Username or Email Address
Do you already have an account?
Forgot your password?
  • Log in or Sign up

    VWVortex


    Results 1 to 31 of 31

    Thread: Torque vs Horsepower

    1. Member clifborder4fm's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 13th, 2007
      Posts
      721
      Vehicles
      01 VRT, B6 1.8t Quattro
      05-22-2011 01:04 AM #1
      Hey guys so I am moving to Europe soon hopefully and getting a bmw 330d. But I am still trying to understand how torque works exactly compared to hp. My understanding on the relationship between the 2 forces is that basically the more torque the faster you get to your max horsepower?

      So if a Ferrari F430 raced against this guys car (which is exactly the same car with the same setup I will get): http://www.e46fanatics.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=819419

      how would it go? I feel the bmw would smash at first but then the ferrari would easily catch up and blow by...

      Thanks for the help guys

      (by the way that bmw gets over 40 highway mpg's diesel ftw)

    2. Member JSWTDI09's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 22nd, 2009
      Location
      Las Vegas, NV
      Posts
      522
      Vehicles
      2009 VW Jetta TDI Sportwagen
      05-22-2011 02:44 AM #2
      This might help:

      http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=112247

      and this:

      http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=14100

      This one comes closer to answering your Ferrari question:

      http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=130030


      To paraphrase Carroll Shelby: "Horsepower sells cars, Torque wins races"

      Have Fun!

      Don
      Last edited by JSWTDI09; 05-22-2011 at 02:47 AM.
      2009 Jetta SportWagen TDI
      Candy White/Anthracite Build date: 01/16/09; Buy date: 02/09/09
      Coveted Three Pedal Version, Big hole in roof
      Dieselgeek Shortshifter & Panzer Plate (my favorite & my smartest mods)
      2microntech Pure Flow and Contain Flow CR fuel system modifications

    3. Member
      Join Date
      Apr 16th, 2004
      Location
      Hatfield, MA
      Posts
      2,825
      Vehicles
      2010 Golf TDI 6M 2Dr
      05-22-2011 11:30 AM #3
      Ever watch Pimp My Ride? In one episode they installed a tuned Duramax engine and Allison 6spd in a '67 or '68 Impala, which is a big, heavy boat. Once they got it dialed in, they did 1/4 mile drag races against a Ferrari, a Lotus, a Mustang GT, and something else. The only car to beat it was the Mustang.

    4. Member clifborder4fm's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 13th, 2007
      Posts
      721
      Vehicles
      01 VRT, B6 1.8t Quattro
      05-22-2011 01:59 PM #4
      Ok those links had a ton of info... So what I got from that is that the gear ratio is a huge factor in torque numbers... whats the difference between a diesel's gear ratio compared to that of a petrol? And wouldn't you just be able to change the gear ratio of the gas car to produce way more torque... but wait the max horsepower of petrol cars is in the higher rpm range... diesels have it in the lower range.. Holy crap my brain is fried..

      So I guess my question right now is why do diesels generally have worse 0-60 times compared to petrol cars? Gear ratio? would this be why its so difficult to do a burnout in a diesel?

      I think I got it!! Engine can't rev that high in a diesel so you need a tighter gear ratio which is why that have all that torque!


      But in the end, those links made it seem like high horsepower and high rpms work best in race situations... Once torques gone its the horsepower that will keep you accelerating..

      So the ferrari will win then even though my bmw would have 150 more torque... because...

    5. Member clifborder4fm's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 13th, 2007
      Posts
      721
      Vehicles
      01 VRT, B6 1.8t Quattro
      05-22-2011 02:13 PM #5
      why does this happen then.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKscQ...eature=related

      hp = tq * rpm/ 5252

      ok so being able to rev at a higher rpm is much more important than tq because the number for rpm in the civic will go to 8000 while the diesel will only go to 4500 say.. while torque the difference is only 100-150 as compared to thousands..

      the ferrari f430 revs pretty high which explains all the power... and ultimatley hp is what makes you go faster..

      So wait another question. Why do diesel's rev so low? And how can you make them rev higher?

      In theory if you could make a diesel redline at like 6k or more, then that would be an unstoppable car right? but wait then you would have to change the gear ratio... fml

    6. Member clifborder4fm's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 13th, 2007
      Posts
      721
      Vehicles
      01 VRT, B6 1.8t Quattro
      05-22-2011 02:25 PM #6
      well bmw has made some advancements actually: http://www.thedieseldriver.com/2010/...he-year-award/

      I remember reading that this engine redlines at around 6k. Now 2 questions: 1) is that because of the lightness of the engine's parts (why can civics rev to 9k? I heard it has to do with weight of particular parts of the engine) which is why diesels usually rev low because they have heavy steel blocks..

      2nd question: how is the alluminum block able to handle high revs with diesel..

    7. 05-22-2011 03:25 PM #7
      Diesels have lower RPM limit due to that fact the pistons, connecting rods, and crankshaft are beefier than those say in a honda civic.

      A train's diesel engine only revs to 800 rpm.

    8. Member JSWTDI09's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 22nd, 2009
      Location
      Las Vegas, NV
      Posts
      522
      Vehicles
      2009 VW Jetta TDI Sportwagen
      05-22-2011 04:02 PM #8
      Quote Originally Posted by Al Czervik View Post
      A train's diesel engine only revs to 800 rpm.
      ...and most big truck diesels (semi tractors) rev to well less then 2000 rpms. Typically a "power band" between about 1100 to 1400 rpms. this is why the have 10 to 15 speed (or more) transmissions. It was VW in the '80s who mostly pioneered "high reving" diesels (meaning 4000+ rpm).

      Have Fun!

      Don
      Last edited by JSWTDI09; 05-22-2011 at 04:17 PM.
      2009 Jetta SportWagen TDI
      Candy White/Anthracite Build date: 01/16/09; Buy date: 02/09/09
      Coveted Three Pedal Version, Big hole in roof
      Dieselgeek Shortshifter & Panzer Plate (my favorite & my smartest mods)
      2microntech Pure Flow and Contain Flow CR fuel system modifications

    9. Member
      Join Date
      Mar 31st, 2008
      Location
      PNW - Oregon
      Posts
      5,780
      Vehicles
      92 Jetta GLI 1.6TD Ripper (VNT20 Turbo), 86 GTI (Wolfsburg Golf), 86 Audi Coupe GT
      05-22-2011 05:17 PM #9
      Quote Originally Posted by clifborder4fm View Post
      well bmw has made some advancements actually: http://www.thedieseldriver.com/2010/...he-year-award/

      I remember reading that this engine redlines at around 6k. Now 2 questions: 1) is that because of the lightness of the engine's parts (why can civics rev to 9k? I heard it has to do with weight of particular parts of the engine) which is why diesels usually rev low because they have heavy steel blocks..

      2nd question: how is the alluminum block able to handle high revs with diesel..
      well, diesel burns alot slower than gasoline, so that right there is a RPM limiting factor..

      and civics can turn 10k rpms because there is nothing (well almost) in that engine. all the parts in that engine are light weight, and made to spin a billion rpms.. but thats also a reason that hondas have NO TORQUE at all..

      and thats why diesels have alot of torque, they have a way more heavy duty rotating assembly (crank, rods, pistons, that sort of thing) because of all the added stress that comes with the diesel engine. a gasser usually has about 175 psi of compression (around 9:1) while diesels on the other hand, usually have upwards towards 4-500 psi compression (around 20:1) thats another contributing factor to why a diesel doesnt turn 9000 rpms, there is alot of compression pushing back on that piston..

      and an iron block has no effect on an engines ability to rev up. an aluminum engine will not turn more rpms just because the block is aluminum.. aluminum is used because it is light, fairly strong, and dissipates heat alot better than iron..
      Last edited by Glegor; 05-22-2011 at 05:21 PM.

    10. Member clifborder4fm's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 13th, 2007
      Posts
      721
      Vehicles
      01 VRT, B6 1.8t Quattro
      05-22-2011 06:28 PM #10
      Ya i feel like I need to go drive a high torque diesel car for me to understand what it's all about..

      Its weird though that my vr6 when it was stock did 0-60 in 6.8 (174 hp) while the 03 bmw 330d I want to get with 204 hp and 300 tq does it in 7.2 stock...

    11. Member 16VJohn's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 1st, 2005
      Posts
      1,589
      Vehicles
      00'/98' Jetta TDI
      05-27-2011 09:27 PM #11
      Quote Originally Posted by clifborder4fm View Post
      Ya i feel like I need to go drive a high torque diesel car for me to understand what it's all about..

      Its weird though that my vr6 when it was stock did 0-60 in 6.8 (174 hp) while the 03 bmw 330d I want to get with 204 hp and 300 tq does it in 7.2 stock...
      Was your VR6 a manual trans? The BMW probably weighs a lot more, probably automatic (drive train losses) and is geared for efficiency (taller gears). Gearing plays in important role in 0-60 times. The longer you can stay in a lower gear, the faster your car will be, comparatively speaking. Diesels make gobs of power in the lower RPM range, which is why they are desirable for moving freight. Low RPM torque isn't limited to just diesels either. Look at the low RPM (long stroke) gasoline engines. They make torque like a diesel does. Why? Cause the "lever" aka: connecting rod is longer, thus increasing the "force", but limiting revability at the same time, which will effect the horsepower rating. It's hard to look at logically, but to put it in a very broad generalization, a high torque, low HP engine will do about the same amount of work as a low torque, high rpm engine.... they simply make their power at different RPM ranges. HP was a marketing term used to compare steam engines to horses. It was very general and didn't take into account many variables... Like I say, just a marketing term to help people compare what they knew (horses) to a completely new technology and way of doing things (steam). It's still used today as a marking term and like any other form of measurement, it's an accurate way to compare things to other things like it. (You can't use HP to compare a diesel VW to a gasoline VW. With that, you only have half of the story.)

      Sorry to continue my rambling, but here's a different way to look at it. Get on your 10 speed bike, put it in first gear. Now pedal the bike until you get up to 10mph. Your legs are spinning very fast but you're only going 10mph. Now, change the gear to 10. You are peddling much slower but going the same speed. Compare HP to the fast spinning 1st gear and torque to the slow spinning 10th gear... either way you slice it, the same amount of work is being done. To put it in very simple terms, Torque = Measurement of force, Horsepower = Measurement of work done over time... or a measurement of energy exerted on an object... like Watts, Joules, Calories, etc...

      Diesel and gasoline engines... two different tools for two different jobs.
      Last edited by 16VJohn; 05-27-2011 at 09:35 PM.

    12. Member
      Join Date
      Aug 2nd, 2010
      Location
      Athens, Ohio
      Posts
      1,969
      Vehicles
      99 Jetta TDI, 00 Golf 2.0, 81 Rabbit pickup vr6, 02 TDI jetta
      05-28-2011 06:34 AM #12
      Quote Originally Posted by OttoSchultz View Post
      Ever watch Pimp My Ride? In one episode they installed a tuned Duramax engine and Allison 6spd in a '67 or '68 Impala, which is a big, heavy boat. Once they got it dialed in, they did 1/4 mile drag races against a Ferrari, a Lotus, a Mustang GT, and something else. The only car to beat it was the Mustang.
      right, because a mustang gt is obviously the superior car there/ must have been a crap ferrari

    13. 05-29-2011 01:36 AM #13
      This is part of an article written several years ago, so the numbers today should be different, but not the main point. Sorry for the length, but perhaps helps understanding the problem!
      During the past decades, I worked in several countries as a design and research engineer for the automotive industry. There was -and still is- a permanently returning debate, even among engineers, about answering the question: which single parameter drives a vehicle, power or torque? The word “single” is important! If several parameters can be included, even fuel consumption or exhaust temperature could be a partial answer.
      Let me try to add a few arguments and some sort of suggestion to this subject, which comes up rather frequently especially in the US, where the big displacement -obviously higher torque- engines, with relatively low specific power output rate are preferred. For example: the Corvette Z 06 is still below the VW 1.9 liter top of the line turbo diesel! (Using rounded DIN hp-values, 72 hp/l versus 79hp/l.) In order, to make this discussion brief and easier to follow, I shall use simplifications. In our approach almost everything is ideal and our vehicle is moving on a straight line, accelerating or with constant speed. (Car is a shorter word, than vehicle, that is why it will be used, even if one means truck, bus, bike, sail-sledge or anything else, which can be considered as a vehicle!)
      Let us start with the acceleration. Not just because this is one of the highest contributors to the fun-factor, but because in order to reach any constant speed, at first we have to accelerate. To get a certain [a] acceleration for our car, which has [m] mass, we need [F] force. This time we apart from the acceleration of the revolving mass, not because it is always negligible, but just for simplification. (By the way, e.g. in case of a sail-sledge nothing rotates.)
      F=m . a
      In English, to accelerate, the car needs FORCE!
      After accelerating for some time, we reach a speed, we want to maintain as a constant speed on a horizontal road. Since the conditions are just almost ideal, we do not move in vacuum, i.e. there is air surrounding us, which has to be moved away. The dragging force will depend on the relative speed [v] (square of speed!), the frontal area of the car [A], the air density [ρ] and the shape of the car. This latter is expressed in the drag coefficient [cd].
      F=ρ/2 . v^2 . A . cd
      So, to overcome the drag with constant speed, the car needs FORCE again!
      The last major resistance, we have to work against, is the slope with [α] angle. (The rolling resistance is neglected, because of its little value!) When we are climbing up on a slope with constant speed, a force is needed to work against a component of the weight of our car, which is parallel with the slope.
      F=m . g . sinα
      As you already know, to climb up on slopes with constant speed, the car needs FORCE!
      Of course any combination of the aforementioned main components can and will occur on the roads. But the sum of forces is still force. There are different ways to generate a driving force, e.g. towing the car with rope; using jet engine to obtain thrust; going down on a slope without any motor (see above), using wind or using wheels, which are being driven. From these few examples it can already be seen, that the correct answer CAN NOT BE TORQUE! Nobody can speak about torque in case of a towing rope, a jet engine, wind or a slope. As an extreme, in some cases our “car” would not even need wheels, so nothing rotates! One can still say: O.K. torque is not a general answer, but almost 100% of the cars are moving by means of engine driven wheels. In this case the driving force is the tangential force, acting at the wheel-road contact. This means, that the force can be calculated easily from the wheel-torque. Because they are proportional, either of them could be used.
      But is force the right answer? Not at all! It was shown that the car needs force, but not just for an instant, the force has to move with the car, e.g. all the way up on the slope. Force is acting through a distance [s] is work [W]. What do we need if we want to double the speed [v] of the car through that distance [s]? The time [t] necessary to get there will be just half. This means, the necessary power should be doubled as well, because the work done during the time-unit is the power [P].

      P=W/t=F . s/t=F . v

      THE CAR IS DRIVEN BY POWER!

      By the way, if you are torque-hungry, it is easy to avoid starving. Just use different gear ratio and the torque can be increased. But the power stays constant. Trouble can come, when one wants to drive the car at medium or high speed. The power-characteristics can not be changed without replacing or retuning the engine.
      Does this mean, that the torque-supporters are wrong? Literally yes, but what they probably want to say, is different and based on driving experience. Powering a car means that the engine is operating in a wide speed range, let us say, from 1500 RPM to the max. RPM. The power-output, can be found in specifications for today’s internal combustion engines, is the maximum power, which -especially when the engines have computer-controlled fuel injection- is close to the max. RPM. At lower engine speeds the available power is less. But how much less?
      To answer this question, we need to see and analyze the total power curve in the operating range, instead of using just one point of it. To avoid this inconvenience, assuming the curves always have similar shape, the torque peak is used, as another “one point value”. If the engine speed [n] is known, the power can be calculated as the product of torque [T], RPM and a constant value [c].
      P=c . T . n
      (With ISO units, c=1/9549 for kW; with SAE units, c=1/5252 for SAE hp.)
      Therefore as an approach, one could say, the higher the torque peak, the less the power drop is within a range, which means better car performance with the same maximum power. This is most likely the driving force for the torque-supporters. (In case of manual transmission, it is not necessary to change the gears frequently, the clutch does not need to be burned at traffic lights to get maximum acceleration, etc.) The only problem is with this practice, that the curves are not really similar, so knowing two points, we still can not compare directly two engines with identical, -not to mention with different-, power and torque peaks. Let us look at a simplified example!
      We have two engines with “properly” matched transmissions and one car. The “proper” transmission in this case means, that the car’s top speed in every gear will be the same, no matter what engine we choose. The engine data are as follows:


      Engine # 1 Engine # 2
      Power: 268 hp @ 4500 RPM 268 hp @ 8000 RPM
      Torque: 320 lb-ft @ 2800 RPM 216 lb-ft @ 4500 RPM
      Suppose the torque curves between the power peak and torque peak are straight lines. Which motor would you choose if your goal is the sportier car?
      Engine # 1 has the same power peak and significantly higher torque at lower speed, therefore this is the obvious choice. Right? Wrong! Just for easier understanding we can place an extra “reductive-gearbox” between the engine and the “original” transmission. Engine # 2 has higher speed, so in order to get the same car speed, we shall use a ratio of 8000/4500=1.78 in this “reductive-gearbox”. At the power peak the torque and speed on the input shaft of the “original” transmission will be identical with engine # 1. At the torque peak the data will be:
      1.78*216=384 lb-ft @ 4500/1.78=2528 RPM !
      In English, using engine # 2, higher torque will be delivered to the wheel at lower speed, just what the torque supporters are looking for. Surely no “reductive-gearbox” is necessary, just the ratio should be changed in the power train! A really proper driveline, where just the car’s top speed is unchanged, will give even better performance with the second engine. (Handling the clutch is still some issue at the start!)
      Could we avoid this misunderstanding if we used just power? (Engine #1 delivers 171 hp at torque peak and engine #2 delivers 185 hp.) Not quite! Even in this simple case we need some calculations because the engine speeds are different. In real life the curves are rarely straight lines, not to mention, that the curve-segments below the torque peak and over the power peak are also players in this game. Fortunately there is an obvious improvement at hand, which is still not a perfect solution, but seems better, than today’s practice.
      This would be the AVERAGE POWER.
      In our computerized world it is not a big deal to calculate the area under the power curve in a certain engine speed range, to obtain the average power.

    14. Member clifborder4fm's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 13th, 2007
      Posts
      721
      Vehicles
      01 VRT, B6 1.8t Quattro
      05-30-2011 01:03 PM #14
      Ok soo this article is amazing and just answered everything.. thanks Pam!

      So in the end, higher rpm is more important than higher torque because hp= rpm x tq/ 5252.

      One thing though about the bmw 330d I want to get that no one can argue with... 42mpgs

      In Europe though people add LPG to their cars which is pretty cheap to buy so I guess now I can throw an evo or sti into the conversation.. Refueling frequently might get annoying tho so we'll see I still have a big decision ahead of me..

      Thanks for the help guys!

    15. Member
      Join Date
      Mar 31st, 2008
      Location
      PNW - Oregon
      Posts
      5,780
      Vehicles
      92 Jetta GLI 1.6TD Ripper (VNT20 Turbo), 86 GTI (Wolfsburg Golf), 86 Audi Coupe GT
      05-30-2011 01:31 PM #15
      Quote Originally Posted by clifborder4fm View Post
      Ok soo this article is amazing and just answered everything.. thanks Pam!

      So in the end, higher rpm is more important than higher torque because hp= rpm x tq/ 5252.

      One thing though about the bmw 330d I want to get that no one can argue with... 42mpgs

      In Europe though people add LPG to their cars which is pretty cheap to buy so I guess now I can throw an evo or sti into the conversation.. Refueling frequently might get annoying tho so we'll see I still have a big decision ahead of me..

      Thanks for the help guys!
      where do the STI and EVO come into this picture? they are not diesel YET... unless suby finally released one..

    16. 06-01-2011 11:29 AM #16
      [QUOTE=clifborder4fm;71820635]Ok soo this article is amazing and just answered everything.. thanks Pam!

      So in the end, higher rpm is more important than higher torque because hp= rpm x tq/ 5252.
      ........
      Torque and engine speed are equally important! Their product, the power is the single parameter that matters.

    17. Member
      Join Date
      Mar 31st, 2008
      Location
      PNW - Oregon
      Posts
      5,780
      Vehicles
      92 Jetta GLI 1.6TD Ripper (VNT20 Turbo), 86 GTI (Wolfsburg Golf), 86 Audi Coupe GT
      06-01-2011 12:26 PM #17
      [QUOTE=pam;71852398]
      Quote Originally Posted by clifborder4fm View Post
      Ok soo this article is amazing and just answered everything.. thanks Pam!

      So in the end, higher rpm is more important than higher torque because hp= rpm x tq/ 5252.
      ........
      Torque and engine speed are equally important! Their product, the power is the single parameter that matters.
      higher RPM may be more important than higher torque in some situations, but not all..

      i like driving my TD rabbit much more than any of my other cars, just because of the amount of torque it has.. its a real blast to drive..

    18. Member 16VJohn's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 1st, 2005
      Posts
      1,589
      Vehicles
      00'/98' Jetta TDI
      06-02-2011 02:34 PM #18
      [QUOTE=Glegor;71853296]
      Quote Originally Posted by pam View Post

      i like driving my TD rabbit much more than any of my other cars, just because of the amount of torque it has.. its a real blast to drive..
      I don't mean to be the devil's advocate, but... your TD rabbit still has less torque than an ABA gasser. Your rabbit is fast because it weighs nothing.
      Last edited by 16VJohn; 03-28-2012 at 04:39 PM. Reason: Apparently I didn't know the difference between you're and your.

    19. Member
      Join Date
      Mar 31st, 2008
      Location
      PNW - Oregon
      Posts
      5,780
      Vehicles
      92 Jetta GLI 1.6TD Ripper (VNT20 Turbo), 86 GTI (Wolfsburg Golf), 86 Audi Coupe GT
      06-06-2011 02:29 PM #19
      [QUOTE=16VJohn;71874421]
      Quote Originally Posted by Glegor View Post

      I don't mean to be the devil's advocate, but... your TD rabbit still has less torque than an ABA gasser. You're rabbit is fast because it weighs nothing.
      i dont mean to be devils advocate, but... your wrong.

      ~20 psi, intercooled.. pump turned up alot, governor mod, and it has a VNT off a TDI on it, long runner intake manifold, open downpipe, and some other little things..

      its not some bone stock 68hp turbo diesel.. and theres no way an ABA has anywheres near the torque my 1.6D has.. my car hauls ass, it will keep the tires lit most of the way thru 3rd gear..

      my buddies SRT4 doesnt even pull me very hard till the top of his 4th gear..

      yes, my diesel rabbit can ALMOST KEEP UP with an SRT4.

    20. Member 16VJohn's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 1st, 2005
      Posts
      1,589
      Vehicles
      00'/98' Jetta TDI
      03-28-2012 04:37 PM #20
      [QUOTE=Glegor;71931999]
      Quote Originally Posted by 16VJohn View Post

      i dont mean to be devils advocate, but... your wrong.

      ~20 psi, intercooled.. pump turned up alot, governor mod, and it has a VNT off a TDI on it, long runner intake manifold, open downpipe, and some other little things..

      its not some bone stock 68hp turbo diesel.. and theres no way an ABA has anywheres near the torque my 1.6D has.. my car hauls ass, it will keep the tires lit most of the way thru 3rd gear..

      my buddies SRT4 doesnt even pull me very hard till the top of his 4th gear..

      yes, my diesel rabbit can ALMOST KEEP UP with an SRT4.
      Perhaps you missed the fact that your buddy's SRT4 was just a regular neon with a duct taped SRT badge on the back? The 1.6 is the slowest dog vw ever made and even at 40psi (it's been done), they still don't make crap for power. Can it be done? I guess, but why? You made a loud, annoying, expensive, unreliable build that would get its doors blown off by a bone stock V6 Camry... Perhaps next time you should put your money towards a cheaper TDI swap.

    21. Member Rockerchick's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 10th, 2005
      Location
      Cary, NC
      Posts
      5,336
      Vehicles
      '03 BMP 20th GTI, '84 TD Jetta
      03-28-2012 04:46 PM #21
      So you came in here and bumped a 9 month old thread just to say that? How do you even know the power his car puts out? Sounds like someone dislikes the IDIs...
      Quote Originally Posted by TM87 View Post
      VW-making mechanics out of owners since 1957.
      The project - '84 Jetta 1.6TD, 190k, fully rebuilt, Giles IP and injectors, 2.5" custom exhaust, 51mpg
      Hers - '03 BMP 20thAE GTI, 138k, 3" 42DD turbo back, Unitronic Stage 2
      His - '01 Jetta TDI, 159k. Now has 3 pedals, as it should!

    22. Member
      Join Date
      Mar 31st, 2008
      Location
      PNW - Oregon
      Posts
      5,780
      Vehicles
      92 Jetta GLI 1.6TD Ripper (VNT20 Turbo), 86 GTI (Wolfsburg Golf), 86 Audi Coupe GT
      03-28-2012 04:48 PM #22
      [QUOTE=16VJohn;76626145]
      Quote Originally Posted by Glegor View Post

      Perhaps you missed the fact that your buddy's SRT4 was just a regular neon with a duct taped SRT badge on the back? The 1.6 is the slowest dog vw ever made and even at 40psi (it's been done), they still don't make crap for power. Can it be done? I guess, but why? You made a loud, annoying, expensive, unreliable build that would get its doors blown off by a bone stock V6 Camry... Perhaps next time you should put your money towards a cheaper TDI swap.
      good thing i didnt waste any money on it.. build was mostly free.

      and my buddys car was definitely a REAL SRT..

      my cars loud, expensive, annoying, and un-reliable?

      wow, im glad you can make predictions about cars without even seeing them in person..

      my car was actually very quiet for an open downpipe, and it was very reliable until it started eating turbos..

      where do you get off calling a TDI swap cheap? you cant even get an engine for under 1500 bucks around here.. people think TDIs are worth their weight in gold around here.. theres nothing cheap about them!

      i have less than $1000 into my whole TD build.. idk how an engine swap costing more than the car is being CHEAP..
      Last edited by Glegor; 03-28-2012 at 04:52 PM.

    23. Member 16VJohn's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 1st, 2005
      Posts
      1,589
      Vehicles
      00'/98' Jetta TDI
      03-28-2012 04:51 PM #23
      Quote Originally Posted by Rockerchick View Post
      So you came in here and bumped a 9 month old thread just to say that? How do you even know the power his car puts out? Sounds like someone dislikes the IDIs...

      Yeah, that "some guy" smelled bull **** emanating from this thread so intense that it compelled him to "dig up a thread".

      It's a forum, you'll get over it.

    24. Member
      Join Date
      Mar 31st, 2008
      Location
      PNW - Oregon
      Posts
      5,780
      Vehicles
      92 Jetta GLI 1.6TD Ripper (VNT20 Turbo), 86 GTI (Wolfsburg Golf), 86 Audi Coupe GT
      03-28-2012 04:56 PM #24
      Quote Originally Posted by 16VJohn View Post
      Yeah, that "some guy" smelled bull **** emanating from this thread so intense that it compelled him to "dig up a thread".

      It's a forum, you'll get over it.
      yea, and diesels CAN BE fast.. you'll get over it..

      ever heard of andy2? he used to have a 350+hp IDI 1.9L engine.. it was a drag car, and smoked most everything he ever raced against..

      now hes running a cast iron headed, bosch inline pumped, compound turbo'd TDI thats making around 450hp and close to 100psi boost..

      its a forum, you'll get over it..

      should take yourself back to the 16v thread where you belong tho.. we dont need any trolls over here, we've already got plenty, being that "Air-cooled or diesel" is back on the board..

    25. Member 16VJohn's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 1st, 2005
      Posts
      1,589
      Vehicles
      00'/98' Jetta TDI
      03-28-2012 05:11 PM #25
      Quote Originally Posted by Glegor View Post
      yea, and diesels CAN BE fast.. you'll get over it..

      ever heard of andy2? he used to have a 350+hp IDI 1.9L engine.. it was a drag car, and smoked most everything he ever raced against..

      now hes running a cast iron headed, bosch inline pumped, compound turbo'd TDI thats making around 450hp and close to 100psi boost..

      its a forum, you'll get over it..

      should take yourself back to the 16v thread where you belong tho.. we dont need any trolls over here, we've already got plenty, being that "Air-cooled or diesel" is back on the board..
      Troll? Here we go pal. I've been down this path before. I've had more IDIs than I can count on two hands. Me and my friends have been down the path of tuning, cat nozzles, balanced cranks, aftermarket pistons, port work, and after blowing up more turbos and crap VW transmissions than I can remember, I decided there was no turbo in existence that could be small enough to boost before 4,000rpm that could handle the boost it requires to put an IDI up near stock power outputs of better, comparatively cheap VAG engines. If you're doing it for fun, or if you are poor and in poverty and can't afford anything better, then by ALL means. But don't come in here and make outlandish claims that your car hangs with an SRT4 until third gear. The BIGGEST problem with IDI fan boys is they all seem to have an insatiable desire to exaggerate and bull ****. And don't even for one second call me a diesel or IDI hater, I love them. In fact, I don't even own any gassers anymore. Diesels ARE cool, but little dweebs like you come in here and swing your nuts around like nobody has ever done that before. News for you, kid... you're not that special and your mom hates you.

    26. Member Rockerchick's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 10th, 2005
      Location
      Cary, NC
      Posts
      5,336
      Vehicles
      '03 BMP 20th GTI, '84 TD Jetta
      03-28-2012 05:16 PM #26
      Dang dude...chill out Seriously. Why did you come in here just to stir the pot? Completely unnecessary. Sorry you couldn't get the right stuff for getting power out of your IDI's but that doesn't mean others haven't.
      Quote Originally Posted by TM87 View Post
      VW-making mechanics out of owners since 1957.
      The project - '84 Jetta 1.6TD, 190k, fully rebuilt, Giles IP and injectors, 2.5" custom exhaust, 51mpg
      Hers - '03 BMP 20thAE GTI, 138k, 3" 42DD turbo back, Unitronic Stage 2
      His - '01 Jetta TDI, 159k. Now has 3 pedals, as it should!

    27. Member 16VJohn's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 1st, 2005
      Posts
      1,589
      Vehicles
      00'/98' Jetta TDI
      03-28-2012 05:24 PM #27
      I really didn't mean to stir the pot like this... as you can see, I was a contributor back when the thread was new. We were talking about power output comparisons of gas vs diesel and genius Glegor felt the need to throw in the wild card of "look how much time and money I put into making an engine do something it was never designed to do" into an argument of a stock BMW diesel to a stock gasoline exotic. You throw enough time and money at anything and it can be made to go fast, that's not the point. But that nut swinging nonsense has no place in a thread like this... If I had noticed it back in May I would have commented then.

    28. Member Rockerchick's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 10th, 2005
      Location
      Cary, NC
      Posts
      5,336
      Vehicles
      '03 BMP 20th GTI, '84 TD Jetta
      03-28-2012 05:29 PM #28
      Quote Originally Posted by 16VJohn View Post
      Troll? Here we go pal. I've been down this path before. I've had more IDIs than I can count on two hands. Me and my friends have been down the path of tuning, cat nozzles, balanced cranks, aftermarket pistons, port work, and after blowing up more turbos and crap VW transmissions than I can remember, I decided there was no turbo in existence that could be small enough to boost before 4,000rpm that could handle the boost it requires to put an IDI up near stock power outputs of better, comparatively cheap VAG engines. If you're doing it for fun, or if you are poor and in poverty and can't afford anything better, then by ALL means. But don't come in here and make outlandish claims that your car hangs with an SRT4 until third gear. The BIGGEST problem with IDI fan boys is they all seem to have an insatiable desire to exaggerate and bull ****. And don't even for one second call me a diesel or IDI hater, I love them. In fact, I don't even own any gassers anymore. Diesels ARE cool, but little dweebs like you come in here and swing your nuts around like nobody has ever done that before. News for you, kid... you're not that special and your mom hates you.
      If you didn't mean to stir the pot, then this entire post, especially the bolded section, wouldn't have been said. Please, just drop it.
      Quote Originally Posted by TM87 View Post
      VW-making mechanics out of owners since 1957.
      The project - '84 Jetta 1.6TD, 190k, fully rebuilt, Giles IP and injectors, 2.5" custom exhaust, 51mpg
      Hers - '03 BMP 20thAE GTI, 138k, 3" 42DD turbo back, Unitronic Stage 2
      His - '01 Jetta TDI, 159k. Now has 3 pedals, as it should!

    29. Member ragnar's vw's Avatar
      Join Date
      Oct 3rd, 2004
      Location
      Puyallup, WA
      Posts
      494
      Vehicles
      '63 bug,'84 rabbit diesel
      04-01-2012 01:26 AM #29
      so back to the topic. torque is what gets the load moving in big trucks, and horsepower is what carries it up the hill. . think about it how can a 400 hp cummins start a fully loaded truck and trailer from a stop. you know a chevy 350 rated at 400 hp couldn't even get the trailer to move. driver's constantly want more horsepower so when they come to a hill they can make it up the hill faster and in a higher gear. that's why there is 500+ hp motors now.
      I didn't do much today, but i'am going to give it hell tomorrow.

    30. Member 16VJohn's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 1st, 2005
      Posts
      1,589
      Vehicles
      00'/98' Jetta TDI
      04-01-2012 05:27 PM #30
      Cummins powered semi has an 18 speed gearbox, that's how.

    31. Member RabbitJockey's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 25th, 2004
      Location
      York, Pennsylvania
      Posts
      7,592
      Vehicles
      97 Trek, 81 Jetta, 81 Rabbit
      04-01-2012 05:32 PM #31
      Torque is more of an imaginary number that hardly means ****. If a cars peak hp is above 5250 then its peak torque will be lower than its peak hp if its peak hp is below 5250 then the peak torque number will be higher. But they're a measure of two different things in two different units so they're not really even comparable. Torque is the measure of how much rotating force can be applied, but It does not have time factored in to it. Hp is an actual measure of power like a kilowatt. It's a measure of how much work can be done with a certain period of time. Ok so let's say a tdi has some crazy looking torque curve that's very high down low and then flattens out and drops off as it approaches 5000 rpms. But u look at the hp curve and it's flat the whole way up. Well when u actually drive the car it's like it feels all fast at the bottom end and then progressively pulls less and less. It feels the way the hp curve looks, like a freight train smoothly and evenly until hp drops off. U might call it torque because it has a lot of power down low but the power is what moves the car. Torque is just a part of the mathematic equation for power
      ..........___..................___..............._ __
      ......._//_|_\__........._//_|_\__........//|_|_\__
      ......|_@_|_|@|..O0o|_@_|_|@|..O0o|@_|_|@|

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •