Torque competition.

[SixPackBack]

Endless pointless arguing.......if twins were capable of higher power outputs then why are they slowly slipping away in superbikes and supersports, and not visible at all in motogp.....hang on i know......fucken obviousFOURS RULE

[WINJA]

I'm not exactly sure what the argument is about.

If you have a v-series engine (eg. a v-four) and an inline 4 that both have the same bore, stroke and gearing you will get the same amount of torque from both.

The difference between the two is in *how* the torque is delivered. If both have the same timing, then you will get exactly the same torque delivery - both will be linear. If the v-series engine has a different timing (as they often do), then you will get pulsed delivery.

Usually the reason why an engine is put in a v-series is to increase the bore size for a given stroke which increases the torque given at the expense of the speed of rotation of the crank (because a bigger piston is heavier etc). Hence v-series engines tend to have more torque at lower rpm.

You could do the same with an inline-4 ,but it would be a rather big engine.

ITS CRANK ANGLE YOUR TALKING ABOUT , THE TRX FIRES LIKE A V TWIN, AND A MOTOGP BIKE FIRES ANYWAY THEY WANT ACCORDING TO CRANK PLANE ANGLES AND CAMSHAFT CONFIGURATION

[unhingedlizard]

like to piont out also that Having ridden a TDR250, Cagiva Vraptor and Kawasaki ZX6r back to back that all this torque is pants. The TDR was the most fun under the limit, to have the same fun on the zx you had to be going much much faster and the vtwin cagiva was fun at low speeds too as you just sat there listening to the engine.

All fun in there own way. remember a bke can have no torque (2 strokes) no power (125cc sports) and look like crap (TDR250) but they are all still fun.

[Pixie]

Mr Slob is right. It is the curve (or more strictly, the area under the curve) that matters. A high peak torque figure may be meaningless, in extreme circumstances unusable

.

And this is what my testing method displays

[Pixie]

like to piont out also that Having ridden a TDR250, Cagiva Vraptor and Kawasaki ZX6r back to back that all this torque is pants. The TDR was the most fun under the limit, to have the same fun on the zx you had to be going much much faster and the vtwin cagiva was fun at low speeds too as you just sat there listening to the engine.

All fun in there own way. remember a bke can have no torque (2 strokes) no power (125cc sports) and look like crap (TDR250) but they are all still fun.

Two stroke twins rule

[speedpro]

Mr Slob is right. It is the curve (or more strictly, the area under the curve) that matters. A high peak torque figure may be meaningless, in extreme circumstances unusable

Imagine an extreme case. An engine with 120 ft pd at 8000 rpm. And 5 ft pd at everything under 7500 rpm.

Really high peak torque but you'd never be able to use it, because you wouldn't be able to get the bike up to 8000 rpm in any gear, because of the low torque at lower revs. The bike wouldn't even be rideable.

Conversely, a bike with a peak of only 50 ft pd but a very flat curve (45 ft pd at 1000 rpm !) might accelerate a lot faster than one with a higher but peaky peak torque. Because it has more power available at lower revs so it gets to its peak faster.

Peak torque is ony relevant on single speed engines.

This talk of peak torque in a VERY narrow band made me think of F5Dave's bucket for some reason. Very peaky power can be used, it's just a bit hard on the clutch. Also I raced agains't a guy with a bike that made way more power than mine but in a narrow band. When he was "in-the-zone" he walked away from me but inbetween times I could pull him back.

This thread has been hijacked good and proper.

[The Stranger:Me]

OK so what's the suposed 0-60 of a rocket

[WINJA]

This talk of peak torque in a VERY narrow band made me think of F5Dave's bucket for some reason. Very peaky power can be used, it's just a bit hard on the clutch. Also I raced agains't a guy with a bike that made way more power than mine but in a narrow band. When he was "in-the-zone" he walked away from me but inbetween times I could pull him back.

This thread has been hijacked good and proper.

AND THIS GUY KNOWS HIS BUCKETS BETTER THAN MOST

[Mooch]

FIND THE CBR1100XX ONE TO BE UNBELIEVABLE , CAUSE ME AND CRAZY STEVE DID ROLL ONS FROM 100 AND FOUND WHEN HES IN 4TH I CAN USE 6TH AND ITS CLOSE , IF HE USES 5TH AND I USE SIXTH HE HAS NO CHANCE

June "Bike" magazine compares 2005 999R with R1.
999R 79.8 lb @ 7800rpm 138.6 bhp
R1 72.1 lb @ 9900rpm , 151.8 bhp.

The mazagine plots the torque of both , the 999 has it over the R1 up to it's red line. At 7000 rpm the Duke is making 20 % more torque and 20bhp more power , this slowly flatens of to the Dukes redline at with point the R1 bhp comes through in BHP only.

Interesting enough , Matt's stock MV 750 and my Ducati 748R were ploted on the same dyno , Matts old bike made more power and torque right through the rev range. I don't remember the torque figures , but I think in RW BHP it was 114 to 104. I'm running RS race cams , race exhaust with drops the torque in the lower rev range. Ended up with 110 bhp once a more suited chip was installed,The Vtwin was still short in both BHP and Torque compared to Matt's inline 4.

[onearmedbandit]

Can you buy this 'torque' in a can or bottle, how much of it should I put in my engine?

[GSVR]

More cylinders equals more power. A 750 inline 4 compares favourably with a 1000cc twin.

Remember the superbike rules around ten years or so ago. The only reason Ducati's had so much success was because the rules were biased in theirfavour. But it must have been great for Honda's development as their 750's were keeping up. But honda was running a V4 at the time.

Looking at current MotoGP engines there isn't any difference between a V4 or an inline four except maybe in weight distribution.

For an extreme compare a single cylinder with a multi of the same style and displacement.

Anyone built a Diesel bike? They would have good torque but no power.

Heres an interesting link I stumbled upon a while back .

http://www.maclean-nj.com/2002motogpengines.htm

[Lou Girardin]

The Bandit did 76 ft lbs at 8000 rpm on AMPS Dynojet dyno.
And remember that all dynos vary. So do roll ons, if you're 120 kilos you'll struggle against some Japanese racing snake on the same bike.
BTW, how about posting actual dyno figures you've SEEN, not rehashing magazine figures.

[James Deuce]

All fun in there own way. remember a bke can have no torque (2 strokes) no power (125cc sports) and look like crap (TDR250) but they are all still fun.

I'll say it again. I don't want it brought up again.

1. Two Strokes produce waaay more torque than four strokes of the same capacity and number of cylinders. It is the torque curve shape that is different.

2. Torque is a measurement of a twisting moment. When you wake up in the morning with an erection, push down on it and lift your feet off the floor. The force generated to lift your feet off the floor is torque.

Horsepower is a function of revs, torque is generated by rotating mass. Engines are at their most efficient at peak torque.

[Hitcher]

85 lb/ft of torque at 6000 rpm, in the old money...

Do I win anything?

[WINJA]

I'll say it again. I don't want it brought up again.

1. Two Strokes produce waaay more torque than four strokes of the same capacity and number of cylinders. It is the torque curve shape that is different.

2. Torque is a measurement of a twisting moment. When you wake up in the morning with an erection, push down on it and lift your feet off the floor. The force generated to lift your feet off the floor is torque.

Horsepower is a function of revs, torque is generated by rotating mass. Engines are at their most efficient at peak torque.

AND ACCORDING TO TOYOTA THEIR 2.4 PETROL HIACE HAS FAR MORE TORQUE AND HORSEPOWER EVERYWHERE COMPARED TO THEIR OWN 3.0 DIESEL