Outright power vs power delivery - what's more important to you and why?

[grandpa_spec_F6]

The age old "why would you need a car like that when you can only go 100" comes to mind for street applications, as if you have a car that can get you from 0 - 100 fast by putting the power to the road then isn't that better than a car that can produce 600killerwasps but has to be going flat out to achieve it?

As for the other nanny-state meaning behind the saying, my response is always the same.... because I can and I will so cram it!

[SteveJH]

Yeah, but isnt it also a matter of how rapidly the power increases? I assume a car going from 340Nm to 800Nm (or more ) in the space of a few hundred RPM's wouldn't be real easy to drive?

[prasac]

Originally Posted by SteveJH

Tell that to Audi and Peugeot.

yeah, but, a 1/4 mile drag race u don't need to stop and refuel

the new TDI engines are something special, definitely making people look at diesel cars in a different way. power, torque and heaps better fuel economy. they even sound alot better.

[Franco Cozzo]

Power delivery all the way, a workmate has a 1982 Mazda RX-7, with a 13B with a big-*** port on it, turbo work etc, its making around 350hp at the rear wheels in a car around 1100kg.

Problem is, it doesn't like being under 3500 RPM, it'll cough and splutter and want to stall on you. Then its too dangerous to drive because there seems to be no in between with the way it drives, once you hit a certain rev point it just goes ballistic and wants to blow off the rear tyres, which means you can't drive it the moment it starts raining because theres no in between with that thing.

Give me lots of torque and from a low point, thats why I have a turbo diesel small hatch back, maintain speed up steep hills at 1500 RPM in 4th gear without any issues and still lots of pick up if you want to.

[tex]

You can have both.

the bigger the cubic count, the smaller boost pressure, the more drivability.

Generally the massive power Turbo sixes would be hardest to power down as a street driven car.

[ToCo]

I prefer the real "shove back" feel that you get when you're in a powerful car that can put it to the ground. So I went the Power Down option.

[ebxr8240]

Can have it both ways with turbo engines especially larger one's...
Then just control power / grip with throttle..
Latter model cars with traction control is too easy to drive...
Can't beat boost controllers ,,,
Although on the street trans brakes and two steps is going a little too far...
Just a little Lol...
One part I have found is the more power you make ...
The better an auto works at getting all that torque & power to the ground...

[SteveJH]

Originally Posted by prasac

yeah, but, a 1/4 mile drag race u don't need to stop and refuel

Fairly sure the Diesels at Le Mans were getting faster laptimes than the petrol cars as well as possibly better fuel economy (do they use smaller tanks?)

[blueoval]

Is a power readout for the fan boys or is it something worthy of respect? I think some people get hung up on a number rather than how the delivery of the power is made. I was once like that and as i get older, i want to use the power within the most common driving style rev range. i prefer not to wring the neck of the engine to feel peak power, id rather have it where its most usable.

[ebxr8240]

Hmm ?? Diesel rail...
http://www.racesolutions.com.au/gall...w_pictures/350

[Bridgette01]

I wonder, would it shoot flames from the headers at night?

[OzJavelin]

Power delivery .. the biggest complaint from stock LS1 owners (like my SV8) .. they will rev and produce power, but down low nothing much happens, even my old AMC Javelins "feel" sportier stoplight to stoplight.

[JC]

I'd prefer CAT power - that is insane levels, right through the rev range (but someone else to pay the breakage bills).

[Auslandau]

The Landau with huge Torque, HP, huge rev range, loud and aggressive to drive is amazing fun but not if you are going somewhere for a 4 hour plus drive .... ears start bleeding ....... but it is bloody good fun and anyone who says you can only drive to the limit, what is the point of having that much power can come for a drive in the Landau. Too much power? NEVER.

Jump in the GT 335 and TOTALLY different story. Would drive somewhere for 10 hours plus, is quiet, effortless when required, TOTALLY refined in comparison but will still bang your head on the head rest.

Which is better? Neither as they are worlds apart ....... but on a nice sunny Sunday I would still take the Landau for a cruise but the GT to the shops.

[VioletGT]

I sleep well at night knowing i have 670 horse on 14" hub caps.

[Psi-Pop]

I like the big rush that comes from hitting boost and blowing tyres off. I like being able to use my foot to make sure power goes into the ground not air though too.

Ill pick power delivery, can i make that read as really peaky delivery? Lag is just foreplay and cheap traction control for the first half of the tacho.

[Stav]

I really do not give a dam about power.Give me a tidal wave of torque to make the car accelerate and keep accelerating hard and leave the power figures for dyno queens

[Windsor342ci]

Originally Posted by ebxr8240

Can have it both ways with turbo engines especially larger one's...
Then just control power / grip with throttle..
Latter model cars with traction control is too easy to drive...
Can't beat boost controllers ,,,
Although on the street trans brakes and two steps is going a little too far...
Just a little Lol...
One part I have found is the more power you make ...
The better an auto works at getting all that torque & power to the ground...

Couldnt agree more EB. Driving my TT around and my Mrs car which has more power and an auto, and hers is great. Hard to explain but it feels like I can control it better with an Auto. Just more easier to perfect the launches I find. Even if u break out into wheel spin, it just feels more user friendly to adjust accordingly then the manual TT

[martinijosh]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

The ancient saying goes:
"Horsepower makes a car quick, but torque makes it pleasant to drive..."

The ancient saying is misleading, though. It leads people to believe that torque and power are completely different things when they are actually directly related to each other...

Power/torque don't tell much of the story though, they only give you a rough indication.

Volkswagen currently have a mid range 4 cylinder SUV crossover, it makes less power and torque than our na 6 taxies. But it accelerates from 0-100 in 7.4 seconds... (the tiguan if anyone is interested)

Max power 155kW @ 5300rpm
Max torque 280Nm @ 1700rpm
Kerb Weight 1642kg

Less power than an xt, weighs about 20kg less than an xt... but look at that, the auto box is a 7sp dsg

[SteveJH]

Correct, torque and power are directly related.

Power=(torque*2(pi)*RPM)/60000

Torque=Nm
Power=kW
60000=60 seconds * 1000 watts

Final drive ratios and number of gears also have a large impact.

For a higher revving engine you can make up for any lack of torque by putting in a lower final drive. Add in more gears and you can keep it in that peak band for more of the time.

[mik]

Originally Posted by martinijosh

Power delivery...

Driving dad's c4 corvette. Less power than my BA 6, same amount of gears in the slushbox, same amount of torque... but with an injected 350chev

The power delivery feels MUCH better.


My supermoto... 0.4L engine, about 30-32 kilowatts. Feels faster than both of the previously mentioned cars... and is.

if i`m not mistaken the vette is considerably lighter too? but no doubt power to weight has an effect on power delivery.

[martinijosh]

Originally Posted by mik

if i`m not mistaken the vette is considerably lighter too? but no doubt power to weight has an effect on power delivery.

The shell is completely fibreglass. So yeah it's quite light (Still 1460kg though, which is pretty obese for a car made out of fibreglass with 2 seats, no safety features and no discernible boot - You could save 10-15kg by leaving the targa off I suppose )

0-100 is just over 7 seconds, from a 5.7L v8 powered sports car... lol



A big part of it for the feel of the drive is where the torque comes in, Not sure what diff gearing it's running either.

Power to weight was the point I was making with the reference to my bike


edit: actually, another note about power. Dad also owns a C3... it makes quite a bit more power than the c4 from factory, but is MUCH slower.

Go figure. Power is definitely not even close to the defining factor to make a quick car... it's actually very low down on the list of priorities (when making a "fun" car) unless you wear a blue singlet and smash down VB and pies or wear a cow boy hat.

[SteveJH]

How much does the engine in an old Vette' weigh though?

[martinijosh]

Originally Posted by SteveJH

How much does the engine in an old Vette' weigh though?

Which motor... this is the list of optional motors over it's life for the C3 alone...


305 cu in (5.0 L) LG4 Small-Block V8 (1980)
327 cu in (5.4 L) L75 Small-Block V8 (1968)
327 cu in (5.4 L) L79 Small-Block V8 (1968)
350 cu in (5.7 L) Small-Block V8 (1969)
350 cu in (5.7 L) L46 Small-Block V8 (1969)
350 cu in (5.7 L) ZQ3 Small-Block V8 (1970-1974)
350 cu in (5.7 L) LT-1 Small-Block V8 (1970-1972)
350 cu in (5.7 L) L82 Small-Block V8 (1973-1980)
350 cu in (5.7 L) L48 Small-Block V8 (1975-1980)
350 cu in (5.7 L) L81 Small-Block V8 (1981)
350 cu in (5.7 L) L83 Small-Block V8 (1982)
427 cu in (7.0 L) L36 Big-Block V8 (1968-1969)
427 cu in (7.0 L) L68 Big-Block V8 (1968-1969)
427 cu in (7.0 L) L72 Big-Block V8 (1969)
427 cu in (7.0 L) L71 Big-Block V8 (1968-1969)
427 cu in (7.0 L) L89 Big-Block V8 (1968-1969)
427 cu in (7.0 L) L88 Big-Block V8 (1968-1969)
427 cu in (7.0 L) ZL1 Big-Block V8 (1969)
454 cu in (7.4 L) LS5 Big-Block V8 (1970-1972)
454 cu in (7.4 L) LS6 Big-Block V8 (1971)
454 cu in (7.4 L) LS4 Big-Block V8 (1973-1974)

In fairness, there are only really 5 actual engine choices there, the rest are just slight changes/updates if memory serves me.


(The C3 was a ****, a beautiful ****, but a **** non the less. Lets use the base of the C2 which was designed and built in the 60's, and carry that right up until the early 80's... go Chevrolet)

edit: seriously guys, you censored a word rhyming with nerd? Come on...

[randel]

Originally Posted by burnz

power is nothing without control..

Pirelli..

[martinijosh]

When you're ready to get serious.

The right tire changes everything, passion for excellence... for everything you value, driving emotion, power is nothing without control.

High performance, time and again, the more we progress, the better you advance, because so much is riding on your tires. Drivers know, they don't give up a thing. Race proven performance... take control.

[mik]

brutal power is nice, being pinned to the seat the instant that throttle is hit is awesome, but if power delivery is not controllable, the fun is going to be very short or hard work, so imo it`s a combination of both.

[my_gxl]

Power delivery and handling....so the speed limits are low, so i find more fun these days trying to spend more time at that limit.

The factory cam in the boss 260 (BF) i find caters to both power up high, and manners down low.

[steve.zissou]

A big fat wollop of torque for me. Something that will twist those rears nice and easy and makes over taking effortless.

300 rwkw isnt anything special for me - but 800nm at 2500rpm is - then again 800 nm and 400 rwk would be nice

[superfly]

Outright power is for dyno queens

Power delivery for me. As I drive on the roads, there's no point in having no low down power.