Torque this, torque that...

KindBuddy · 02-07-05, 06:05 PM

Why do I read sooo much about how we need low end torque when we have so much trouble with traction as it is? I was thinking that while our cars are heavy, they get down the road pretty good stock (relatively speaking). Why aren't we focusing more on top end horsepower? Any more torque down low and we won't have traction. People talk about turbos for more low end torque and what-not, but what about turbos focused more on high rpm applications? Isn't it easier on the engine to have boost higher anyway?

GSteg · 02-07-05, 06:14 PM

traction sucks because we have fwd. No matter what people say, FWD has its limitation and you'll have a hard time getting traction with it. likewise, people are still able to spin their wheels going from one gear to another so its not just the low end. losing traction on the top end is possible. See Toyota Supra for example

to incerase horsepower, you're going to have to increase torque. horsepower is derived from torque so if you're concentrating on top end horsepower, you're essentially trying to increase torque.

KindBuddy · 02-07-05, 06:43 PM

Sorry man, I guess I should have underlined "low end torque" as what I had been reading. Increase HP derived through increase torque since horsepower=derivitive of torque, yeah gotcha.

So yeah, why do I read people writing soooo much about low end?

ChrisK · 02-07-05, 06:57 PM

I agree. Everyone wants more torque and HP, but there is a point where enough is enough. My 04 RX330 is tuned for some good low end torque and for my driving style it is too torquey. I usually have to feather the throttle or else you will jerk back into your seat. Now, some people like that feeling and I do too when I go WOT, but not for every day driving. My SC400 has decent torque. Much more than the Legend did. The other day I just installed an Injen intake system. Just like any under hood intake, you gain some upper HP and probably loose a little bit of low end torque. Guess what? I like the way the car drives better now. I'm not one that does any type of burn outs since I think it is a waste of tires so when you get aroudn 250-300 ft lbs of torque that is probably enough unless you are talking about a truck for towing. The people that want low end torque are the poeple that probably like burning out or racing from stop light to stop light barely hitting 60MPH.

tnelson · 02-07-05, 07:12 PM

i have to agree, i also would like to see someone build one for more top end. Now one thing that we should do is just shift the torque curve, ie headers and different length runners on the intake manfold. thats just my opinion.

**Mike Diaz** · 02-08-05, 01:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tnelson

different length runners on the intake manfold.

Any luck finding anybody? *WINK WINK*

tnelson · 02-08-05, 02:05 AM

its getting shipped to be modified this weekend.

**Mike Diaz** · 02-08-05, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tnelson

its getting shipped to be modified this weekend.

Ahhh, you're a godsend.

**B+O** · 02-08-05, 04:27 AM

I get confused silences and more questions than i care to answer when i talk about why I want lowend power.

especailly by Ronnie (Imran).

The reason you probably hear it so much from me is because i have had a major impression left on me from cars that have huge lowend power and carry it through to the top end. i LOVE that feelin of being able to not have the transmission shift and it feels like you're being rocketed forward without delay.

Another thing is when my mom drove my car, she was like "WHY is this so slow?!?!" i told her "stop poosie-footin the throttle" about five minutes later she finally did dig into it further and found out it had gobs of power (mrore than the car she drove at the current time) down low (she didn't take it past 3500rpm

....next thing out her mouth was "you dont need this car...it's too fast"

this is the nature im looking for.

With most centrifugal superchargers you have that nasty whistle/whine all the time (a no go for me). with roots superchargers (if it was that easy to install in teh first place) they are instant on and often loose power as the spin up higher because of over heating air. Lysholm was the only supercharger i would really consider, but again, that's instant on and i want the car to be able to creep around off boost and still be pretty darn quick.

for one, i've driven VR4s, 1.8t's, and several big engine oldschooler american iron types of vehicles. torque i love

and if you're not a dumbass trying to spin your tires all the time you can actually put it down pretty well.

one note...
"RPM=Rapidly Pulverizes Motors"

-i cant remember who i heard that by
Im not an RPM fanatic...im a lowend yank me to 120 in 8 seconds fanatic. it's just more fun when you feel like your car has more in reserve

but i DO agree...top end hp is needed in some applications.

legend4life · 02-10-05, 12:19 PM

Low end is for street drivability, top end is for racing.

KindBuddy · 02-11-05, 01:04 AM

I use both low and top for both street and racing.

Roger · 02-24-05, 05:27 AM

man i dont know what your talking about our low is is terrible i never loose tracting what kinda tires you got, i would trade half my top end power for more low end casue thats what i use the most.

legend4life · 02-24-05, 05:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger

man i dont know what your talking about our low is is terrible i never loose tracting what kinda tires you got, i would trade half my top end power for more low end casue thats what i use the most.

Wanna buy a 2002 3.5L motor? 231 lb of torque at 2800 rpm

FS: 3.5L engines, auto tranny, mods, parts!!

KindBuddy · 02-24-05, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger

man i dont know what your talking about our low is is terrible i never loose tracting what kinda tires you got, i would trade half my top end power for more low end casue thats what i use the most.

Man, this is a performance section, quit pussi-footin' the throttle. Anyway, I said we have trouble with traction and that if we actually had more torque down low like you want, that we would have loose the little traction we are getting. I wouldnt loose traction if I never floored it.

GSteg · 02-24-05, 08:47 AM

i floored my car a couple of time before and i do not lose any traction at all. Only time where i had any lost of traction was when i go from 1st gear to 2nd gear, at even that, i had only a small chirp.

02-07-05, 06:05 PM	#1 (permalink)
KindBuddy Registered User Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: San Antonio Posts: 478 Car 1: 01 Audi S4 6spd Blue Car 2: 00GSR Sedan5spdWhite iTrader: (0)	Torque this, torque that... Why do I read sooo much about how we need low end torque when we have so much trouble with traction as it is? I was thinking that while our cars are heavy, they get down the road pretty good stock (relatively speaking). Why aren't we focusing more on top end horsepower? Any more torque down low and we won't have traction. People talk about turbos for more low end torque and what-not, but what about turbos focused more on high rpm applications? Isn't it easier on the engine to have boost higher anyway? __________________ Lightly Modded Last edited by KindBuddy : 02-07-05 at 06:44 PM.

02-07-05, 06:14 PM	#2 (permalink)
GSteg Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: California Posts: 2,518 Car 1: 1992 iTrader: (0)	traction sucks because we have fwd. No matter what people say, FWD has its limitation and you'll have a hard time getting traction with it. likewise, people are still able to spin their wheels going from one gear to another so its not just the low end. losing traction on the top end is possible. See Toyota Supra for example to incerase horsepower, you're going to have to increase torque. horsepower is derived from torque so if you're concentrating on top end horsepower, you're essentially trying to increase torque. __________________ 1992 Acura Legend LS sedan

02-07-05, 06:43 PM	#3 (permalink)
KindBuddy Registered User Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: San Antonio Posts: 478 Car 1: 01 Audi S4 6spd Blue Car 2: 00GSR Sedan5spdWhite iTrader: (0)	Sorry man, I guess I should have underlined "low end torque" as what I had been reading. Increase HP derived through increase torque since horsepower=derivitive of torque, yeah gotcha. So yeah, why do I read people writing soooo much about low end? __________________ Lightly Modded

02-07-05, 07:12 PM	#5 (permalink)
tnelson Pedobear is watching you Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Oklahoma Posts: 7,594 Car 1: 2002 TL-S, white iTrader: (3)	i have to agree, i also would like to see someone build one for more top end. Now one thing that we should do is just shift the torque curve, ie headers and different length runners on the intake manfold. thats just my opinion. __________________ Real Life Trolling FTW.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feLqz1udhtY

02-08-05, 02:05 AM	#7 (permalink)
tnelson Pedobear is watching you Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Oklahoma Posts: 7,594 Car 1: 2002 TL-S, white iTrader: (3)	its getting shipped to be modified this weekend. __________________ Real Life Trolling FTW.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feLqz1udhtY

Remove Advertisements Sponsored Links
The Acura Legend & Acura RL Forum Advertisement

02-07-05, 06:57 PM	#4 (permalink)
ChrisK 0000$$$$0000####0000 Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Hawaii Posts: 4,963 Car 1: Acura iTrader: (0)	I agree. Everyone wants more torque and HP, but there is a point where enough is enough. My 04 RX330 is tuned for some good low end torque and for my driving style it is too torquey. I usually have to feather the throttle or else you will jerk back into your seat. Now, some people like that feeling and I do too when I go WOT, but not for every day driving. My SC400 has decent torque. Much more than the Legend did. The other day I just installed an Injen intake system. Just like any under hood intake, you gain some upper HP and probably loose a little bit of low end torque. Guess what? I like the way the car drives better now. I'm not one that does any type of burn outs since I think it is a waste of tires so when you get aroudn 250-300 ft lbs of torque that is probably enough unless you are talking about a truck for towing. The people that want low end torque are the poeple that probably like burning out or racing from stop light to stop light barely hitting 60MPH.

02-08-05, 04:27 AM	#9 (permalink)
B+O G2BMC Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: VSC Moderator Posts: 12,093 Car 1: why? iTrader: (1)	I get confused silences and more questions than i care to answer when i talk about why I want lowend power. especailly by Ronnie (Imran). The reason you probably hear it so much from me is because i have had a major impression left on me from cars that have huge lowend power and carry it through to the top end. i LOVE that feelin of being able to not have the transmission shift and it feels like you're being rocketed forward without delay. Another thing is when my mom drove my car, she was like "WHY is this so slow?!?!" i told her "stop poosie-footin the throttle" about five minutes later she finally did dig into it further and found out it had gobs of power (mrore than the car she drove at the current time) down low (she didn't take it past 3500rpm....next thing out her mouth was "you dont need this car...it's too fast" this is the nature im looking for. With most centrifugal superchargers you have that nasty whistle/whine all the time (a no go for me). with roots superchargers (if it was that easy to install in teh first place) they are instant on and often loose power as the spin up higher because of over heating air. Lysholm was the only supercharger i would really consider, but again, that's instant on and i want the car to be able to creep around off boost and still be pretty darn quick. for one, i've driven VR4s, 1.8t's, and several big engine oldschooler american iron types of vehicles. torque i love and if you're not a dumbass trying to spin your tires all the time you can actually put it down pretty well. one note... "RPM=Rapidly Pulverizes Motors" -i cant remember who i heard that by Im not an RPM fanatic...im a lowend yank me to 120 in 8 seconds fanatic. it's just more fun when you feel like your car has more in reserve but i DO agree...top end hp is needed in some applications.

02-10-05, 12:19 PM	#10 (permalink)
legend4life Blk/BlkGS6 Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Buffalo, NY Posts: 1,779 Car 1: '94 Black/Black Legend GS Sedan 6 Speed Car 2: '92 Silver LS Coupe Car 3: '94 Cashmere L Sedan iTrader: (1)	Low end is for street drivability, top end is for racing. __________________ Black/Black GS 6 speed FS $3800 OBO Lots of mods/parts FS To contact me, e-mail desijigga786@gmail.com

02-11-05, 01:04 AM	#11 (permalink)
KindBuddy Registered User Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: San Antonio Posts: 478 Car 1: 01 Audi S4 6spd Blue Car 2: 00GSR Sedan5spdWhite iTrader: (0)	I use both low and top for both street and racing. __________________ Lightly Modded

02-24-05, 05:27 AM	#12 (permalink)
Roger Registered User Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: East Lansing, Mi Posts: 4,267 Car 1: 1995 Acura Legend GS iTrader: (0)	man i dont know what your talking about our low is is terrible i never loose tracting what kinda tires you got, i would trade half my top end power for more low end casue thats what i use the most. __________________ 1995 Legend GS (sherwood Green) 144,000 My ride http://www.cardomain.com/memberpage/608014

02-24-05, 08:47 AM	#15 (permalink)
GSteg Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: California Posts: 2,518 Car 1: 1992 iTrader: (0)	i floored my car a couple of time before and i do not lose any traction at all. Only time where i had any lost of traction was when i go from 1st gear to 2nd gear, at even that, i had only a small chirp. __________________ 1992 Acura Legend LS sedan

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Wheel size/weight: torque > inertia?	Volk Racing	Second Generation Legend (1991-1995)	28	05-28-04 10:03 AM
Responsive to mods	tnelson	Second Generation Legend (1991-1995)	10	07-05-03 08:38 PM
Horsepower vs. Torque	biyonic	The Lounge	7	05-08-03 12:14 PM
low end torque: the answer...	mkovalan	Engine & Performance Modifications	21	01-15-03 06:21 PM
jmo torque converter	blaxos	Engine & Performance Modifications	7	11-21-02 03:10 PM