SS S/C vs. GTO
05-31-2007, 06:17 PM
#76
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-11-06
Location: Hubert NC
Posts: 3,462
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FNFAST has it down pat! Everything combined makes a total. Torque gets you moving or gets you there, horespower keeps you there or keeps you moving. Cars like ours and vettes, f-bods, vipers, and so on are all geared and designed to accelerate steadily at/to high speeds. Thats why our cars are stable at 160+ and pulls steadily up until then. Its funny seeing races with cars that are equal in hp-weight but are geared economy cars. They hang for maybe two gears then switch and bammm, here comes the gas saver gear and you are down a couple thousand rpms on your tach. Or you start getting the car uneasy over 120 or the aerodynamics are holding you back more then your cars power will push it through.
Go check out they reason why 410hp camaros and t/a's are staying side by side or pulling from 450+hp cobras. Or my favorite, why 350 rear wheel hp GTO's are staying side by side with 360 AWHP evo's and sti's (with less weight, gears and aerodynamics)! Its all about the combination of everything. One more example, two buddies with equal mazda 6's one with a five speed auto and the other with a 6 speed auto. Almost identical hp (the 6 speed has a slightly larger driver) and the 6 speed always pulls it even with intakes on both. The 6 speed is geared to keep it in its power more so then the 5 speed and it shows on acceleration tests everywhere.
Torque does play a factor in slow roll races and also when shifting staying in your power band. When I shift it goes to my peak torque then proceeds to hit my peak HP and then click, next gear. I would rather have a high torque and equally high hp V8 that revs a little lower (6-7k) then a high hp low torque but high revving (9k) four. It can move alot easier granted the weight is too much for it.
On a side not FNFAST, I have seen dyno numbers of stage 2's with supporting mods. What would a stage three be putting out with out the shot on there? Just curious so I can know what to watch out for in the future. Tyler
Cliff notes, a car has to be designed to make efficient use of what it is given.
Go check out they reason why 410hp camaros and t/a's are staying side by side or pulling from 450+hp cobras. Or my favorite, why 350 rear wheel hp GTO's are staying side by side with 360 AWHP evo's and sti's (with less weight, gears and aerodynamics)! Its all about the combination of everything. One more example, two buddies with equal mazda 6's one with a five speed auto and the other with a 6 speed auto. Almost identical hp (the 6 speed has a slightly larger driver) and the 6 speed always pulls it even with intakes on both. The 6 speed is geared to keep it in its power more so then the 5 speed and it shows on acceleration tests everywhere.
Torque does play a factor in slow roll races and also when shifting staying in your power band. When I shift it goes to my peak torque then proceeds to hit my peak HP and then click, next gear. I would rather have a high torque and equally high hp V8 that revs a little lower (6-7k) then a high hp low torque but high revving (9k) four. It can move alot easier granted the weight is too much for it.
On a side not FNFAST, I have seen dyno numbers of stage 2's with supporting mods. What would a stage three be putting out with out the shot on there? Just curious so I can know what to watch out for in the future. Tyler
Cliff notes, a car has to be designed to make efficient use of what it is given.
05-31-2007, 06:18 PM
#77
Senior Member
you better have one HELL of a redline
crotchrockets are a great example of torqueless engines tearing **** up.
it doesnt mean "torque doesnt mean ****" though.
05-31-2007, 06:26 PM
#78
Banned
Join Date: 11-29-06
Location: CT
Posts: 1,935
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05-31-2007, 06:29 PM
#79
Senior Member
HP is too 
at least torque is a measurable force applied to the pavement.
HP is a number derived from a mathmatical formula.
me personally? I like thrust/weight ratios
contact with the ground is overrated
at least torque is a measurable force applied to the pavement.
HP is a number derived from a mathmatical formula.
me personally? I like thrust/weight ratios
contact with the ground is overrated
05-31-2007, 06:32 PM
#80
Banned
Join Date: 11-29-06
Location: CT
Posts: 1,935
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whats the mathmatical amount of horsepower for a car that makes 10lb/ft at 50,000rpms?
05-31-2007, 06:33 PM
#81
Senior Member
Join Date: 02-25-06
Location: Dacula, Georgia
Posts: 3,246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05-31-2007, 06:37 PM
#83
Banned
Join Date: 11-29-06
Location: CT
Posts: 1,935
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obviously we know what I'm getting at. How many stories have you read where it said something like "I smoked that Honda outta the hole because they have no torque!" When I see that I just laugh.
05-31-2007, 07:54 PM
#86
Banned
Join Date: 10-30-05
Location: in a house
Posts: 7,752
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But obviously the flip side is when someone in a Honda Civic SI brags about the fact that their Cobalt SS trumping 210 HP is naturally aspirated yet their max torque is only 147 and their max HP is near the 9K rev limit. There are many factors. I absolutely loathe people comparing cars solely on HP numbers.
05-31-2007, 09:13 PM
#88
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-07-05
Location: texas
Posts: 645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First off the video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZwHXBOplUs
Funny thing is, this might be slow sho's car. Is it? He says stock in the video versus a 350ish awhp STI. The gto is geared to accelerate solidly up until its tops out, where as a sti isn't. It is designed differently. It has more drag from the scoops, and wings, and overall shape of the nose and body. hence the reason of the GTO pulling back around a 100. It is more able to overcome its aerodynamics that is fighting more heavily against the STI, which also has to overcome the 4 wheel drive.
Second, it takes a balance of both to win. Go ride in a car (many of you have) that is torque less. It takes until the top of the rpm to be going at its full acceleration. Anywhere under redline it is significantly slower. Run in a torque filled car the it keeps its acceleration steady all the way. No lag, or wait. This is similar to what turbo cars and those vtec cars feel like. My old cutlass had 220 hp DOHC, it was semi quick. But below 3500 rpms was gutless. Torque plays a big factor in even acceleration. Less lag time. As someone else stated, hp comes from torque, not vice versa. Say what you will about the HP only at 500,000 rpm, yes I can see that as being true. But with an equal amount of torque, then that some object can be heavier and still accelerate the same. Its physics. Punch a GTO at half its redline and it starts pulling pretty damn heavily, do the same in an S2000 and it takes some time to get at its full head of steam.
I just want this basic question answered by those you wish to reply. In regards to the acceleration of a torque filled car versus one that is not. Which feels a steady and more powerful acceleration? Does a honda s2000 accelerate as steady as say oh, i dunno, a gto? Powerband FTW, Tyler
Funny thing is, this might be slow sho's car. Is it? He says stock in the video versus a 350ish awhp STI. The gto is geared to accelerate solidly up until its tops out, where as a sti isn't. It is designed differently. It has more drag from the scoops, and wings, and overall shape of the nose and body. hence the reason of the GTO pulling back around a 100. It is more able to overcome its aerodynamics that is fighting more heavily against the STI, which also has to overcome the 4 wheel drive.
Second, it takes a balance of both to win. Go ride in a car (many of you have) that is torque less. It takes until the top of the rpm to be going at its full acceleration. Anywhere under redline it is significantly slower. Run in a torque filled car the it keeps its acceleration steady all the way. No lag, or wait. This is similar to what turbo cars and those vtec cars feel like. My old cutlass had 220 hp DOHC, it was semi quick. But below 3500 rpms was gutless. Torque plays a big factor in even acceleration. Less lag time. As someone else stated, hp comes from torque, not vice versa. Say what you will about the HP only at 500,000 rpm, yes I can see that as being true. But with an equal amount of torque, then that some object can be heavier and still accelerate the same. Its physics. Punch a GTO at half its redline and it starts pulling pretty damn heavily, do the same in an S2000 and it takes some time to get at its full head of steam.
I just want this basic question answered by those you wish to reply. In regards to the acceleration of a torque filled car versus one that is not. Which feels a steady and more powerful acceleration? Does a honda s2000 accelerate as steady as say oh, i dunno, a gto? Powerband FTW, Tyler
05-31-2007, 10:14 PM
#91
Junior Member
Join Date: 05-12-07
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 444
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didnt read it all but idk why people come here to argue for the gtos...ur in a cobalt forum of course your going to get biased remarks
and im probably totally wrong and i really dont know that much and im not trying to start another arguement but an0malous you said crotch rockets are an example of a torqueless engine but if you peg a throttle on one your going to flip over or at least have the front end lift up...wouldnt this mean it has alot of torque especially for the size of the engine and weight of the bike? Cause as some one here said torque is the pressure of the tire to the pavement..i could be wrong but yea
and im probably totally wrong and i really dont know that much and im not trying to start another arguement but an0malous you said crotch rockets are an example of a torqueless engine but if you peg a throttle on one your going to flip over or at least have the front end lift up...wouldnt this mean it has alot of torque especially for the size of the engine and weight of the bike? Cause as some one here said torque is the pressure of the tire to the pavement..i could be wrong but yea
05-31-2007, 10:16 PM
#92
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: 05-03-05
Location: Ar-kan-sas
Posts: 15,395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didnt read it all but idk why people come here to argue for the gtos...ur in a cobalt forum of course your going to get biased remarks
and im probably totally wrong and i really dont know that much and im not trying to start another arguement but an0malous you said crotch rockets are an example of a torqueless engine but if you peg a throttle on one your going to flip over or at least have the front end lift up...wouldnt this mean it has alot of torque especially for the size of the engine and weight of the bike? Cause as some one here said torque is the pressure of the tire to the pavement..i could be wrong but yea
and im probably totally wrong and i really dont know that much and im not trying to start another arguement but an0malous you said crotch rockets are an example of a torqueless engine but if you peg a throttle on one your going to flip over or at least have the front end lift up...wouldnt this mean it has alot of torque especially for the size of the engine and weight of the bike? Cause as some one here said torque is the pressure of the tire to the pavement..i could be wrong but yea
05-31-2007, 10:19 PM
#93
Senior Member
crotch rockets have the power to do that because they weigh about 350lbs, and rev comfortably to 12-14k RPM.
hows that for monster torque.
45ft/lbs of torque for a vehicle that runs 11s.
this still doesnt change the fact that Torque is the rotation force applied by your tires to the pavement
hows that for monster torque.
45ft/lbs of torque for a vehicle that runs 11s.
this still doesnt change the fact that Torque is the rotation force applied by your tires to the pavement
06-01-2007, 12:36 AM
#95
Banned
Join Date: 10-30-05
Location: in a house
Posts: 7,752
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didnt read it all but idk why people come here to argue for the gtos...ur in a cobalt forum of course your going to get biased remarks
and im probably totally wrong and i really dont know that much and im not trying to start another arguement but an0malous you said crotch rockets are an example of a torqueless engine but if you peg a throttle on one your going to flip over or at least have the front end lift up...wouldnt this mean it has alot of torque especially for the size of the engine and weight of the bike? Cause as some one here said torque is the pressure of the tire to the pavement..i could be wrong but yea
and im probably totally wrong and i really dont know that much and im not trying to start another arguement but an0malous you said crotch rockets are an example of a torqueless engine but if you peg a throttle on one your going to flip over or at least have the front end lift up...wouldnt this mean it has alot of torque especially for the size of the engine and weight of the bike? Cause as some one here said torque is the pressure of the tire to the pavement..i could be wrong but yea
Some of us have owned one of these vehicles at one time or another. I know what the LSJ is all about (My LSJ was built in April of 04). When I owned one I'd always put up a good fight against G35s, 350Zs, the last generation Mustangs. With my old LSJ setup I had a 2.9" pulley, a Cold Air kit, and a few other goodies.
The video that I commented about regarding the Stage II pulling on the GTO is because I hear the Supercharger whine above the GTO's exhaust while the camera is inside the GTO. Having owned the two (and with the 2.9" pulley/CAI I can say that the supercharger whine was about as loud as it was going to get without going to a machined snout and a smaller pulley) I couldn't imagine the supercharger whine being so loud as to drown out the GTO's exhaust if the GTO was at WOT. If the camera was inside the Cobalt, then I would expect the Supercharger whine to be louder than the GTO's exhaust. In this video you couldn't even hear the GTO's exhaust. That's why I questioned the video.
06-01-2007, 12:46 AM
#96
Senior Member
from the passenger side of the cabin in the GTO, with the window down, with the microphone right next to the drivers side of the cobalt.....
we both know where the blower scream comes from....
Im not surprised in the slightest that the blower drowned it out.
we both know where the blower scream comes from....
Im not surprised in the slightest that the blower drowned it out.
06-01-2007, 01:13 AM
#97
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: 05-03-05
Location: Ar-kan-sas
Posts: 15,395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dont worry anomalous, im not even going to argue with the guy. it was taken with a freaking picture camera with a shitty microphone
if you dont believe it then would you like the guy driving the GTO to admit to the video being 100% real because he had done so on the GTO forums. oh yeah and then the thread got completed deleted, wonder why
Some of us have owned one of these vehicles at one time or another. I know what the LSJ is all about (My LSJ was built in April of 04). When I owned one I'd always put up a good fight against G35s, 350Zs, the last generation Mustangs. With my old LSJ setup I had a 2.9" pulley, a Cold Air kit, and a few other goodies.
The video that I commented about regarding the Stage II pulling on the GTO is because I hear the Supercharger whine above the GTO's exhaust while the camera is inside the GTO. Having owned the two (and with the 2.9" pulley/CAI I can say that the supercharger whine was about as loud as it was going to get without going to a machined snout and a smaller pulley) I couldn't imagine the supercharger whine being so loud as to drown out the GTO's exhaust if the GTO was at WOT. If the camera was inside the Cobalt, then I would expect the Supercharger whine to be louder than the GTO's exhaust. In this video you couldn't even hear the GTO's exhaust. That's why I questioned the video.
The video that I commented about regarding the Stage II pulling on the GTO is because I hear the Supercharger whine above the GTO's exhaust while the camera is inside the GTO. Having owned the two (and with the 2.9" pulley/CAI I can say that the supercharger whine was about as loud as it was going to get without going to a machined snout and a smaller pulley) I couldn't imagine the supercharger whine being so loud as to drown out the GTO's exhaust if the GTO was at WOT. If the camera was inside the Cobalt, then I would expect the Supercharger whine to be louder than the GTO's exhaust. In this video you couldn't even hear the GTO's exhaust. That's why I questioned the video.
Last edited by hatrickstu; 06-01-2007 at 01:13 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
06-01-2007, 01:15 AM
#98
Senior Member
good camera or not, these blowers are ****** LOUD.
you could have a $10k movie camera...a blower screaming 6 feet from the cam will still drown out a GTO exhaust from inside the cabin.
you could have a $10k movie camera...a blower screaming 6 feet from the cam will still drown out a GTO exhaust from inside the cabin.
06-01-2007, 09:30 AM
#99
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-09-06
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 991
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a side not FNFAST, I have seen dyno numbers of stage 2's with supporting mods. What would a stage three be putting out with out the shot on there? Just curious so I can know what to watch out for in the future. Tyler
Not gonna post numbers with H.O mode until I get the full exhaust on and get it re-dyno'd because the stock exhaust is killing me right now.
I will take a safe guess and say 320WHP with full exhaust, HO Mode and the Spray.
Last edited by FNFAST; 06-01-2007 at 09:30 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
06-01-2007, 10:53 AM
#100
Senior Member
Join Date: 02-25-06
Location: Dacula, Georgia
Posts: 3,246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://vmaxoutlaw.com/tech/torque_hp.htm
If torque was as important as most people thought it was then horsepower wouldn not be needed.
If torque was as important as most people thought it was then horsepower wouldn not be needed.
you guys crack me up.. your still not getting it man 
hp and tq.. how do they correlate.... what is the true unit of measure... one of those two units is real.. the other is a derivate of the other..