> such and such 4-cylinder has no torque!
torque is basically proportional to displacement so of course a smaller engine has less torque.
it's like complaining that water is wet
>>14596844
Nope, sorry. My stock 2.3 |4 from the late 90s makes more torque than a current day jeep cherokee.
Shitty designs are shit.
>>14596883
Post dyno
>>14596883
>Comparing to Chrysler.
Makes you feel like a big man huh?
>>14596844
torque is to do with stroke not displacement
>>14597167
>LS3 is 92mm stroke
>l4 2.5l Mazda engine is 94mm stroke
>OBVIOUSLY THE 2.5 MAKES MORE TORQUE
Stroke plays a bigger role than bore but displacement still produces torque.
>>14596844
No. Torque is proportional to stroke, not displacement (although stroke is a factor in displacement). Also, it's largely determined by the engine's camshaft.
>>14597215
Apples to oranges mate. Cam shaft on those two is completely different, just look at their peak power and torque RPM. (5900/4300RPM and 5700/3250RPM, respectively).
Also, you're talking about an engine with twice the cilinders, you're not correcting for that either. Cut the LS3's numbers(and cilinder count) in half, and you'd end up with a 3.1L inline four, with 215hp/212ftlbs, compared to the Mazda's 184/185. Correct that for bore(89mm instead of 103.1), and the LS3 ends up with only 170ftlbs. But this is only benchracing, because we don't know cam specs, which is what really determines torque.
you idiots, torque= 2(turbos)(cylinders squared)+3(cylinders)
>>14596844
your forgetting the numbers fool
being four stoke and only having cylinders means you have to wait around for the next power stroke
that and a longer lever does have a longer reset point
Torque comes from the lever action of the conrod on the crank. The more angle the more torque. Angle is determined by conrod length and crankshaft throw distance (stroke).
You have to find a balance between rev range and torque basically. The more of each you want, the stronger and lighter your parts have to be.
This barrier is one of the reasons rotaries had so much time invested in them. The pistons in a conventional engine have to go up, stop, and then go back down. The forces on that conrod and piston joint, as well as the side load of the cylinder bore in ENORMOUS. Rotaries go around and around, much like a turbine engine, so they conserve more momentum per combustion cycle and therefore put less load on the metal for a given displacement and make higher output because of it.
>>14597258
You're autistic and missed his joke, but thanks for the awesome reply.
>>14597307
That completely undermines the current power stroke is of longer duration to get you to the next power stroke, dumb cunt.
>>14596844
torque means nothing for performance. whatever torque your engine doesnt have you can make up for with gearing and a higher redline and more hp for the sacrifice of torque will realize faster lap times. anyone who thinks otherwise is stuck in the boomer era where "sports cars" had 4 gears and needed torque to make up for their shitty designs and 3500lbs pigfat chassis + a 400lbs american to haul around.
>>14597623
>current power stroke is of longer duration
that means a longer stroke or heaver fly wheel
My 1.6l puts out 280tq
>>14597958
Turbo and/or diesel
Diesel cars are putting high torque numbers? You can have a high torque car for small trailer towing
>>14597896
good point because making an engine rev higher (work harder) over the corse of a race couldn't have any impact on its performance over the period of a race.
>>14598394
Yeah, of course it's a turbo. :)
>>14597167
Torque has almost nothing to do with stroke
>>14597376
In that case, what's the point of having torque at the crankshaft if you can just choose a shorter gear? An engine with less "torque" could have far more torque when measured at the wheels
so how much does stroke have to do with torque
>>14598749
diesel has more torque nigga
>>14600281
> hey I need to pass this truck, lemme just drop 'er into 1st for that torque
> pistons become intimate with valves
> but I thought all the gears did was multiply torque!
>>14596844
Then quit trying to best bigger and better cars with your peice of shit honda and usuing that as an excuse as to why youre being eatin alive.
>>14600595
This fucking mad you got smoked by a civic, lol
>>14600281
A good engine has alot of usable area underneath the torque and power curve. If all your power is up top in some wacky exponential power curve, your going to need a million gears to get it to pull something.
>>14596883
New Cherokee i4 or v6?
>>14598482
that's what rotaries are for
>>14598482
> more revs = working harder
This board I swear
My 3 liter 944 s2 has plenty of torque.
>tfw stock LS1 makes 300 ft-lbs off the line
like a dump truck nigga. ricers have no idea what it is like climbing a hill in final gear and never having to downshift.
more torque at that RPM = more available power. my V8 car makes more hp at idle than my 4 cyl honda does. i'm not even joking
>>14602579
>4 cyl does * at redline
also
tfw when 5.7l V8 revs higher than 1.5l 4 cyl
>>14602579
> like a dump truck
So slow as fuck and only good for hauling your fat ass from a to b?
>>14602590
>slow as fuck
its so fast. the V8 is so much better than a 4 cyl you can't really put it into words. you just have to drive one.
at 10% throttle my LS1 is faster than your average car. i'm not even exaggerating. people who drive slow cars think i am going WOT just because they hear it rev up under light throttle. it makes SO MUCH torque at down low, it has immediate power. it pulls from any gear at any RPM
>why are muscle car owners tryhards
drive one faggot
>>14602616
I guarantee my 4cyl at 10% throttle leaves your ls1 at 100% for dead
>>14602626
>>14602626
>10% throttle in lol no torque
literally impossible
>muh boosted 4 cyl in gutted shitbox
yawn.
>>14602646
Motorcycle :^)
>>14602646
this is what torque looks like. the low-end bruh. pulls from the bottom
>muh peak power
what about ANYWHERE ELSE
>>14602656
>muh bike
then why even mention it?. i could go ride my friends bike that is way faster than my car. that bitch is like 80 hp and weighs nothing of course its faster
that doesn't mean its impressive. you and every gook on the fucking planet has a bike
>>14602667
>>14602667
The only place where amount of power produced is relevant is the last 4000rpm
But I don't expect someone who only guns it between stop lights or does ricer flybys on the highway to understand
>>14602678
Because not every 4cyl is a 80hp civic engine contrary to your beliefs
>>14600435
Dann right it does nigga. Theres a reason trucks n shit use it
>>14600587
>pistons become intimate with valves
>>14597896
>cars can only go around in large circles
Offroading and obviously towing have different requirements
>>14602312
You know what he meant.
Higher revs means more stress which in turn can cost you the engine and dnf the race.
Although the longevity and resilience of engines nowadays is amazing and less of an issue.
>>14602678
>everyone has a bike
>has to borrow a friend's bike
no torque plebs pls go
>>14605165
Inline 5 yes
>>14602616
>it pulls from any gear at any RPM
my 4-cylinder pulls at 8k, can your v8 do that?
