ITT: we post dyno sheets and others R8, H8, and guess the car

>>28477603 (OP)
Something with a bmw m57 diesel.

>>28477604
unleaded

>falling off at 6k
Pushrods

>>28477603 (OP)
SC300

If both hp and torque are falling off like that, why wouldn't they change the redline to 6k or something lower to stay in higher torque on upshift instead of reving higher
Or am I retarded and don't understand?

>elantra n
>cropped image from faceberg
>OP probably doesn't even own a car
grim

>>28477625
Meant sc400

>>28477630
kek I own the N, I've just never put it on a dyno
not that it wouldn't be a fun thread regardless of whether i owned the car or not

>>28477635
LOL

116whp, no need to post it.

>>28477635
Are there no performance shops in your area? If you only want a pull without an accompanying tune or upgrades then it just takes a few minutes

>>28477683
I mean I love the car and it's a ton of fun to drive but it's still a hyundai, I got it because it's basically the perfect daily driver sports sedan for the price, it's not a gt350 or z06 or something that i'm gonna go bragging to the boyz about muh hp/torques
also i'm just kinda lazy for that anyway, it's been a month and I still havn't had the windows tinted lol

>>28477603 (OP)
>sxth element
Something Hyundai/Kia.

>>28477629
You don't understand. I'll try and explain for you:
Power is torque times RPM. There's some more math for converting between units but just take my word for it with these numbers. If your engine is making 400 foot-pounds at 5000 RPM, you have 381 horsepower. Now, you can use gearing to turn that 381 horsepower into any combination of torque and RPM at the wheels that multiply out to 381 horsepower. You can have 4000 ft-lbs at 500 RPM, or 200 ft-lbs at 10,000 RPM. Notice how the torque at the wheels, which is the force that's accelerating the vehicle, depends on the engine's power and the speed of the wheels, but not directly on the engine's torque. So the goal with the engine if you want more acceleration or higher speed, is to make more power. You don't want to shift exactly when you make peak power, because then that will put you out of the power band in the higher gear. Consider this, which of these sets of numbers has the greater average: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] or [3, 4, 5, 4, 3]. Both sets are the same length and peak at 5, but the first has an average of 3 and the second has an average of 3.8. So the goal is to put peak to power exactly in the middle of the range* between shifts in order to maximize the average power and therefore the torque at the wheels.

*not actually exactly, because usually the power curve won't be symmetrical. It'll usually be biased to the lower side because power usually drops off quickly after peaking.

>>28477629
Stock redline is just over 6500rpm Anon.

>>28477629
To correctly understand an engine think of your power band as an averaged power output from the peak point and from a point lower and higher at some amount of power.
Lets take my car for example. HP peaks at 310 at 6200-6400. If we consider the points where HP is 10-15% lower both above and below that the engine has a useful powerband of about 5400 to 6800rpm, with an average powerband HP of 285.

"We" like to take an engine's peak and call it the power rating, and do all the different maths for P/W and accel and 0-60s and quarter mile and stuff, but in reality your usable useful power is more correctly an average number of the HP between the rpm your gear ratios shift to and the redline.

As a different example, the reason electrics get such accel even matching or beating a higher HP rated gas car, is they have god's swinging dick amount of torque from "Zero" rpm. This is also why small turbo engine cars get similar or better accel times as NAs, a good turbo is pushing the small engine to the same or better torque levels from a much lower RPM, as we see in OPs pic.

Done on a Dynapack btw
Peak hp was 212 at 5700rpm, peak torque was 217 lb-ft at 4300rpm

>>28477811
>>28477831

>>28477811
>>28477831
So basically OP as an example would want to be between ~4800 - 6700 RPM/redline for peak power

>>28477831
Engine torque doesn't matter, see >>28477811. The reason electric cars can have such good acceleration is because of their traction control, they have much faster transient response than an ICE so they can hold themselves right at the edge of traction for the whole run, where a gas car will end up doing a burnout or cutting too much power. Electric cars actually have worse low-speed power (what you're calling torque) than gas cars because a gas car can generate peak power while parked with launch control, while electric cars are usually either direct drive or have a two-speed gearbox and make reduced power at very low speeds.

>>28477860
That's great and all but torque over time IS power and torque does matter. The similar-accel EV can ride the edge of grip way harder for the first 30-40mph even if it loses accel past that range and the similar-accel gas engine is gaining output. The gas engine, again as an example, might be grip limited only to the first 10mph leaving "room on the table" while the EV can crush the tires for far longer.

Somebody please post the 1st gen BRZ getting gapped by a 110hp prius from a standing start so this fool can visually understand it.

>>28477625
370Z/G37

>>28477894
>someone post the automatic gt86 sleeping on the line as proof of anything
I gapped a lambo at the traffic lights yesterday bro
This proves my camry is faster than a lambo bro

>>28477906
I recall asking for the webm not asking for some spergtard's cope reply.

>>28477603 (OP)
Y'all like falling torque curves?

>>28477920
I BEAT A FERRARI TODAY /o/!!!

>>28477951
Grim

>>28477894
>torque over time IS power
Torque is (rotational) force. Power is energy over time, or force times distance. Force over time would be impulse, which is an entirely different concept.

>The similar-accel EV can ride the edge of grip way harder for the first 30-40mph
The EV rides the edge of grip closer because it responds to input more rapidly. Even in full fly-by-wire ICE cars, there's only so much the ECU can do to modulate the power output, and the engine itself has substantial inertia.

>even if it loses accel past that range and the similar-accel gas engine is gaining output
Electric motors start out with low power at very low RPMs, ramp up quickly, and then hold that power out to very high RPMs. On the other hand, ICEs have narrow powerbands, but have transmissions with many gears to keep them in their powerband as much as possible. ICEs have greater torque at very low wheel speeds because their engine speed isn't tied to the wheel speed.

>The gas engine, again as an example, might be grip limited only to the first 10mph leaving "room on the table" while the EV can crush the tires for far longer.
What you're describing here is an EV being more powerful than an ICE, which isn't really relevant to the discussion at hand.

>Somebody please post the 1st gen BRZ getting gapped by a 110hp prius from a standing start so this fool can visually understand it.
I'm well aware of the capabilities of EVs, you're just misunderstanding the source of those capabilities.

>>28478008
>Force over time would be impulse, which is an entirely different concept.
I made a silly mistake here, impulse is force times time. Force is instantaneous, it wouldn't make sense to divide it by time.

Is some faggot really trying to gaslight me that torque isn't what it is?

>>28478036
Torque is a rotational force around an axis. Is that what you think it is or are you wrong?

I personally don't worry about torque/hp bullshit and just mash the gas pedal when I wanna go fast

>>28477603 (OP)
This is pure fun.

>>28478061
Chad
I have a fast car and I miss having a slower car because you get to enjoy it more. If I stomp on the pedal I get 3 seconds of fun before I'm breaking the law.
In my Acura integra my gas pedal basically lived smashed against the floor.

>>28477973
What about this?

>>28477903
2 cylinders too many

>>28478063
that's a turbo subaru

>>28481293
Nope. 6 cylinder.

>>28481525
Diesel?

>>28481538
Nope.
6 cylinder, 91 octane gasoline. Made in the last 6 years.

A turbocharged 4-cylinder Subaru likely wouldn't get this kind of low end power but a diesel is a good guess.

Not enough power anymore. By far. I need more.

>>28481538
>>28478063
You're supposed to post your own dyno, faggot. It's a repost from Reddit like half of the threads on this shitty board

>>28477811
>If your engine is making 400 foot-pounds at 5000 RPM, you have 381 horsepower. Now, you can use gearing to turn that 381 horsepower into any combination of torque and RPM at the wheels that multiply out to 381 horsepower.
I was always told that torque is multiplied by gearing. So why doesnt power also get multiplied? pls help

>>28484111
If torque goes up (from gearing), speed goes down. And vice versa, if you increase the speed you lose torque.

>>28484111
Gearing effectively trades RPM for more torque, it can't make more power than it is given by the engine

>>28484121
>>28484117
My question is how a dyno chart would look different if we used different gears
You are saying the power curve looks the same but the torque curve is multiplied?
That doesnt make sense

>>28484117
does that mean i can give my car so many torques that it just burns rubber all day and is completely undrivable?

>>28484128
It would look the same, just longer or shorter. If you had an engine that peaked at 500 HP at 7000 RPM and hooked it up to the dyno through 2:1 gearing, it would reach 500 peak HP at 3500 RPM. If you used 1:2 gearing, it would reach 500 peak HP at 14,000 RPM.

>>28484142
Yes, extremely high-power cars are usually geared very tall because they'd have difficulty hooking up with shorter gearing. Corvettes, for example, redline at around 70 MPH in first gear. With a stump puller gear that redlines at 10 or 15 MPH, they'd cook the tires even at relatively low throttle position. There's also a speed component to burnouts though, you'd have a hard time getting your car to do one with a first gear that redlines at 1 MPH.

>>28477603 (OP)
late 90s SVT Cobra
>>28478063
smog era pontiac v8 that's been hopped up
>>28484105
LS 6.0 or 454
>>28484108
2019 B9 S4 with Stage 2 ECU + Stage 2 TCU
>>28484114
chevy 383 stroker