Stormbringr1
Pro
jtssrx said:
See...I just don't get this...
You are obviously very well informed on a number of issues that contribute in a big way to making this board so outstanding, jts. 
Yet...exposed to a topic where another poster here may be more well informed and presents his case in a very straight-forward manner...rather than debate the issue and possibly learn something new... or educate him...you got pissy about it...and caused it to turn ugly when it needn't be that way. 
You guys had a great thread going...and I, for one was learning a lot... :?
SuperStroker!
Pro
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone, please read this one more time and don't ever forget this single sentence! It is not subject to debate, I will not debate it with anyone, it is obsolutely correct and it has been used by the most knowlegable and winingest racers in the history of powersports>>>>>>Please read it again and never forget it when you're tuning your sled!
TORQUE IS ET/ HORSE POWER IS MPH
Lazy, I will only do this one more time, so if you're serious with
your desire to understand, here ya go!
Horse Power doesn't exist as a tangible measured force. Horse Power is a number derived from 3 specific pieces of information:
*The first and most important is the OBSERVED torque, as measured by a properly calibrated engine break.
*The second is RPM, which is measured by a calibrated tachometer.
*Finally, there is a derived mathematical constant that is agreed upon as the "common denominator" for CALCULATING a figure known as Horse Power. That common denominator is the number 5252.
So, OBSERVED (as measured by a dyno) torque is multiplied by OBSERVED RPM (as measured by a tach) and then divided by the derived constant of 5252>>>>>which equals Horse Power.
[TORQUE x RPM/5252= HORSE POWER]
Then the observed torque and calculated HP numbers are corrected to SAE standards (Standard of Automotive Engineers) from measured observed atmospheric testing conditions that were input to the software during the test to determine the engines torque.
The SAE correction factor is barometric pressure of 29.92" of mercury, dry air and 70 degree ambient air temperature.
This gives us what is known as Corrected Break Horse Power and torque figure. The reason observed torque is corrected to an SAE standard, is so engineers can compare dyno tests performed all over the world, at any elevation and any ambient air conditions and be comparing the same numeric information for development purposes.
The above is all the information anyone needs to understand, to also understand where and what the numbers on a dyno test sheet mean (the numbers your engine may have generated in a dyno test), but a person must also understand how they translate to the field, in a vehicle that is under acceleration and has moved from a dead stop to a velocity over distance.
I'll finish the second half of this tomorrow, its late!
Everyone, please read this one more time and don't ever forget this single sentence! It is not subject to debate, I will not debate it with anyone, it is obsolutely correct and it has been used by the most knowlegable and winingest racers in the history of powersports>>>>>>Please read it again and never forget it when you're tuning your sled!
TORQUE IS ET/ HORSE POWER IS MPH
Lazy, I will only do this one more time, so if you're serious with
your desire to understand, here ya go!
Horse Power doesn't exist as a tangible measured force. Horse Power is a number derived from 3 specific pieces of information:
*The first and most important is the OBSERVED torque, as measured by a properly calibrated engine break.
*The second is RPM, which is measured by a calibrated tachometer.
*Finally, there is a derived mathematical constant that is agreed upon as the "common denominator" for CALCULATING a figure known as Horse Power. That common denominator is the number 5252.
So, OBSERVED (as measured by a dyno) torque is multiplied by OBSERVED RPM (as measured by a tach) and then divided by the derived constant of 5252>>>>>which equals Horse Power.
[TORQUE x RPM/5252= HORSE POWER]
Then the observed torque and calculated HP numbers are corrected to SAE standards (Standard of Automotive Engineers) from measured observed atmospheric testing conditions that were input to the software during the test to determine the engines torque.
The SAE correction factor is barometric pressure of 29.92" of mercury, dry air and 70 degree ambient air temperature.
This gives us what is known as Corrected Break Horse Power and torque figure. The reason observed torque is corrected to an SAE standard, is so engineers can compare dyno tests performed all over the world, at any elevation and any ambient air conditions and be comparing the same numeric information for development purposes.
The above is all the information anyone needs to understand, to also understand where and what the numbers on a dyno test sheet mean (the numbers your engine may have generated in a dyno test), but a person must also understand how they translate to the field, in a vehicle that is under acceleration and has moved from a dead stop to a velocity over distance.
I'll finish the second half of this tomorrow, its late!
Correct.. HP is a number derived from torque where torque is actually the only thing you can actually measure on an engine.
One of the cars I work on makes about 2500HP @ 9000 RPM and weighs in at 2700#'s (yes, it's a bad mofo). TONS of data on this car and how TQ/HP related to how it goes down the track.
We shift the car at 8000 RPM in 1st gear. Now why would we do that when we're not at peak HP? Simple. When the car is shifted at 8000 RPM, RPM after the shift is about 6800 RPM, HUGE amount of torque there. Makign the 1-2 shift at 9000 RPM slows the car down considerably as the RPM after the shift is at a point where the engine is making alot less torque (but alot more HP than at 6800 RPM). As the car is accelerating, the shift points for each gear are moved up. In top gear it goes through the lights at right around peak HP.
Another example of this is an automatic car.
A torque converter is a torque multiplying device up to a certain point. Take a 99 Camaro with the stock converter and run it down the drag strip, now swap the converter out for a 'looser' one and run it again. It should pick up a couple tenths ET in the 1/4. The engines TQ and HP hasn't changed at all. What has changed is the amount of torque sent to the wheels. The 'looser' converter is multiplying the torque, which makes the car accelerate quicker.
Now back to the original question.. why is my 05 RX-1 fast. Well.. www.ulmerracing.com is why
I put Allen's stage 3 clutch in me 05 ER and the damn thing is undefeated (drag races and rollign starts). F7's, ZR800, ZR900's, Rev 800HO's, Vipers.
Mine isn't even broken in yet. What the clutch is doing is putting more useable power to the track. My RX-1 makes less HP than all of the sleds I have raced and it weighs more. It does however make more torque for a longer period of time than all of those other sleds. I plan on installing a filter kit which brings up the midrange power #'s quite a bit, which should make this thing even quicker.
One of the cars I work on makes about 2500HP @ 9000 RPM and weighs in at 2700#'s (yes, it's a bad mofo). TONS of data on this car and how TQ/HP related to how it goes down the track.
We shift the car at 8000 RPM in 1st gear. Now why would we do that when we're not at peak HP? Simple. When the car is shifted at 8000 RPM, RPM after the shift is about 6800 RPM, HUGE amount of torque there. Makign the 1-2 shift at 9000 RPM slows the car down considerably as the RPM after the shift is at a point where the engine is making alot less torque (but alot more HP than at 6800 RPM). As the car is accelerating, the shift points for each gear are moved up. In top gear it goes through the lights at right around peak HP.
Another example of this is an automatic car.
A torque converter is a torque multiplying device up to a certain point. Take a 99 Camaro with the stock converter and run it down the drag strip, now swap the converter out for a 'looser' one and run it again. It should pick up a couple tenths ET in the 1/4. The engines TQ and HP hasn't changed at all. What has changed is the amount of torque sent to the wheels. The 'looser' converter is multiplying the torque, which makes the car accelerate quicker.
Now back to the original question.. why is my 05 RX-1 fast. Well.. www.ulmerracing.com is why
I put Allen's stage 3 clutch in me 05 ER and the damn thing is undefeated (drag races and rollign starts). F7's, ZR800, ZR900's, Rev 800HO's, Vipers.
Mine isn't even broken in yet. What the clutch is doing is putting more useable power to the track. My RX-1 makes less HP than all of the sleds I have raced and it weighs more. It does however make more torque for a longer period of time than all of those other sleds. I plan on installing a filter kit which brings up the midrange power #'s quite a bit, which should make this thing even quicker.
The Hammer
Veteran
how much money you got Jt I will have something! You can bet on it. My sled only has 172hp and I beats sleds with 200-220hp all the time and they don't understand Why! We'll it has a great deal to do with chassis setup probably more than anything else.
The Hammer
Veteran
"If you can make a stock RX-1 Beat a Mack in 500 and 660 I want your clutching package!!!!"
JTS this is what I was refering to!
JTS this is what I was refering to!
Mark: I'm not talking about your Viper!!!
Plus you make power on par with the Mach and your sled is lighter!!!!!
Plus you make power on par with the Mach and your sled is lighter!!!!!
LazyBastard
TY 4 Stroke God
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2003
- Messages
- 5,276
- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 1,216
SuperStroker! said:
Read my lips;
TORQUE IS ET, TORQUE IS MPH, HP IS A CONVIENENT UNIT USED TO DETERMINE TORQUE THROUGH A TRANSMISSION AS A FUNCTION OF SPEED
And since torque multiplies with gear reduction, you can get MORE TORQUE by MAKING LESS
Let us finally put this to rest;
Using the ACTUAL DYNO from a CPR TURBO (because its easier to find than for stock...)
PEAK TORQUE = 113.4 @ 6100 rpm (131.6 hp)
PEAK POWER = 192.1 @ 9900 rpm (101.9 ft lbs)
Driveshaft speed = 1000 rpm
Final torque @ motor6100rpm = 113.4 * 6100 / 1000 = 691.74 ft lbs.
Final torque @ motor6100rpm = 131.6 * 5252 / 1000 = 691.16 ft lbs.
Final torque @ motor9900rpm = 192.1 * 5252 / 1000 = 1008.91 ft lbs.
Final torque @ motor9900rpm = 101.9 * 9900 / 1000 = 1008.81 ft lbs.
You tell me, WHICH ONE WILL ACCELERATE HARDER??
Mikey
TY 4 Stroke Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2003
- Messages
- 615
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 893
- Location
- Thunder Bay Ontario
- Country
- Canada
- Snowmobile
- 03 RX-1
I just read every word of this and I am sure my head is about to explode. Althe Power in the world won't help ya when the bumps are 4 feet deep and 100 miles long. 
Just ride Brothers It's the cure for all that anger you're feeling :ORC
Althe Power in the world won't help ya when the bumps are 4 feet deep and 100 miles long. Just ride Brothers
It's the cure for all that anger you're feeling :ORCSuperStroker!
Pro
LazyBastard said:
Go ahead Lazy, teach us with the answer to your own question!
Thanks.
impalapower
TY 4 Stroke God
Bashing is naughty! 
Buckeye
Lifetime Member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2003
- Messages
- 1,430
- Reaction score
- 42
- Points
- 1,128
- Location
- Lakes Region, NH
- Country
- USA
- Snowmobile
- 2018 Sidewinder LE XTX 137" 50th Aniversary
Testing, testing, testing, testing, testing, testing,
That's what makes your sled quicker!
Any ?'s
That's what makes your sled quicker!
Any ?'s
SuperStroker!
Pro
So now that we agree that torque is ET and HP is MPH and we understand why and how to interpret this information and how that information is produced (dyno sheets from engine break testing), I will do my best to explain the rest of the equation (as I understand it), what makes our sled quick!
Torque makes your sled quick!
Not just peak torque (like Lazy tried to show) but how quickly the engine can produce torque (immediate torque, right off the throttle stop) and more importantly, how wide the torque curve can hold on, over as many RPMs to peak and beyond peak, before it begins to fall victim to horse power on the top end, top rpms.
I'm going to diverge from this explanation for a moment to raise an interesting point. Have you ever wondered why Diesel engines never do well in NASCAR, FORMULA-I, INDY or DRAG-RACING? They should do well based on the torque they produce, right? The answer is; they lack HORSE POWER and more importantly, RPM and HORSE POWER at those high rpms.
So why would this matter, since they make twice the torque as a gas engine and they do it a low, low RPMs, which according to Lazy is the single most important factor? Well, torque and as much of it as we can get is great but you still need to transition to HP and you need RPMs with HP to carry that wonderfully quick acceleration you just generated with all of that Diesel like power you’re making on the bottom end. Diesels simply transition poorly to HP, because they aren't capable of turning high rpms.
Technically, it’s all torque, regardless of RPM, right? Well yes, but HP, which is calculated from observed torque has one more important variable in the formula, that’s RPM and precisely why it’s important to express the "ability to do work", with two numbers...HP and Torque.
Horse Power and RPM will produce MPH
RPM and HP will generate speed and the more RPM you can generate, while producing lots of low end torque, a rapid low RPM build of torque, while maintaining it over a wide RPM range transitioning to HP and holding HP to high RPMs, the quicker and FASTER your sled will be!
Why, because high and powerful top RPMs, allow the tuner to take advantage of gear ratio options that are not available to low RPM engines. If you can utilize engine RPMs to allow you to run LOWER GEAR RATIOS in your chain case, you can multiply the torque of the crankshaft with gear ratio.
Example, if you can run a 2:1 gear ratio and generate MPH with engine RPM, you may choose to take advantage of this scenario, to double the crankshaft torque for acceleration and quickness and let the big RPM of your engine re-establish MPH that may have been compromised by that low gear ration, through the ability to rev to high RPM.
If you have 100ft/lbs of crankshaft torque and leverage it with a 2:1 gear ratio, you now have 200ft/lbs at your driveshaft (before considering the track driver advantage, just chain case) on the bottom and the ability to rev to 11000 RPMs to pull MPH on top.
The Mach may have 130 pounds of torque but will only rev to 8000 rpm, before losing hp rapidly over the top. That means you need to run a 1.5:1 gear ratio to pull MPH on top. So 130 x 1.5= 195 ft/lbs of torque! That's potentially less than the lower torque RX-1!
These numbers aren’t exact, since I don't have a 150FI dyno sheet and a Mach Z dyno sheet to get the exact numbers, but I bet the two sleds are pretty close, even though the Z makes more torque on paper!
I still say that I can make an ATAC 150FI run right along side of a Mach-Z, in spite of the observed HP advantage of the Mach-Z in a 1320 foot drag race! HP will eventually over take, but not quickly enough to take me in a measured distance.
Yes, there are efficiency and weight considerations here and this all plays into it but I still think I can do it! I know this much, I will run 10.30s or better and 128-130 MPH at Lebanon Valley next fall with my Atac-RTX, wanna bet?
Torque makes your sled quick!
Not just peak torque (like Lazy tried to show) but how quickly the engine can produce torque (immediate torque, right off the throttle stop) and more importantly, how wide the torque curve can hold on, over as many RPMs to peak and beyond peak, before it begins to fall victim to horse power on the top end, top rpms.
I'm going to diverge from this explanation for a moment to raise an interesting point. Have you ever wondered why Diesel engines never do well in NASCAR, FORMULA-I, INDY or DRAG-RACING? They should do well based on the torque they produce, right? The answer is; they lack HORSE POWER and more importantly, RPM and HORSE POWER at those high rpms.
So why would this matter, since they make twice the torque as a gas engine and they do it a low, low RPMs, which according to Lazy is the single most important factor? Well, torque and as much of it as we can get is great but you still need to transition to HP and you need RPMs with HP to carry that wonderfully quick acceleration you just generated with all of that Diesel like power you’re making on the bottom end. Diesels simply transition poorly to HP, because they aren't capable of turning high rpms.
Technically, it’s all torque, regardless of RPM, right? Well yes, but HP, which is calculated from observed torque has one more important variable in the formula, that’s RPM and precisely why it’s important to express the "ability to do work", with two numbers...HP and Torque.
Horse Power and RPM will produce MPH
RPM and HP will generate speed and the more RPM you can generate, while producing lots of low end torque, a rapid low RPM build of torque, while maintaining it over a wide RPM range transitioning to HP and holding HP to high RPMs, the quicker and FASTER your sled will be!
Why, because high and powerful top RPMs, allow the tuner to take advantage of gear ratio options that are not available to low RPM engines. If you can utilize engine RPMs to allow you to run LOWER GEAR RATIOS in your chain case, you can multiply the torque of the crankshaft with gear ratio.
Example, if you can run a 2:1 gear ratio and generate MPH with engine RPM, you may choose to take advantage of this scenario, to double the crankshaft torque for acceleration and quickness and let the big RPM of your engine re-establish MPH that may have been compromised by that low gear ration, through the ability to rev to high RPM.
If you have 100ft/lbs of crankshaft torque and leverage it with a 2:1 gear ratio, you now have 200ft/lbs at your driveshaft (before considering the track driver advantage, just chain case) on the bottom and the ability to rev to 11000 RPMs to pull MPH on top.
The Mach may have 130 pounds of torque but will only rev to 8000 rpm, before losing hp rapidly over the top. That means you need to run a 1.5:1 gear ratio to pull MPH on top. So 130 x 1.5= 195 ft/lbs of torque! That's potentially less than the lower torque RX-1!
These numbers aren’t exact, since I don't have a 150FI dyno sheet and a Mach Z dyno sheet to get the exact numbers, but I bet the two sleds are pretty close, even though the Z makes more torque on paper!
I still say that I can make an ATAC 150FI run right along side of a Mach-Z, in spite of the observed HP advantage of the Mach-Z in a 1320 foot drag race! HP will eventually over take, but not quickly enough to take me in a measured distance.
Yes, there are efficiency and weight considerations here and this all plays into it but I still think I can do it! I know this much, I will run 10.30s or better and 128-130 MPH at Lebanon Valley next fall with my Atac-RTX, wanna bet?
markgyver
Extreme
No i dont want to bet,But i want to know more about the ANTI GRAVITY thing your working on, 
Mark.
Mark.Stormbringr1
Pro
markgyver said:No i dont want to bet,But i want to know more about the ANTI GRAVITY thing your working on,
Sorry Mark...I just filed that patent application on that...
SuperStroker!
Pro
markgyver said:No i dont want to bet,But i want to know more about the ANTI GRAVITY thing your working on,
Now that would be cool!
