|
Post by MartinT on Jul 17, 2020 17:11:23 GMT
Torque means twisting action, directly related to acceleration. It's a much better real-world measurement than horsepower.
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on Jul 17, 2020 17:15:49 GMT
Yeah I get that bit but how does that relate to your driving experience?
Eg you have two cars that do 0-60 in exactly the same time but one has higher torque, what is the real world benefit of that? Hope that makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jul 17, 2020 17:55:27 GMT
It depends on their relative weight. If one has more torque than the other, it could be gearing or weight that's different.
In terms of driving experience, I can really feel the difference in my car. It's not just the number difference, it's the fact that there is more torque everywhere. The feeling is of faster response, better get-up-and-go at any revs in any gear. It makes it feel flexible and picks up speed faster without having to work the car through the gears.
|
|
|
Post by ajski2fly on Jul 17, 2020 18:36:41 GMT
It depends on their relative weight. If one has more torque than the other, it could be gearing or weight that's different. In terms of driving experience, I can really feel the difference in my car. It's not just the number difference, it's the fact that there is more torque everywhere. The feeling is of faster response, better get-up-and-go at any revs in any gear. It makes it feel flexible and picks up speed faster without having to work the car through the gears. Martin is quite correct, I used to be into cars for many years which I will not list here, one powerful car was a Morgan Plus 8, the model has a Rove V8 4L and has bags of torque, you could stick it in top gear and bumble along in it most of the time with the engine revving at 1500-2000rpm, and if you need to take of you just put your foot down, obviously as it was a relatively lightweight car it did not hang around, same power to weight ratio as a mid 90's 911.
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on Jul 17, 2020 20:24:32 GMT
It sounds like it is something you really need to experience to fully understand.
|
|
|
Post by petea on Jul 17, 2020 22:43:56 GMT
I doubt that anyone's interested, but I thought I'd share a non-hi-fi problem I've been having with the exhaust manifold I had fitted by Tuning Developments almost two years ago. It rises into the engine bay and back down again in order to give it a long run and improve torque. Unfortunately, it almost touches the top radiator hose and I've had to heat wrap the hose and exhaust several times already. The clearance is just a few mm and, whatever I do to twist the hose out of the way, it's always too close for comfort. On a hot day, I fear for my engine bay with all the heat brought up into it. I'd had enough about a month ago, sought advice from Abbey Motorsport who do all the work on my car now, and ordered a new Rogue Motorsport manifold. The equal-length version is on the right in the photo (I've chosen EL to make the car just a little quieter - less Subaru burble, more racecar). This will remain completely underneath the engine and will not bring any heat up into the engine bay. I'm having it installed next week, complete with a new dyno tune as is always required with such changes. Being one of the best on the market, its design should give me a little more torque again over the TD. And you thought power supplies were the best way to improve performance? Probably a bit late now, but when I had a tuned manifold fitted to my Jag. I had it ceramic coated which improves significantly heat dissipation and negated the need for a heat shield. That might help with the issue of the close proximity of the hoses you mentioned. It has worked well for me.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jul 17, 2020 22:54:27 GMT
Thanks, petea . Interestingly, the Rogue manifold came with some additional heatshielding for the underside of the car. I didn't have it ceramic coated as the previous manifold , which wasn't coated either, caused all the heat issues by rising up into the engine bay and then back down. This latter to create a long tube design for greater torque. The Rogue stays completely under the engine. As it turns out, the Rogue creates very much less heat and I was watching the water, oil and intercooler temps very closely today (it rose to 27C outside). Rock stable even after a three-hour drive on country A and B roads. Heat problem solved!
|
|
|
Post by petea on Jul 17, 2020 23:09:43 GMT
An XK engine had a cast iron manifold as standard and had a heat shield above it, but the equal length stainless-steel, tuned manifold deserved to be 'seen' as it were. It also dissipated heat differently and so it was ceramic coated to make that more uniform and negate the need for a shield. It worked perfectly (and looks very tidy too). The car is stored a few villages up from you and when I'm next back in the UK and we are able to meet safely I'll bring it over rather than the Micra for that long-delayed visit.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jul 18, 2020 8:09:08 GMT
Excellent, Pete, I look forward to it.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 23, 2020 8:45:05 GMT
Another good meeting at the Fuel Coffee House near Steyning. This had the best turn-out yet with 22 GT86/BRZs (well, strictly, 21 Toyotas and just the one Subaru - mine). We were lucky with the weather and enjoyed great coffee and conversation outside in the sun.
|
|
|
Post by The Brookmeister on Aug 24, 2020 20:48:19 GMT
Had this baby about 3 weeks now, no going back EVER. It weighs about 2 tonnes and does 0-60 in just a few seconds. Oh and of course no engine growl, no gear changes, whisper quiet.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 24, 2020 20:59:19 GMT
Impressive but soulless!
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Aug 25, 2020 14:42:05 GMT
My 1996 Saab 2.3 Turbo passed the MOT again !
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on Aug 25, 2020 17:22:42 GMT
My 97 Civic would have easily passed MOT again but emissions are too high for the new London zones etc
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Aug 25, 2020 17:36:43 GMT
My guess is the Saab would fail that too
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on Aug 25, 2020 17:49:42 GMT
For sure!
|
|
|
Post by Mr Whippy on Aug 27, 2020 20:30:30 GMT
Anyone know where I might get an equivalent for this Daihatsu rear shock absorber? Part number is: 48531B2400. Monroe part number is: Copen 0-4 12.
Googled till I'm blue in the face.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Aug 27, 2020 20:36:06 GMT
Have you scoured all the eBay sites? You might get lucky.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Whippy on Aug 27, 2020 21:12:48 GMT
Yes. There was a UK seller that had some last year. Kept meaning to get a pair but never did and now he's sold out. There is a dodgy Chinese seller with a number of cloned sites that has it listed, but that's the only one so far.
|
|
|
Post by pre65 on Aug 28, 2020 7:09:50 GMT
Anyone know where I might get an equivalent for this Daihatsu rear shock absorber? Part number is: 48531B2400. Monroe part number is: Copen 0-4 12. Googled till I'm blue in the face. I like a challenge.
Can you give me the vehicle details (make - model - year ) please, PM if necessary.
In real life I was a Parts Manager in aftermarket parts, and later with franchised dealers.
|
|