Revisiting Torque

[rsportvolvo]

Kirk,

Have you considered running the cars through a simulator? Bosch LapSim has a free version that you can do this on.

http://www.bosch-motorsport.de/conte...809A16EA4A4C14

This is a good way to compare the cars.

I assume for this comparison all other aspects of the car stays the same, i.e. same car with different engines. In that case the gearing options are eliminated.

I think it's track dependent and more specifically turn dependent. I prefer an engine with more torque if there are elevation changes (VIR). On a flat (Roebling Road) track I'd settle for less torque.

[ddewhurst]

K, I applaud your thought process relative to being a ITAC member. As stated all else being EQUAL including were road racing, torque gets you there & HP keeps you there. Overall car number 4 please.

With all that ^ aside is this IT class slipping towards, well you know where................

[Knestis]

... With all that ^ aside is this IT class slipping towards, well you know where................

Actually, I don't...

We already consider "torque" when cars are specified - and have for ages, formally or otherwise.

We're just trying to work through some "should we and if so, how?" questions.

K

[tnord]

if all the weights are the same, and we take RPM out of the equation.....

car #1 isn't even in the running.
car #2 is quickly dismissed because that sounds like something that will only do well at very specific tracks....if anywhere
car #3 is only slightly favorable to car #2. but everytime i ask myself "why?" i end up with an answer that is directly related to RPM.
car #4 is the obvious choice to me. it's the only one that you KNOW will have a solid powerplant for racing.

to me there is no consistent way that torque "matters." climbing up the hill at Road America it matters a lot. but a fast, flowing track with high speed corners it matters very little. i think it matters less in lighter cars than it does in heavy cars (which kind of answers the third question). the more rubber you can put to the pavement via advantage in drive-wheel suspension layout, wheel size, and drive layout, the bigger of an advantage it is.

i don't think there is a consistent, repeatable way to treat ALL cars in the ITCS equally for torque. peak HP can be used because it's always measured within the usable RPM range. this is not true for torque. i don't know if i think it should be 100% ignored, as some cars are so far "out there" one way or another that they warrant some sort of consideration, but the means in which that is done doesn't seem to be the goal here.

[Eagle7]

I've never owned a muscle car, and only ever raced a rotary, so I probably know squat, but... I'm pretty sure that the only thing that matters is the size and shape of the HP curve in the RPM band of interest - in simple terms "the area under the curve". On my rotary, the torque keeps climbing all the way up to 6200 RPM, so the HP curve is very steep. Drop your RPMs and you lose much of your HP - the peak is good, but the area under the curve sucks. On engines where torque exceeds HP the torque curve is falling with RPM, leading to a more flat HP curve. This maximizes the area under the HP curve. So if you class based on peak HP, the flat HP curve engine has an advantage.

BTW, if someone has some dyno plots confirming or refuting my premise I'd love to see them.

[Andy Bettencourt]

Some have said that because final drives are free, torque is a factor we should not try and manage because you can make up for less torque with shorter gearing and take advantage of torque with taller gearing. It's about building around your platform.

So the question for me is simple: does the open final drive rule mitigate these strengths and weaknesses enough to not want to monkey with it?

[dickita15]

Andy, while the final drive helps I really think the low torque cars are hurt more by lousy tranny ratios. I was looking at the gear spacing on the newly classed mustangs and comparing them to my Rx7 and thinking it is a good thing the stang has high torque and probably a wide power band.
Final drive would make up for a lack of torque if we had 6 speed hewlans.