Are Americans actually retarded or is their school system this much of an abysmal failure?

>american education

>ariel atom 500
>3l dohc v8
>500hp
>198lb
>Reliable race engine

>corvette z06
>7l ohv v8
>505hp
>498lb
>drops valves on the street with 1k mile on odo

Lmao why do Americans even bother

There are production dohc 2.0l v8s around that d0 like 500hp at 14,000rpm anyway. Pushrods are blacksmith tractortech

Source. I fucking want one now

see

>>ariel atom 500
l dohc v8
hp
lb
>>Reliable race engine
i haven't seen it at LeMans 24.. what class did it race in? over the past 10 years i have seen a big dumb stupid American pushrod rack up some class wins.

Can you actually be this stupid? The size of the block means absolutely nothing if the overall package size is roughly the same. In an approximately the same amount of space, the LS manages to pack twice as many cylinders and displaces three times as much. Inline engines are, by design, fucking terrible in regard to economy of space.

One on the left makes 120hp. The one on the right could be 350-450hp.

>3L
>Not even 200lb-ft of torque

Wew fucking lad

Why does torque matter for a performance car though?

Is there a point to this retarded thread? Who thinks a v engine is the same as an I engine?

Because it's what actually makes the car accelerate? Horsepower is one of the most misleading statistics ever. It's just the relationship between rpms and torque in ft-lbs. It's why Honda engines are so gutless despite them having really high "specific outputs". They're just built to rev to the moon with super light internals which allows them to publish a higher number without actual realistic power being much of a factor

Disss

Horsepower is a measure of work done
Horsepower makes your car go faster
Horsepower is the be all end all for performance

Also you can have 800lb-ft of torque and your car is not going to move anywhere at all
So yes torque is fucking useless as dog shit when talking about performance

Both stats are important. Go ahead and put your 14,000 rpm V8 in a semi and see how much it can carry.

honda s2k begs to differ

I never said anything about towing
I made it clear I only cared about performance

As for user talking about s2k, why is the torque less wonder a good second plus faster than a 5.0 stang in the quarter?
The f20c doesn't make 160hp until 6k anyway it's a shit engine

>Why does torque matter for a performance car

in fairness I don't see all the shit bolted onto the 4banger, exhaust manifold, an Alt, AC & power steering pump attached to the LS

As long as you have a transmission short enough to keep the engine in its powerband you can pull as much as with any other engine of the same power.

The mileage would be even less than that of a semi-truck as it is already. If what you're suggesting is essentially a powerglide attached to a fucking f1 engine.

It wouldn´t even be worse than a normal semi since a small high rpm engine can rev low when it doen´t need to deliver full power.
Wich is often the case when driving, since you don´t always drive topspeed.
Its efficiency on full power isn´t worse than normal engines either.

And no, I don´t suggest a hydrodynamic gearbox, a conventional 6-speed manual would be more efficient and let thedriver choose at wich rpm he wants to run his engine and allow him to use almost WOT at any speed for maximum efficiency.

> I DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU, AND THAT IS WHY I POST THIS PICTURE ABOUT YOU
wat

What kind of an idiot made this?

>clickety clack
>click
>[post]
Wew I care so much

No. Just fucking no.

At the lower RPM's it would BARELY BE ABLE to move out of it's own way let alone with a load.

Here's a fun experiment.

Put a honda B series engine in a 70s cadillac.
Tell me how it works out.

>At the lower RPM's it would BARELY BE ABLE to move out of it's own way let alone with a load.

There is something called a "gearbox" wich converts high rpm and low torque into low rpm and high torque.

Therefore the first gear of the transmission has to be verry short, so the car would rev to 14.000 @40-50km/h in first gear.
The wheeltorqu would be as high as with any other engine of the same power.

A honda B series would get a 70s cadilac to accelerate as fast as any other engine with the same power.

>clickety clack
>whoosh
>[six gorillion]

Wew what a shoah!

Sure, but it'd be working overtime to accomplish the same thing a 455 could do.

the engines weigh the same you mongaloid.
only the engine on the right produces a hell of a lot more power.

>There is something called a "gearbox" wich converts high rpm and low torque into low rpm and high torque.

And it would result in the whole shebang having a top speed of about 20 to be geared that deep. Or have have about 17 gears and shift so frequently it would make Cletus Snow blush.

Freindly reminder

>When you remember that nowadays all race cars are super high revving hybrids with an electric motor to make up for a lack of torque at lower rpms

Really makes you think

>It'd work fine as long as we make the powerband as impractical as ever.

It's just simply not fucking streetable. Maybe as a race engine, but not in a practical application.

Only because of displacement limits.

Do people like you think LS engines can't be turbo charged or something?

No shit. That other autist was trying to argue that there was no point for torque.

s2k is prob much lighter than the stang :p
-
Torque is important if you have a car heavier than an F1 machine. Those cars weigh nothing, so they can get away with 16,000 RPM and 800hp with only 250-300 ft-lb of torque.
-
It's an odd way to look at it, but I see it like this:
HP = how fast your car can go.
Torque = how heavy a car you can have and still move. (or how big a tree you can rip out of the ground)

also INB4 horses can output more than 1hp :p

here just let an engineer teach it to you.

youtube.com/watch?v=CxK0x7AE3s8

Well they are, if your measurement tool is a go-no go gauge of a Miata engine bay.

>Using LeMans as a benchmark for reliability
>A car powered by a 4-rotor won in 1991

Either start rethinking your reliability benchmark, or start rethinking your definition of reliability.

...

this thread is dumb post 2000hp+ road cars

minus the AC and alternator everything else is there. Look at the heat shround on the left the exhaust is under it and the intake obviously on top.

Rethink your definition of a race engine, retard.

The difference is that rotaries will make the same power but are light enough to carry, unlike a fuckhuge v8 which is so heavy it will put more load on the tires, add more weight to the car, and have the same power output.

>NA Wankels will make as much power as a turbo LS

u so mad

No one said they would be an NA rotary, dipshit

Both are car engines. That makes them the same.

Once you add in the fluid weights, piping, turbo and intercooler to the rotary it's not that far off from a LS. Hence why people swap them so often.

>jumping into conclusions this hard

That may be true, but the Wankel engine is still garbage

13B are much lighter but it's kind of absurd to compare the two engines honestly. They almost couldn't be more different.

People swap them because LS are readily available, cheap power comparatively, and people usually have more experience with piston engines than doritos.

That and you can build a fairly capable LS and keep it usable on the street. As much as I like rotaries, heavily ported 13B drive like absolute shit on the street.

...

do you... not see the intake and (what looks like a log style) exhaust manifold on the 4 cylinder??? Plus its got all of the accessories attached (including emissions junk and hoses etc.) while the v8 does not. be dummer pleb

this. but don't expect idiots on Veeky Forums to understand 9th grade physics...

If it's not colored in how am I expected to see it?

Nope, a dressed 13B-REW is heavier than a dressed LS Juan, while the Juan is developing more power and torque while improving the weight distribution of the FD.

High rpm aren´t stressing an engine that much if it is a shortstroke.
No, since the engine revs higher it can drive faster in small gears.
So you gear it to rev to its limiter in first gear @40-50 km/h, in second @ 90-100km/h, in 3rd @140-150km/h, in fourth @ 180-200km/h in fifth @ topspeed and the sixth gear as a overdrive.
If the powerband would be big enough, like 80% power @ 30% of the rev range it would be practical.
Althuogh 14.000rpm might be a bit too much and 9000 would be more practical.

Start getting some experience with rotaries. They are extremely reliable if treated right and used within their service intervals.

Treated right is fairy potion in the gas tank, sacrificing a chicken before every start.
Service interval is replacing apex seals every 30k miles and soaking them in the sacrificed chickens blood.

And i was thinking a bigger OMP would make them last longer...

This looks wrong honestly or is an extreme example (steel housing, etc) being used. A 13B block weighs under 200lbs. They're about 350lbs with accessories.

I don't have anything against the LS1 but you can pick a 13B block up by yourself.

>ls
basically the shittest V8 in existence after the 4.6 Modular.

>horsepower is how hard you hit the wall
>torque is how far you take the wall with you
Easy.

*wheeltorque not engine torque

the ls does have its water pump
muh torque

torque can be measured both as force and work
foot pound vs pound feet

noob here

How exactly does torque affect a moving car
For example: flatheads produced heaps of torque but barely any horsepower yet they were capable of modern speeds.

Memes please do not respond.

You have no Idea what you are talking about because lbs/ft is a verry nonfusing unit.
It can mean torque like lifting 1lb on a 1ft long lever or it can mean lifting 1lb 1ft high.
Both are completely different units.

In the metric system we have Newtonmeter for torque and Joule as a equivalent.

1Nm=1m lever and 1N force on the end
1Joule=1m distance and 1N force

gearing
also less bearing friction and rolling resistance (perhaps not taking into account aerodynamics)

So it's basically about what gear ratios you can use from the applied torque?

A flat torque curve means you have power in most part of your rev range.
This is important for conventional gearboxes, since you want your engine to rev to a rpm where it has power most of the time.
They don´t affect you at a constant speed as long as you are in the correct gear.

Flatheads didn´t have much of a rev range, the could only rev verry low, like 4000rpm or so.
But they had a huge displasement and therefore torque.
The power of an engine is basicly torque in Nm multiplied by its rpm.

They could only get power due to insanely high displacements,since they didn´t rev and low resistance.

But getting to 100mph doesn´t actualy require much power, my 50kw econobox for example can do 110mph .
But air resitance increases by square of the amount the speed increases.
So going double the speed would require 4x the energy, so it would need like 200kw of power.

Also some cars back then where extremely aerodynimic designed to be fast, since they couldn´t fit bigger engines in them anyway.

They actually are closer than you'd think. An LS swap into an RX7 only adds about 50 pounds

torque is how much something can push at an instance.
power is how much something can push over a certain amount of time.

lets say you have 3000lbs that you need a foot.
you have two people.
a guy can move 300lbs a distance of 1 foot
a girl can move 100lbs a distance of 1 foot.

the guy has more torque.
the guy is capable of moving that 300lbs a foot 10 times a minute.
the girl is capable of moving her 100lbs a foot 30 times a minute.
While the guy has more torque, the have equal power. The girl just needs to do her torque more times a minute.

kylesconverter.com/torque/foot--pounds-force-to-newton-meters
it's just not used where you live

pretty much
lots of older engines stay below 6000 rpm and have longer strokes that give the crank longer arms
also fuel delivery systems are a little imprecise at the time
so in general torque is preferred

early types engines that get up around 8000 and 10000 rpm can have problems with oil starvation and vibration
as well as heat build up (up to half of an engines cooling can be done via the engine oil)

but I'm not so sure about other things on old cars
they are quick to get moving mostly due to low weight and having much thinner tires

You should add that "torque" here means wheeltorque, not engine torque.
Even a 13b renesis or a 1KR-FE could pull 100tons if it is geared short enugh.

Wheeltorque/half wheel diameter=force your car can put to the ground if the tires are up to the task

Power= how fas can you pull it

>muh vee ate

an ls is about 400lbs
a 13b-rew with all turbo goodies is 350lbs.
a 13b renesis is about 250lbs.

>t. 4 banger owner

I just wrote that ft/lbs can be verry confusing, since it can mean two completely different things.

It can mean a amount of energy or it can mean torque.

>350lbs with accessories.
An LS1 is 450 with accessories. 500 with a manual transmission. I couldn't find an exact weight but it seems like an LS with only what it needs to run (water pump, alternator etc...) sits right around 380. There must be some other part of the car that is rotary specific that can be swapped or removed for a lighter part in these swapped cars

Even your little converter knows this:
kylesconverter.com/energy,-work,-and-heat/foot--pounds-force-to-kilojoules

How much is the transmission? I'm thinking that when they do these swaps they must put in a much lighter transmission, because you are right, each set of numbers I've seen for before and after the swap don't add up

L4 has to wait longer between combustion
180 degrees vs 90

Rotor housing and the rotors themselves immediately come to mind.

If you want to talk about gearing you are adding in a bunch of different variables and no longer explaining torque vs hp.

Once that is understood, then yes you probably should talk about gears, but since CVT is shit, you don't have infinite gears to have optimal torque from 0 to 160mph so in the end the total amount of torque through the rev range matters.

superior I6 here

gearing matters a lot in the torque vs hp debate