., Honda
>modified the engine. The engine has the same 240 HP but now has increased
>torque of 162 lb/ft versus the old 153 lb/ft. Hmmm, interesting! The
>changes to the engine were to increase torque not horsepower. Fascinating!
>Now, the car has quicker 30 to 50mph and 50 - 70mph times. From 9.9 sec. to
>8.8 and 9.4 to 7.9 sec. Positively scintillating! Looks like Honda wants
>more torque for the S2000.
>
>
>
> Jeff
>
-----
Steve Laifman
Editor
http://www.TigersUnited.com
|