How come?

**Flip** · 14th September 2015, 20:46

Originally Posted by J.A.W.

Well yes Dave.. glad you appreciated the heads up on the whole TQ/HP deal.. guess you got learned good, huh..

Given TQ/HP IS JUST 1/REVS I guess F5 should have called it quits.

**caspernz** · 14th September 2015, 21:13

Torque and power in atmo engines vs turbo engines are an even more fascinating topic. Then add average "life to overhaul" into the equation and you end up back at the maxim "no replacement for displacement" again.

That must be one of the reasons, apart from $$$, that we all favour our own kind of bikes. For my kind of riding, I've done the buzzy 600/750 IL4 race replica kind of thing, and the Busa fits my style for the time being.

Imagine what could be achieved if we could get a small turbo diesel into a cruiser such as the HD market? The learning curve needed to adapt ones' riding style to a rising torque curve with falling revs would be intriguing....

**J.A.W.** · 14th September 2015, 21:23

Originally Posted by caspernz

Torque and power in atmo engines vs turbo engines are an even more fascinating topic. Then add average "life to overhaul" into the equation and you end up back at the maxim "no replacement for displacement" again.

That must be one of the reasons, apart from $$$, that we all favour our own kind of bikes. For my kind of riding, I've done the buzzy 600/750 IL4 race replica kind of thing, and the Busa fits my style for the time being.

Imagine what could be achieved if we could get a small turbo diesel into a cruiser such as the HD market? The learning curve needed to adapt ones' riding style to a rising torque curve with falling revs would be intriguing....

What makes you think the TQ would be rising.. with fuel cut ( C.I. mill) or throttled back ( S.I. mill) - on falling revs?

**Drew** · 15th September 2015, 07:47

Originally Posted by Flip

Given TQ/HP IS JUST 1/REVS I guess F5 should have called it quits.

Pretty sure it's torque/time. Revs has fuck all to do with it since you can use the unit of measurement to describe things that don't revolve.

**bogan** · 15th September 2015, 08:23

Originally Posted by Drew

Pretty sure it's torque/time. Revs has fuck all to do with it since you can use the unit of measurement to describe things that don't revolve.

Things that don't revolve tend to have 0hp though

**F5 Dave** · 15th September 2015, 08:32

Originally Posted by J.A.W.

Well yes Dave.. glad you appreciated the heads up on the whole TQ/HP deal.. guess you got learned good, huh..

Buddy I'm still not sure what point you were trying to make. All you taught me was that your personality makes it pointless and unenjoyable to engage with.

450 posts in less than a month. That's not normal. Let me guess. Told to leave every Australian forum? And I see its starting to happen here too.

Dude learn a life lesson. Stop posting for a week and come back with a better attitude to socialising. Cause that's what we are doing here. Clue is in the name,social media.

**caspernz** · 15th September 2015, 08:46

Originally Posted by J.A.W.

What makes you think the TQ would be rising.. with fuel cut ( C.I. mill) or throttled back ( S.I. mill) - on falling revs?

Simple, unless the fuelling curve is set to keep torque flat, then the falling revs torque rise aspect is natural for a turbo diesel. This is why us truckers love torquey turbo diesels...

**J.A.W.** · 15th September 2015, 08:52

Originally Posted by F5 Dave

Buddy I'm still not sure what point you were trying to make. All you taught me was that your personality makes it pointless and unenjoyable to engage with.

450 posts in less than a month. That's not normal. Let me guess. Told to leave every Australian forum? And I see its starting to happen here too.

Dude learn a life lesson. Stop posting for a week and come back with a better attitude to socialising. Cause that's what we are doing here. Clue is in the name,social media.

Too funny, you still don't get it..

It aint about me, or my personality, nor you & yours.. except in as much as you choose to ignore the longstanding, well-established physics..
The "life-lesson" is for you to learn Dave.. going ad hominem as a way of avoiding the pain of ego-growth is sadly, typical of infantile forum style..

Dumbing a forum down - to only those who think being 'nice' - even in a technical matter - is more important than learning the real deal - is what kills a lively forum.

**J.A.W.** · 15th September 2015, 08:55

Originally Posted by Drew

Pretty sure it's torque/time. Revs has fuck all to do with it since you can use the unit of measurement to describe things that don't revolve.

Revs - per minute - that is 360 angle turns repeated over time - IS the the means by which unit measurement for work done - HP - is expressed .. by the TQ force..

**J.A.W.** · 15th September 2015, 09:04

Originally Posted by caspernz

Simple, unless the fuelling curve is set to keep torque flat, then the falling revs torque rise aspect is natural for a turbo diesel. This is why us truckers love torquey turbo diesels...

If you are keen on a light compact C.I. turbo mill, check out this 2.2 litre 2T - 1000hp unit.. designed by Garrett for NASA -as a high efficiency helo engine..

http://www.ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nas...9930001160.pdf

**Flip** · 15th September 2015, 20:02

Originally Posted by J.A.W.

Revs - per minute - that is 360 angle turns repeated over time - IS the the means by which unit measurement for work done - HP - is expressed .. by the TQ force..

You are completely wrong, don't they teach basic maths in Auzy schools?

Work done is force x distance, or for a hydraulic system pressure x volume or for a rotational device torque x speed.

A motor can produce the same horse power if the speed is doubled if at the same time the torque is halved.

**J.A.W.** · 15th September 2015, 20:08

Originally Posted by Flip

You are completely wrong, don't they teach basic maths in Auzy schools?

Work done is force x distance, or for a hydraulic system pressure x volume or for a rotational device torque x speed.

A motor can produce the same horse power if the speed is doubled if at the same time the torque is halved.

No you are wrong.. the constant is 5252.. An electric motor produces max TQ off stall..

**F5 Dave** · 15th September 2015, 20:38

And who is talking about being infantile?

So you see yourself as the bastion of truth. Your mission to teach us neurotypicals the errors of our ways.

So you are certain that you are smarter than all of us (my money is on Phil). Let's examine some facts. You've totally failed to convince me I've made a fundamental error.
So brush that off as me being stupid and too stupid to notice.

Judging by the amount of green reps I've got both before and after my ` Buddy` post, I'd say you've been wholly ineffective in that role. Your arguments are weak, and rely heavily on insult and claiming without basis that Einstein's grandmother agrees with you.

That's not that smart.

And you haven't changed anyone's opinion.

So why are you still here?

**J.A.W.** · 16th September 2015, 09:15

Dave, when will you put away the weird over-personalising.. as previously noted, the TQ/HP deal is a well established physical process..
Whether or not you accept this, is your problem, & I am not concerned in the least about that.

As for your views on what constitutes a proper forum, & putative status therein, well, I find them quaintly fanciful, & also irrelevant to the discussion.
Nor do a few sycophantic rep votes over turn the laws of physics.. & really, an opinion's only worth - comes from the validation of the - facts - it is based on..