Another 2011 in the 10s

[Nathan'sTsi]

Looks like Evo ran into the tens this morning on the 100shot with a 10.91 at 127 with a 1.53 60'. For power, they got to 414rwhp before the bottle and jumped to 469/513 on the hose. To me, it's ecouraging that the car will go those speeds with that much power, and it should be possible to get that power all motor.
The internal debate continues....order a new gt, pick up a used gt500 or go nuts with a used Porsche turbo....hmmmmmm

 

[metaman]

Get that kind of torque all motor? Doubt it, unless you count a blower as all motor.

 

[Nathan'sTsi]

Get that kind of torque all motor? Doubt it, unless you count a blower as all motor.

Thanks for the input captain obvious:rollseyes
I am sure it sees that amount of torque only in 1st gear(at the strip), so I doubt it had much impact on the trap

 

[metaman]

Torque is everything in drag racing. Your welcome for the input captain fragile.

 

[Todd03Blown]

check this out..

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7G1C7-_zDc"]YouTube- 2011 Mustang GT Nitrous Back fire[/nomedia]

 

[Marc]

Damn this car is a beast!

 

[Ry_Trapp0]

Torque is everything in drag racing. Your welcome for the input captain fragile.

please don't repeat this bullshit factless muscle car rhetoric.
Horsepower vs torque

 

[Sir Nate 3000]

Torque is everything in drag racing. Your welcome for the input captain fragile.

actually, I would rather have more horsepower than torque in drag racing.

 

[metaman]

"Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races"

Caroll Shelby

You guys are totally right, Caroll Shelby had no clue what he was talking about. Good thing I am here on the SVTP forums so that you can all set me strait.

 

[Ry_Trapp0]

"Horsepower sells cars, torque wins races"

Caroll Shelby

You guys are totally right, Caroll Shelby had no clue what he was talking about. Good thing I am here on the SVTP forums so that you can all set me strait.

yes, i am right. if you would just read this...
Horsepower vs torque
...then you would see where the bullshit rhetoric is wrong.

if torque won races then F1 cars wouldn't have an 18,000RPM redline:rollseyes

 

[Wylde Horses]

"Caroll Shelby sells cars, flat power curves win races"

Thought I'd just fix that up for ya. :beer:

 

[metaman]

yes, i am right. if you would just read this...
Horsepower vs torque
...then you would see where the bullshit rhetoric is wrong.

if torque won races then F1 cars wouldn't have an 18,000RPM redline:rollseyes

I did read it, and an F1 car weighs how much? You can turbo charge a Hiabusa motor and get 500 horsepower out of it. Try sticking that motor into a 3600 lb mustang and cutting a good 60 foot time with it.

A while back a buddy of mine had an 03 cobra and so did I. Actually we both still have them but the mods on his have changed since then. Anyway, at the time I had a 2.8 pulley with no port on the blower, and he had a 2.8 pulley with a 4lb lower and an unported blower.

The two cars made about the same horsepower. However, my car with just the 2.8 pulley made about 70 ft. lbs less torque then his did. Guess what happens when you have 70 ft. lbs on someone and you are trying to move a 3600 lb car from a stand still.

Hmm lets see here, I wonder if the car with the higher torque gets moving faster because it has more force to overcome the mass of the weight of the car? Anyone want to guess who cuts the better 60 foot time?

Rolls eyes

 

[Ry_Trapp0]

wow, your telling me that you beat a car that had the same HP but less torque?! NO WAY!!!
really, if you had less HP by about the same amount of torque you had over him, you might have a point.

but, hey, if you don't mind being ignorant, then more power to you!!! only trying to help!


BTW, how is that diesel engine swap going...

 

[Nathan'sTsi]

I did read it, and an F1 car weighs how much? You can turbo charge a Hiabusa motor and get 500 horsepower out of it. Try sticking that motor into a 3600 lb mustang and cutting a good 60 foot time with it.

A while back a buddy of mine had an 03 cobra and so did I. Actually we both still have them but the mods on his have changed since then. Anyway, at the time I had a 2.8 pulley with no port on the blower, and he had a 2.8 pulley with a 4lb lower and an unported blower.

The two cars made about the same horsepower. However, my car with just the 2.8 pulley made about 70 ft. lbs less torque then his did. Guess what happens when you have 70 ft. lbs on someone and you are trying to move a 3600 lb car from a stand still.

Hmm lets see here, I wonder if the car with the higher torque gets moving faster because it has more force to overcome the mass of the weight of the car? Anyone want to guess who cuts the better 60 foot time?

Rolls eyes

Which is all fine and dandy, save for the fact of your lack of reading comprehension caused you to start a pointless arguemnt. The statement I initially made "it's encouraging that the car can reach those speeds with that amount of power" is obviously refering to the 127mph trap speed, of which that 513wtq has almost no influence over.

 

[metaman]

wow, your telling me that you beat a car that had the same HP but less torque?! NO WAY!!!
really, if you had less HP by about the same amount of torque you had over him, you might have a point.

but, hey, if you don't mind being ignorant, then more power to you!!! only trying to help!


BTW, how is that diesel engine swap going...

You guys have got way to much in the way of inflated internet egos. Step away from the computer and take a deep breath. Then re-read what I posted without looking through it with your desire to be right and you might actually understand the point I was making which has absolutely nothing to do with the response.

 

[Sir Nate 3000]

I see it like this..

torque is needed to get you off the line quick, that is what gives you your 1.35 60ft. then the horsepower takes over which give you your 125mph and 10 second 1/4 mile time. The more hp you have the higher your mph and the lower your et.

........just my way of seeing it. :shrug:

 

[metaman]

Exactly, is that not what I was just saying? They work together, and the more torque the better. Especially in a heavy car like a mustang.

 

[Sir Nate 3000]

Exactly, is that not what I was just saying? They work together, and the more torque the better. Especially in a heavy car like a mustang.

well actually the more horsepower the better. I would rather have 600hp/475tq than 475hp/600tq. with both cars the same the 600hp car will win all day unless your racing to 60ft.......

just an example.

 

[Wylde Horses]

I see it like this..

torque is needed to get you off the line quick, that is what gives you your 1.35 60ft. then the horsepower takes over which give you your 125mph and 10 second 1/4 mile time. The more hp you have the higher your mph and the lower your et.

........just my way of seeing it. :shrug:

No. Torque and horsepower are essentially the same thing. Torque is the twisting force, and horsepower is that twisting force applied to RPM. So what it comes down to is you're just talking about power at different points in the RPM range. The reason "torque" is generally not as important as "horsepower" is because as soon as you are past 5k RPM, "horsepower" is more important as this is where you'll be spending the rest of the run down the 1320 (or around the course, whatever floats your boat). Torque can be compensated for by replacing the rear-end gears, which can increase the mechanical torque multiplication off the line and get you into your powerband faster. It's really not a "torque does this but horsepower does this" thing at all. They are both working together, at the same time.

 

[65mph_Roll]

well actually the more horsepower the better. I would rather have 600hp/475tq than 475hp/600tq. with both cars the same the 600hp car will win all day unless your racing to 60ft.......

just an example.

Good point, if torque alone ruled, diesels would be king of the drag strip.

It’s a bit more dynamic than that.

Torque is not a unit of energy (power) (like a kilowatt or calorie); HP is. In the end, it’s power and how it’s applied.