Rep Power: 0

I can't wait to see him argue against that^^^^ that's one of the most informed posts I've seen on this site!!!!!!

 
Rep Power: 330

no offence to u .....it just your saying it. we can believe you and then we can't....i'm saying about your car 115 in forth.....also this tread gone way to far

 
Rep Power: 343

I remember awile back a guy with a boosted RSX-S claiming to have 373 hp and 293 ft-lbs, he claimed to be able to hit 120 in 4th. I was the only one that questioned him, no one else found a problem with what he was saying.

Now if people here are willing to believe that a RSX-S can hit 120 in 4th, why is it so hard to believe that a GTS can hit 115 in 4th??

 
Rep Power: 0

OK guys....I dont usually post much in the room but I have to this time.

Most of you civic drivers have no clue how fast and capable the Celica GTS with 6speed is.

Now don't start flaming me here ...I do own both the celica GT and 01 civic.

I have to admit that they are very difficult cars to race in due to their tranny / gearing and it's peaky powerband but once you master it, it's extremely fast on the highway.---except the 02 models(it has rev limiter of 7600rpm where as 00, 01 and 03 models cuts out at 8400rpm.

I used to sell toyotas and every time I'd take the 6spd GTS out, I was always amazed by it's performance, handling and braking.

I also believe that if the MR2 was at stock boost, the celica had a chance to hang with him.
Remember guys that turboed cars are not that fast on the highway speeds, they're just good for drag racing,,,,,and thats with low boost such as 5 or 6 pounds.

I remember when Car and Driver tested Prelude SRV vs Eagle Talon TSi, the prelude just spanked the talon after 70miles.......by big margin. The DOHC Honda and Toyotas with Lift system really works,,,,,,,especially the top end.

 
Rep Power: 0

Exactly, i guess it really is that hard for people to believe that he hit 115 in 4th...the point here is that none of them drive a gt-s so they have no idea what it can do, i would take the guy with gt-s's word about it over someone who doesn't drive one. And if u guys want some more to think about, my brother has a 2000 ex coupe and he has hit anywhere from 120-122mph in 4th if he runs it to the rev limiter.....

 
Rep Power: 0

i said that horsepower is based off of torque. never did i say it didnt matter, but i did say that it is not some seperate thing from torque. from your first post you were acting like they were two entirely different things. now why the complete turnaround and say this:
way to go!

yea, you are just adding to my argument...i said that even with high end torque, it still maxes out at 130 ftlbs...sadly not enough even with gearing.

[/B][/QUOTE]

and as for the gts guy
quit whining...youre pulling the exact same bull that goes on at the wrx boards. some ricer in a gts celica stock thinks he can take a stock wrx from a roll. please. not happening...ever (unless the wrx driver is struggling to catch a breath while having chest pains).

what did you say about 167 hp? wow you must have the new toyota "hand of god" transmission to only get a 7% drivetrain loss. just stop with the bs. dropping the weight 225lbs wont drop your 1/4 et by .5sec (or more)...and no, the power output for the gts is not underrated like an srt neon.

 
Rep Power: 343

Actually in my first post i said a basic rule of thumb was that torque = low speed accerlation and horesepower = top end pull and that still holds true.

You haven't proved me wrong, so far you've only argued the obvious by throwing out well known formuas, [sarcasim] You still haven't proved me and all the salt flat racers wrong that TORQUE is what gives you top end pull. If your right then you should be given a noble prize cause for 60 years everyones has been wrong, but lucky for us you came along and set things straight. Sheesh i can't believe for 60 years we all thought horsepower gave us top end, boy we were wrong. [/sarcasim]

If you knew what you were talking about you'd be talking about how the torque derived from the kenitic energy generated by the rotational mass of a car is less than the amount of torque the engine is producing after it has gone through the gearbox. But since your WAY off on your argument i guess well argue about this on page 20 or so when this thread gets that long.

You my friend are a perfect example of someone who has an understanding of torque but has no clue what horsepower is or how its used.

Answer this, WHAT IS THE POINT OF HORSEPOWER IN A CAR???, if torque is all that matters from idle to redline then why do we even bother measuring horsepower.

I guess i have to dumb that down for you cause apparently you didn't understand it. Making more torque at a higher RPM means you have a much useable torque thus you don't have to be in "the right" gear to get the car to accelrate. You could be in your final gear and if you have alot of useable torque you could accelerate.

 
Rep Power: 0

"I remember awile back a guy with a boosted RSX-S claiming to have 373 hp and 293 ft-lbs, he claimed to be able to hit 120 in 4th. I was the only one that questioned him, no one else found a problem with what he was saying.

Now if people here are willing to believe that a RSX-S can hit 120 in 4th, why is it so hard to believe that a GTS can hit 115 in 4th??"

Dude?

First off...
You dont need to be comparing a 373 hp, 293 lb-ft car to a 180 hp, 130 lb-ft car. That RSX, if he DID have 373 HP, is out of your cars league. big difference. Even if it was 273 HP, it would still smoke you.
Unless, of course I've got my foot in my mouth and you forgot to put 2's where thos 1's are.

As far as the torque thing goes.....

I always thought of horsepower as how much work the car car do, and torque, how quick it can get that work done.

I have always noticed, the more torque I have in a vehicle, the faster it revs, and accelerates, and the more horsepower i get out of it, the more work it can do (TOP SPEED)

they go hand-in-hand anyways oh well so who cares just both of you go home thinking your right. jeez

 
Rep Power: 0

i dont doubt new celicas gts ofcourse the gt is crap......... but against a mr2 turbo very doubtful not impossible but very doubtful

 
Rep Power: 330

i'm just saying i never seen it done....i'm not saying it can't be done

 
Rep Power: 343

DUDE first off the only difference between the boosted RSX-S and a stock RSX-S was power. And as you mentioned, a big difference, but wether you have 1,000 hp or 100 hp if you keep the stock gearbox you will have the same top speed in each gear of course with 1000 hp you can top out each gear pretty quickly but will be at the same speed. That is unless you raise your revs so you can hold each gear longer. There are only a few ways to increase your top speed in each gear.

1) Change transmission
2) Raise your revs
3) Taller tires

The owner of the RSX in question mentioned nothing about raising his revs or changing his gearing. He did have what looked like 19 inches rims with about an inch and a half of side wall top and bottom making for a 22 inch tire diameter but to be generous i factored in a 25 inch tire diameter and still proved him wrong.

Your on the right path

Torque is just a measure of weight over distance ex: you lift a 100 lb weight 1 foot of the ground you have exerted a force of 100 ft-lbs. And has been known to be more important for lowspeed accerlation

Horsepower is a measure of torque over a given period of time and has be known to be more important for high speed accerlation

But since theres no easy mathmatical formula that shows which on is better for which there wil always be people that will argue this topic.

 
Rep Power: 0

ok moron boy I never said that and NEVER have I acted like a ricer. HOWEVER you comin on here and trying to flame me without knowing what the hell youre talking about sure fits into the ricer profile doesnt it.

Now just to make you look stupid I'm going to try and make a vid tonight of me hitting 120 with room to spare since I dont wanna risk holding the cam and doin 140 I'll wait til I get a passenger for that.

And actually I have beaten a stock wrx from a dead stop fvck a roll.Plenty of witnesses. Beat him by 1/2 car all the way to 120mph in less than 1/2 mile. I'd explain it to you but I'll post the link where I posted it on new celica.org since you guys like to quote from there!! Now eat your words loser and stop flamin on my threads damn it!!!!

http://www.newcelica.org/forums/show...hreadid=100640

Hmm looks to me like I got a lot of props from people who were there. Also yes I did admit hed rape me on the track. But that wasnt a track now was it. just goes to show you what kinda potential is in the gt-s especially MINE with me driving. now why the hell would I bother BS'n anyone on this board?? hmm think about that for a minute while you hold your head in shame! You need to just go get OWNED stamped on your fore head. BTW dont even come back with oh I'll race you blah blah cause everyone know a wrx is faster than a stock celica. NOW GO AWAY!

 
Rep Power: 0

also let me tell you the power to weight ratio in a celica GT-S is close to 13:1 so for every 13lbs drop you gain an efficient 1hp to the wheels
so I'd say I freed up about 17hp. hmm funny how these things work isnt it. Also Im going hopefully friday to get my car weighed to get an official weight with me in it. ok thats all I gotta say!

 
Rep Power: 0

i never said that was wrong, just not entirely correct. i said:
that means that with the torque so late in the powerband, its still only putting out 130 ft lbs

im not going to even bother answering any more of your stupid questions. i already did with the turbo diesel truck. once again you talk like horsepower has nothing to do with torque. lmao @ you for being that dumb. horsepower: torque at a certain point in the rpm band.

what does this have to do with anything? btw you could have just said torque lost through the drive train instead of trying to look smart but not even spelling kinetic correctly.

sure thing boss.

You dont "measure" horsepower directly without measuring torque. You said it yourself, dynos measure wheel torque the convert it (by using math) into a horsepower number.


i never said horsepower doesnt matter. if horsepower never mattered in a situation like this, then torque wouldnt matter either. why? because horsepower is torque with a time variable thrown into it, like you stated. i said its meansures at what rpm the torque peaks at. once again, you act like hp and torque are seperate things. they are not.

i am done arguing with you, because you refute your initial statements. thus, there isn't a point because you arent sticking to one side of this argument. first you say:

"horsepower pulls at the top end"
then you post an article which states that you can never feel a motor's horsepower, only torque
first you act like the two are seperate entities, then you acknowledge what ive been telling you the whole time, then you go back to acting like they have nothing to do with each other. so im going to make this REALLY simple because your lack of intelligence/debating skills astound me. HORSEPOWER DOES NOT PULL

 
Rep Power: 0

wait...im lost...you mean you actually contributed anything to the debate between gotboost and me?

well shoot, is there an overall difference between racing on the streets for 1/4 mile and racing on a drag strip for a 1/4 mile? aside from the differences in tarmac anyway, i cant think of any difference, besides not being able to stage that well (lights arent like drag trees). i am not considering any weather besides a dry day here. if you streetrace while its raining you = ubertard. if your friend would rape you on the track, he would rape you on the streets too. at first i thought maybe he didnt want to risk his tranny, since wrx 5-speed trannies are "glass", but then i read through the celica thread and found this:
you said your gts was stock. all cars are stock originally out the dealership door. dumbass.

 
Rep Power: 0

you are a moron you called bs on me then looked more retarded by arguing with him!

 
Rep Power: 0

and Of course all cars are stock from the factory stupid what the hell kinda comment is that? and yeah I beat him period so whos to say what coulda happend on that freeway maybe something went wrong who knows you call BS on me and then said I'd never beat a wrx well obviously I did jacka$$ he ran a 9.3 a irwindale I ran a 9.6 now it would only take 1 minor error for him to get owned and thats exactly what happened so like I said NEVER call BS unless you were there or can without a doubt prove it didnt happen you little ricer you dont even deserve to have your car.

 
Rep Power: 0

I'm not going to jump in and argue.....I just don't have the patience...but for the record...weither you believe me or not...weither you won the race or are BSing or whatever.....04WRX is correct. Also I have read this post from start to finish and have noticed that 1. Got boost has contradicted himself a few times. and 2. he tried to use technical jargon and used it incorrectly.
"If you knew what you were talking about you'd be talking about how the torque derived from the kenitic energy generated by the rotational mass of a car is less than the amount of torque the engine is producing after it has gone through the gearbox."
What you just said is "there is power loss through the gearbox" or "crank torque is higher than wheel torque" I'm not sure what that had to do with your argument other than you being able to use the words kinitic energy and rotational mass in the same sentence. OK I am done..
WRX...keep up the good information...those of us that didn't fall asleep in physics class know your right.

 
Rep Power: 0

well desppite your honest opinion hes still an a$$ and should stick to the books since racing Obviously isnt his strong suit! I'm usually a nice guy but you dont call BS to me and then ignore my posts by arguing with someone else. then to call me a ricer and never back himself up wtf. Stick to the books kid I've checked out your other posts and all you do is talk ish so go ***** on youre own boards!!

 
Rep Power: 343

You might want to read that again. Beacuse when a car is traveling at high speeds the rotational mass (tires, rims, brake rotors, axles, gearbox) is rotating very fast, now any object in motion has kinetic energy, you can convert this energy into torque. The torque generated by the engine must be more than the torque generated by the rotational mass in order for the car to accerlate. But like i said well get back to this somewhere around page 20.

The turbo diesel was just to point out that you need more than just one unit (torque or horsepower) to calculate the other. And i think you should count the number of times i said horsepower is just a more specific measure of torque. And yes at 5252 rpm horsepower and torque will be equal.

Actually i made a simple statement, if i knew i was going to be in an in depth arguement i would have made myself more specific. Now if i just repeated my initial statement over and over that wouldn't make a very intresting or productive debate. But like a typical debate one person makes a statement, another person responds. After the initial statement and response, each side elaborates on there views. If you read again you'll see that i haven't my opinion. yes i have listened to your side. But i have stuck to my original argument iv'e just gone further in depth

Also the reason why you don't feel horsepower is because its not an instantaneous (sp?) measurment. Imagine your torquing (sp? again) down your lug nuts. When youv'e got your torque wrench you don't have to be staring at the needle to have an estimate of how much torque your putting out. Because at any moment you can estimate the amount of torque. But you don't feel the amount of torque your putting out over a period of time.

Example: You can go out side and estimate that its around 90 degrees, but you can't walk out side and estimate the average temperature over the last 3 hours.

 
Rep Power: 0

lmao you think because you gutted your cars interior you gained motor power?

 
Rep Power: 343

I think this is what he was trying to say

On a track a WRX and a Mustang GT are fairly close, simply looking at the times would suggest that the WRX is almost as fast as the GT.

But race from a roll and the GT will pull the WRX.

 
Rep Power: 0

he said that race was from a dead stop.

 
Rep Power: 343

Another basic rule of thumb is that if you lose 100 lbs of dead weight it would have about the same effect as if you gained 10 horsepower. Although this obviously won't show up on a dyno it will show up in the quarter mile

Car - 100 lbs dead weight = Car + 10 horsepower

 
Rep Power: 0

thanks for the support!

 
Rep Power: 343

Please enlighten me, this should be intresting. Show me how i used "technical jargon" incorrectly, because im not going to dumb down everything for you by saying "the torque made by the spinny thing"

read my earlier post, i tried to simplify things for you guys. I you don't understand something ASK, don't try to jusmp out and be a critic for something you don't understand.

And those of us that are a few classes away from a mechanical engineering degree know hes wrong.

 
Rep Power: 0

wrong. the old saying is car - 100lbs = -0.1 seconds in the 1/4. it was never ever related to hp, sorry.

 
Rep Power: 0

So you trying to tell me power to weight ratio means nothing??? You get more retarded by the minute.

 
Rep Power: 0

I never said motor power moron I was simplifying it for you since you dont seem to understand anything anyone says only what you can copy outa some article about how troque works. Now Stop this childish arguement and either tell everyone why you say its BS or STFU and go away already!

 
Rep Power: 0

obviously, since you cant read, ill have to explain further. 100lbs off a car = -0.1 seconds in the 1/4 is exactly that...power to weight ratio changed. what isnt changed is the hp the motor makes. anyone who thinks it does = idiot. motor power is independent of the weight of the car, thus saying that 100lbs nets an "invisible" 10 hp is just downright retarded.

and i already told you why i think its bs. read back a page or two.