Leaderboard

But the amount of torque you are putting to the wheels is NOT the amount of torque you see on a dyno, the amount of torque you see at the wheels is that of the dyno run through the transmission. Lets say one engine has a peak of 200 ft lbs of torque at 8000 rpm and another engine has 600 ft lbs of torque at 2000 rpm. The second engine should launch like a son of a bitch and pull the other hard as hell right? 304 horsepower for the first engine vs 228 hp for the second engine. Put a 4:1 reduction ratio on the first engine so the rpm is the same as the second. Now its putting out 800 ft lbs of torque at the same 2000 rpm. Its an engine that never can produce as much torque as the other at the crank, but once its run through the transmission and put to the ground, it will spank the other motor every time. Point is torque is a number, nothing more. It is meaningless by itself. Horsepower is what gives torque meaning, its torque applied over time. I know what your trying to say, but your taking it too far. A motor with 75 hp and 50 ft lbs of torque will beat a motor with 60 hp and 60 ft lbs of torque every day, if the first motor is set up right. Even though you've seen high hp motors lose to lower hp motors with more torque, thats not because the motor with more torque was faster, thats because the setup of the high hp motor was wrong, and couldn't take advantage of the power.

side not, if you are tightening heads to 250lb-ft, then you have broken bolts or studs everywhere LOL. :: i think this argument started when the 1st internal combustion engine was produced