The complete automotive resource for buyers, sellers, and owners like you.
Car, Truck and SUV Forums at Roadfly
+ Bentley Forums
+ BMW Forums
+ Cadillac Forums
+ Chevrolet Forums
+ Ferrari Forums
+ Jaguar Forums
+ Lamborghini Forums
+ Lotus Forums
+ Mercedes-Benz Forums
+ Maserati Forums
+ MINI Forums
+ Porsche Forums
+ General Discussion
+ Marketplace Forums
Hmmm... not really... (archive)

[ Follow Ups ] [ Z3 Coupe Message Board ] [ Msg. Board FAQ ]

Posted by Justin on April 20, 2000 at 13:36:32:

In Reply to: Bad assumptions... posted by Zandr on April 20, 2000 at 13:26:45:

The whole "area under the curve" thing is what I was hinting at. Rev-range (not RPM) is equivelent to elapsed time, a greater area "under" the curve (in a 2 dimensional sense) is a an increase of the torque to time ratio.

I guess I wasn't clear about the fact that I wasn't saying it's using the PEAK torque for a greater time (although, it isn't necessarily NOT), I was merely saying that it is using torque over time more effectively.

You know, on an S2000 or a 'Teg type R, if you raise the rev-range, you actually see more power due to the nature of the mathematical calculation of HP and the VTEC dynamics.

I think we are talking about the same thing... you just summarized the conclusion that I was alluding to.

By the way, peak torque IS peak torque... area under the curve doesn't make a lick of difference at 1 RPM... technically, there would be no area under the curve at a given point due to the singe-dimension nature of a point. The "curve" is inextricably linked to time in the real world.

Perhaps this is still concvoluted... in summary, an increase in area under the curve can be affected by a change in torque:time.


Follow Ups:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Z3 Coupe Message Board ] [ Msg. Board FAQ ]
Questions, comments, or problems, please visit the Roadfly help desk. Logo © 1997 - 2018 Jump Internet Inc. All rights reserved.