How much torq does o have??

Volvo B5254T7
32Nm 1500-4800 U/min

>32Nm
EDIT: 320Nm

500 Nm/2750 rpm

Nothing wrong with a big Diesel, especially when it sounds like this

>youtube.com/watch?v=zR-hnNTstL4

better quality
youtube.com/watch?v=3jlJMaDQ1WQ

510Nm(376lb-ft) @ 3000RPM

Guess the car.

>16nm
Wew. Tork demon.

450 ftlb @ 2300 rpm fuckers

also like 200 hp stock

>16mn @14,000 rpm
Forgot a bit of info

450 ftlbs @ 1600 rpm

447nm at 3600 rpm

C63 AMG

137 @ 4000

It's a classic
>lol fwd
>but muh handling
shitbox with the Japanese spec motor. Anyone care to guess?

260lbft@2400rpm

Nope.
It's a 4banger FWD.

315@3400
It's time for a bigger cam.

Supra type spec 9?

156 ft·lbf @ 5,250 rpm

It has short gearing so it feels like a lot more.

617 Lb/ft (837 Nm) @ 2800 RPM

390 @ 4000

200 Nm, 147 ft-lb at 6000 rpm

1000nm @ 2000rpm
to the WHEELS

closer to 1200nm at the crank :)

120 Nm @ 2500 rpm

>1000nm @ 2000rpm
>to the WHEELS
>closer to 1200nm at the crank :)
Is it a W211 E400 CDI?

No

125ccm 2-stroke?

250 4 stroke

93 Nm @ 3600 rpm
and
4 Nm @ 4500rpm

265torks at something.

276 lbft @ idk
V6 tdi

what engine is that nigger

147 Nm @ 3600rpm

Late 90's econobox tier.

a hemi of some sort prob

>2.0l
>big diesel

I know 2.0l is big to your average eurofag but even euro diesel techs look at 2.0l diesels as babby diesels.

182@2000
guess
hint: it's from the late '80s early '90s

98 lbs-ft at 4000. The 5.125 rear end helps a little

125 lbs-ft at 2400. This n/a diesel moves along 3 tons with the help of a 4.78:1 first gear and a 4.1:1 rear end and 24" tires.

60Nm 58 bhp.

221 Nm at 4050
MX-5 NC

280@holyshittorquesteerzoomzoomboom

let me guess ... MS3?

120 at 9000 rpm :(

130 ft-lb @ 4600 RPM

Yup.

tarbo valvo

50 ish hp and 80 nm torq?
idk eurokuk box

225WTQ at 4000RPM

210WHP

375 lb-ft @ 4,000 rpm
and like, 300lb-ft at idle.

570@2000 rippems

Tasteful

Mah nigga

46 ft-lb at 10000 rpm.

112.7 Nm @ 10,000
Wew lad

a c63 would have much much more torque

130 ft/lbs at 7600rpm.

Its okay, its not like I like torque or anything. Pls no bully.

284@ 5300rpm
2016 camaro

but the e46 328i has 280 Nm @ 3500

500Nm

breddy gud

3rd gen prelude

390 ft/lbs @ 4,250 rpm

Didn't think this thread would survive until I came back.
It's a SAAB Aero.

The 476HP C63 AMG is rated at 650Nm, 10 more than a Viper GTS with 450HP which is quite good for a much smaller engine.

Prelude?

~900Nm

430 NM at 1500 rpm

Hilux ftw

@Jason

208 Nm @ 3500
189 Nm @ 3500

200 ft-lb @ 2800 rpm

94nm

apparently "258 lb-ft @ 2000-5200 rpm" but I doubt the peak has that much of a range

492 to the wheels at this point in time. at Denver altitude with a DA of about 9000 on a 95 degree day. I've added some more stuff since then.

>1000Nm to the wheels
>1200Nm at the crank

So many wrong things with what you said is not even funny : ^ |

nope, good continent but wrong country
also it is a tarbo
[spoiler]not gasoline tho[/spoiler]
the Viper's engine is the definition of underexploited
it makes a meekly 400hp and 640nm with 8 liters but I'm sure that with some change it could make nearly 800hp and 750nm while N/A

The Viper engine is pushrod, retard. Of course it won't want to punch a ton of horsepower per displacement.

On the other hand, that means it's a lighter and more compact V10 than your typical DOHC one.

>pushrod engines can't make power
nice meme, what's next?
Carbs are unreliable and can't make power?

Here we go.

There are certain limitations pushrods can have, namely in the 2 valve design.
This has inherent limitations as compared to a 4 valve design due to surface area.

Also consider pushrods can limit overall RPM's. Hence the bump in displacement to compensate for this.

In later forms, Dodge did manage to very well-tune this engine (as GM has improved on their pushrod small-blocks as time has gone on) thanks to technological advancements.

And as I said, physically it still makes for a smaller and lighter engine, just there's more INTERNAL displacement.

>carbs
>reliable

Kek

No shit it's limited, but simply saying "lol pushrods can't make power" is both false and retarded, and there are plenty of pushrod engines that made good power. Examples would be Chevy's 302, which made around 360hp on the first versions to approx 400 in the later ones while revving at nearly 8k, Yuro and Jap L4s from the '70s/'80s backwards, which, when fed by good carbs and with a sharp cam, could fetch 7/8k rpm and 70/80hp/L (N/A of course) and I could go on for a while more.
Point being, it could make fuckton more HP, and with modern materials and engineering, design limitations are here mostly for absolutely massive amounts of HP, like on turbo/SC engines.
the very, very vast majority of american pushrod engines dont make power simply because they aren't tuned to, as a 5.0 can very lazily burp out 250hp, but it could be pushed to 400 without having to slap forced induction on it.
ha funy maymays

550ft/lbs and 404bhp. 2007 BMW 535D.

350 N·m (258 lb·ft) @ 1750-2500

but you could make easier and more reliable power/revolutions with a DOHC design..

Or go like Koenegsiegiegig and do the FreeCam?

150Nm @ 3900RPM

Fun fact: if your car makes less torque than it has displacement in cc/100 then it means it's shit
>diesel bmw
At least it's a 6 cyl

True, but the defining factor in engine reliability is usually the max RPM and average RPM an engine makes, hence why old pushrod engines are usually unkillable. but old SOHC engines are also unkillable because of low speeds too.
I'm fairly sure modern pushrod V8s can rev well without being fragile at all.
Freecam sounds interesting but I wouldnt dwelve into it cause I dont know anything about it and I wait to see what gives

360nm @ 4500

How is that a fact? That is just some bullshit that you made up.

Good ol' Xantia with a Peugeot engine (XU7JP4LFY for those who care)
109hp @ 5500rpm
155Nm @ 4250rpm (114lb.fts torkz things)

Pretty tall gears/final ratio, so it feels really slow under 2500rpm. My friends are used to driving diesels with tons of torque of idle so they don't like the fact that you can't just overtake by going WOT in 5th from behind a truck. I have no problem droping one or two gears, and I like the long ass 5th to cruise along in silence so I think it's sufficient for now.

1. pretty sure you meant displacement in cc /10 and not 100
2. this statement is tehn equivalent to "if your car makes less than 100Nm/L it's shit"
3. well the previous gen C class AMG has 6208cc and 600Nm so by that metric it's shit, and I don't think many will agree with that

so many filters

rv 440

pic related is what it came out of

>he didn't go with notched pistons

72ftlb/92nm @ 7.1k.