11-21-2011, 10:30 PM | #45 | |
Private First Class
20
Rep 121
Posts |
Quote:
the main reason for some of the higher HP M3's not doing a "0-60" in the lower 3 second range is due to traction issues, what you should compare is 60-130mph times, these tell the bigger story. a GTR has a quick 0-60mph time because the car does EVERYTHING for the driver, its basically an automatic on all counts, secondly it launches with all wheel drive, but look at the 60-130 times and see the real story. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-24-2011, 05:32 PM | #47 |
Banned
1770
Rep 6,696
Posts
Drives: F30 340i
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Diego,CA
|
^no he isnt successful at all actually. Worst troll I've seen
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-24-2011, 11:08 PM | #48 |
Banned
88
Rep 1,105
Posts |
People think I am bad!
The 0-60 is probably the m3's worst attribute and it is still really stellar. It has a few things going against it such as RWD, not much low end torque so it has to take a second to get into the upper band from the start . (LC helps this) and it is a bit heavier than the e46. And it STILL runs a 3.9-4.1 which is pretty quick. The bmw listed time for the e46 was 5.2 seconds. So even bmw have them .6 apart which is an eternity for that measure. Quarter mile its a second quicker which is huge. I do not think there is much to argue with this OP about. If he thinks its faster than so be it. Arguements where there is actually a close comparison and its not so obvious are the ones that get the emotions going but when its such an obviously stupid post and its just clearly not true than I just think its funny. Guy wishes he had a car in general, let alone an m3. |
Appreciate
0
|
11-25-2011, 02:37 AM | #49 |
Critical Care Anesthesiologist
484
Rep 8,828
Posts
Drives: SMB F83
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
|
I must be really bored at work to be reading this thread.
__________________
kev { divinum est sedate dolorem }
"your friendly neighborhood critical care anesthesiologist" |
Appreciate
0
|
11-25-2011, 10:04 PM | #53 |
Banned
88
Rep 1,105
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-25-2011, 11:25 PM | #54 | |
Private
0
Rep 64
Posts |
Quote:
You can have an engine with 500 HP @ 10,000 rpm and 60 lb-ft of torque @ 1000 rpm that will hardly even be able to move the car forward with tall gearing. In contrast you can have an engine with 500 lbs. of torque @ 1000 rpm and 95 peak hp that will smoke the tires in four gears. Torque is the ability to do work. HP is the potential rate at which work can be done - if there is enough torque to actually do the work. See any automotive engineering text if you still don't understand. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-26-2011, 09:55 AM | #55 |
-
11818
Rep 23,187
Posts |
These concepts aren't as simple as some would say. I have read and re- read about hp and torque but to apply them correctly you need a good grasp of physics, which I have had but often confused me on some levels, geometry, and principles of force, power, work, distance, as well as various others. It is a much debated and misused phrasing because of the complexity of it not because any dummy should know a strict defenition for each principle. Most people who are not engineers will not use these equations and terms regularly enough for it to have burned into their brains.
__________________
02 Tiag e46 M3|6MT|GC plates|MCS c.o.|GC bars|GC race control arms|GC bushings|BW eng. & tran. mounts|subframe kit|BW race shifter|BW Jaffster|Euro header|BW exhaust|K&N c.a.i.|Epic race tune|Rouge pulleys|Seibon CF hood|CSL bumper|apr gt 250 & splitter|ST-40|XR-2|SS lines|half cage|Recaro profi|Profi 2 harness|BMWpedals|BW studs| |
Appreciate
0
|
11-26-2011, 08:53 PM | #56 |
Banned
88
Rep 1,105
Posts |
You are just using semantics. Conceptually Horsepower takes into account engine torque and the effect of RPM's. Both engine torque and high spinnin RPMS generate energy or "power". It is this combination of the two sources of force/power that act and are multiplied through the gearing, which is the third componenent. What you get is this net force applied to the wheels which when rotational as in a car, is measured in torque. I am sure there are a 100 more complicated factor but that is the basic flow of things.
Engine torque combines with engine speed and give you a total "energy" Multiply this energy by the gear/final ratio and that is your energy at the wheels. You can convert this energy into whatever measure you want. If you dont want to call it torque than conver it into whatever you want, but net energy there is a product of torque and RPMS (this is HP-it basically combines the two important producers of power from the engine into one figure-) That is why HP is what always determines how fast a car is. The easiest example cited many timse is F1 cars with 700 hp and 2** foot pounds. The 18k rpms produce so much power that the torque of the engine does not need to contribute nearly as much and all of this makes the wheels. go. Some heavy torque monsters may be all low end torque with max of 4k rpms like a diesel. In that case its the inherent engine torque doing all the work, or most of it and littel contribution relatively by engine speed. The only difference is typically where the power is delivered given the same HP. HIgh low rpm torque get low end torque. Low torque, high revs get power once high in the revs. Obviously you know that but a summary to be complete for anyone else |
Appreciate
0
|
11-27-2011, 12:07 AM | #57 |
Private First Class
3
Rep 111
Posts |
^^^ Your understanding of torque and HP is incorrect.
Torque is a physical force. It is what can achieve work, i.e. propel the vehicle. HP is a measure of how much work can be done in a given amount of time. The reason why F1 cars need to rev their engines high and pop the clutch to leave the pits is because they have low torque output at low rpm and need to spin the tires to keep from stalling the engine. Torque in the engine operating band determines how fast a vehicle will accelerate. Peak HP can determine the vehicles terminal velocity if the gearing is correct. |
Appreciate
0
|
11-27-2011, 04:20 AM | #58 |
Major General
1905
Rep 5,678
Posts |
Ateam... I don't believe your understanding is correct... or at least your explanation anyway. HT1000 and Chris328i are correct and the difference is more than semantics.
__________________
2020 X3 M40i | Black | Current DD
2020 C8 Corvette | Z51 | Torch Red ... built and waiting for delivery 2016 M2 | Long Beach Blue | 6MT 2015 M4 | Austin Yellow | DCT 2012 MB C63AMG | 2011 E92 M3 | 2010 E92 M3 |
Appreciate
0
|
11-27-2011, 06:54 AM | #59 |
Major General
2468
Rep 5,932
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-27-2011, 11:34 AM | #60 |
Banned
88
Rep 1,105
Posts |
perhaps I cannot explain it well enough but people are free to believe whoever they want! Nothing off me if you want to believe engine torque at the wheels has nothing to do with hp. No big deal to me!
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-27-2011, 12:35 PM | #61 | |
Major General
1905
Rep 5,678
Posts |
Quote:
Torque to the wheels also takes into account gearing but, to keep this less complex, let's ignore this. This is also why HP increases to redline (as RPMs increase) whereas engine torque is usually more constant. Relationship of torque to HP P.S. It isn't about people "believing what they want" as you say, it is about having a meaningful discussion that brings out the correct information that members benefit from. Most here don't care if their opinion is right or wrong as long as the discussion gets to the right answer for all to benefit from.
__________________
2020 X3 M40i | Black | Current DD
2020 C8 Corvette | Z51 | Torch Red ... built and waiting for delivery 2016 M2 | Long Beach Blue | 6MT 2015 M4 | Austin Yellow | DCT 2012 MB C63AMG | 2011 E92 M3 | 2010 E92 M3 Last edited by gthal; 11-27-2011 at 12:45 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-30-2011, 10:35 AM | #63 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
268
Rep 1,883
Posts
Drives: 2011 E92 M3
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: One of the coasts...
|
Quote:
I don't expect you to do the research honestly, because most people that do that kind of research are typically some sort of engineers.
__________________
'11 BMW E92 ///M3 - ZCP and DCT
'15 Ford F-250 - Lariat, 6.7 Powerstroke Turbo-diesel |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-08-2011, 10:38 PM | #66 |
New Member
0
Rep 8
Posts |
I'm an M3 fan but I do see the so called trolls point...
In the lower end if the E46 M3 driver winds out his car he can stay with and E92 M3 but as the speed increases it's game over. Hardly an ass-rape though considering most of use drive 80mph and below. This was a good display of the E46 m3's acceleration that I watched recently:
Even on the track: (the guy in the E92 is a bit of a knob but when both cars are on it, one is faster but it's not shockingly faster. When it comes down to it, neither car has torque and from light to light that's what's king. I think the guy should look at an AMG, less involving but more low-end grunt. |
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|