The statement that "torque was your acceleration and bhp was it maxed out" is crap and meaningless actually.

Torque is force. revs and gearing dictate how that force is applied. Essentially, BHP is calculated FROM the torque figures, revs and gearing. Here's an example. A 15 year old kid could probably cycle a lot faster than I can even though I'm no doubt a lot stronger. However he can apply his strength at a a much higher rate (e.g. pedal faster) than I can so he'll go faster than I can.

You only need lots of torque to go fast if a) your engine can't produce power at high revs and b) you have a lot of weight to move off.

Lets not get into all that torque stuff again. The clio lost because the CTR is a quicker, better handling car simple as that. Cue some daft response about how the clio would still beat a scoob even though no-one even mentioned a WRX or the like.:) It would be interesting th hear of anyones experiences in clios against CTR's on the strip.

well i think i would prefer my power down in a usable rev range. you dont exit corners at 6000rpm do you

I did when I had my S2000 ;) :D

It's all relative anyway, In my 4.4 740 I don't need to go over 2.5k rpm to get moving quickly so could argue that a scoob is crap in the low 'usable' rev range as well, after all what power is there below 2.5k rpm???. Anyway, the 740 needs torque as it's a heavy car, my westfield on the other hand does not need big torque figures as it's light and can pi$$ over scoobs/clios/ctrs etc. :D Anyway, horses for courses, I'd hate my 740 to have a massive high revving nature as that doesn't suit the job of the car.

Have what you want and suits your driving style or preference, HOWEVER don't be under any illusion about what the torque/bhp thing is all about :)

Westie faster than a scoob/clio surely not!?!?:D:D

I know, it's hard to believe isn't it :D

thats a brave statement, who do you think is quicker to 100mph the lotus carlton with 419lbft377bhp
or bmw m5(e39)369lbft400bhp

What you got in it?? Mate of mine had a Megablade. Awesome car, never been in anything like it since.

No idea, depends on the weight and gearing etc.

VX 2.0 16v. 190bhp or so. :) Doesn't hang around :D

I agree, Torque pulls the cars' weight (especially up hills) makes it easier to drive quickly too, even makes it feels alot faster than it actually is, but its not the most important factor for performance. As said, as long as the car is willing to rev then its the bhp and weight, that defines the acceleration, with gearing and areodynamics helping matters as speed increases. But to drive a high reving vtec car in the correct zone spot all the time on twisty roads isn't easy, you will get caught out like in turbo cars.

I've prooved the torque isn't so important by not using such a figure on my calculations on my site, keeping things simpe. As examples I list 1000s of cars and their theory performance using my own bhp and bhp per ton formulas, take it with a pinch of salt if you want but I stand by i'm not that too far out on the 1/4mile times of most cars. And not a torque figure in anywhere!
See www.letstorquebhp.com and the fwd, rwd and 4wd theory stats all based on bhp per ton and drivetype.

Still safe in the knowledge that all-comers are buggered by an old saab - alll bow down to old school swede-speed!! - I think that had something to do with the topic. Ignore my ramblings - too many work nights out, too few liver cells. 1AM, and I can't rememeber how I got home - i'll be as rough as a dog on the morning.

it already was the morning:lol1:

Just looked at my last post, and I can't remember even posting it! And I was rougher than a dog as well.

Scoobynet New Year resolution. Peace to all cars. Amen.

good idea

Bollox to that :D

think this thread has slightly lost its way , dont you !!
wise up and buy a scooby ,best new years resolution ever !!!
oops ive said it sh1t!!!:D