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

    VWVortex


    Links back to The Car Lounge (opens in same window)
    Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
    Results 1 to 35 of 49

    Thread: Is 160 crank hp and 260 crank torque fun in a 2500lb car?

    1. Banned 85_305's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 31st, 2008
      Location
      Buffalo, NY
      Posts
      3,950
      Vehicles
      1999.5 Jetta TDI 5spd, MODDED
      04-11-2012 03:44 PM #1
      Just curious if it's anything worthile. I'm reffering to an mkIII Jetta 5spd, fyi.

    2. Banned
      Join Date
      Mar 8th, 2011
      Location
      Bellevue Hospital Center
      Posts
      8,720
      04-11-2012 03:48 PM #2
      Torque wins races bro.

    3. Senior Member AZGolf's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 6th, 2000
      Location
      Phoenix area
      Posts
      21,985
      04-11-2012 04:07 PM #3
      It was going OK until I saw you mention it's FWD. Clearly it isn't going to be a fun car.


    4. Member adrew's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 14th, 2003
      Location
      Texas
      Posts
      12,254
      Vehicles
      '12 Yaris, '14 Mirage, 2.7 liters total
      04-11-2012 04:09 PM #4
      My 2800-lb Civic Si had 160 hp, 132 lb-ft and was plenty peppy.
      Improving the signal-to-noise ratio

    5. Member Omnilith's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jan 15th, 2010
      Location
      Bay Area, CA
      Posts
      1,281
      Vehicles
      2002 SVT Focus, 2000 Focus ZX3, 1966 Cortina, 1987 Dodge Charger, 1998 Tacoma, 1983 Plymouth Scamp
      04-11-2012 04:09 PM #5
      Sounds like fun to me.

    6. Member Dr. Woo's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 28th, 2003
      Location
      Hampton, VA
      Posts
      3,989
      Vehicles
      '03 S2K '12 Focus
      04-11-2012 04:15 PM #6
      Plenty of pep in my 160 hp, 146 lb/ft 2800 lbs car. It's very lively and I have lots of fun.
      ├┼┤2003 S2000 | ├┼┘2012 Focus SE Sport | 2009 Pontiac G8 (2011-2011) | 2008 VW R32 (2007-2011) | 2006 VW GTI (2006-2007) | 2001 Audi A4 (2002-2006)
      SAVETHERING

    7. Member NoGrip61's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 8th, 2005
      Location
      S.E., MI
      Posts
      9,352
      Vehicles
      Toaster, 14 370Z
      04-11-2012 04:19 PM #7
      Quote Originally Posted by 85_305 View Post
      Just curious if it's anything worthile. I'm reffering to an mkIII Jetta 5spd, fyi.
      Yes.... "1999.5 Jetta TDI 5spd, MODDED" This isn't much different...

    8. 04-11-2012 04:23 PM #8
      As long as you have more than 151 torques, you're good to go.

    9. Member
      Join Date
      Jan 9th, 2002
      Location
      Baton Rouge, LA
      Posts
      10,049
      Vehicles
      '98 Cabrio
      04-11-2012 04:23 PM #9
      You lost me at 5spd. It will only be fun in a 6spd or 4spd, but 5spd... nope.
      Roll Tide & War Eagle but stuck in LSU Country
      UAB Blazer Basketball
      Saints - WHO DAT! ROAD WIN?!
      NOLA Pelicans
      Orioles - Thank You Showalter & all the O's!

    10. Member 71DubBugBug's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 3rd, 2006
      Location
      Chicago
      Posts
      10,152
      Vehicles
      91 Audi D11 V8, 71 Super, 07 E320 Bluetec, 05.5 Jetta 2.5
      04-11-2012 04:34 PM #10
      Quote Originally Posted by KrautFed View Post
      You lost me at 5spd. It will only be fun in a 6spd or 4spd, but 5spd... nope.
      why?

    11. Member Subie J's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 16th, 2009
      Location
      Pacific Northwest
      Posts
      512
      04-11-2012 04:55 PM #11
      Quote Originally Posted by 71DubBugBug View Post
      why?
      5-speeds fall between too many gears and not enough gears. Doubly negative != positive. CL: math is hard, bro.

    12. Member Art Vandelay's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 20th, 2005
      Location
      STL
      Posts
      9,868
      Vehicles
      SVO
      04-11-2012 04:56 PM #12
      I've had fun with a lot less.
      JSW TDI, Mustang SVO, et al.

    13. Member overst33r's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 18th, 2006
      Location
      Tampa, FL
      Posts
      2,388
      Vehicles
      S2000 v3
      04-11-2012 04:57 PM #13
      Quote Originally Posted by Art Vandelay View Post
      I've had fun with a lot less.


      135
      ╠╬╬╗
      246 R

    14. Banned 85_305's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 31st, 2008
      Location
      Buffalo, NY
      Posts
      3,950
      Vehicles
      1999.5 Jetta TDI 5spd, MODDED
      04-11-2012 05:05 PM #14
      Quote Originally Posted by C4 A6 View Post
      Torque wins races bro.
      This is absolutely true! In fact, I could probably muster more torque than that out, but I was just lowballing the figures to save disappointment if I dont meet my goals.

      Quote Originally Posted by adrew View Post
      My 2800-lb Civic Si had 160 hp, 132 lb-ft and was plenty peppy.
      Indeed, indeed. A very similarly equipped vehicle.


      Quote Originally Posted by Omnilith View Post
      Sounds like fun to me.


      Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Woo View Post
      Plenty of pep in my 160 hp, 146 lb/ft 2800 lbs car. It's very lively and I have lots of fun.
      Which car is this?

      Quote Originally Posted by .:Ryan View Post
      Yes.... "1999.5 Jetta TDI 5spd, MODDED" This isn't much different...
      It's 500lbs difference.. which is a decent gap... about 50hp worth of weight-power ratio.

      Quote Originally Posted by KrautFed View Post
      You lost me at 5spd. It will only be fun in a 6spd or 4spd, but 5spd... nope.
      Ha! Good one!

      Quote Originally Posted by Subie J View Post
      5-speeds fall between too many gears and not enough gears. Doubly negative != positive. CL: math is hard, bro.
      6spd has TOO many gears and requires 3rd gear to reach 60mph, whereas the 5spds do 60mph in 2nd.

      Quote Originally Posted by Art Vandelay View Post
      I've had fun with a lot less.
      This is true!


      I could get a LOT more than this outta the car, but I'm keeping it relatively stockish and reliable. My mkiv will have a good bit more power, but judging by the 500lb disparity between the 2, I could have 50hp less in my mkiii jetta and in theory be just as quick as the mkiv.
      Last edited by 85_305; 04-11-2012 at 05:08 PM.

    15. Member
      Join Date
      Jun 15th, 2010
      Location
      Bergen County NJ
      Posts
      1,209
      Vehicles
      N54
      04-11-2012 05:31 PM #15
      Quote Originally Posted by 85_305 View Post
      This is absolutely true! In fact, I could probably muster more torque than that out, but I was just lowballing the figures to save disappointment if I dont meet my goals.
      So by this logic, said car will be faster than any car with less than 260 torks? I bet you would completely smoke an S2000, BRZ and keep right up with the E90 M3 too because that car has only 295 torks, so you would stay right with him with your 260 torks.


      Joking aside, said car will only rev to ~4.5 RPM, have about 130 wheel HP and power the wrong wheels. I don't see much fun in this relatively speaking. Sure it may be fun compared to a Prius
      or Corolla but that isn't saying much.

    16. Member mellbergVWfan's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jan 31st, 2008
      Location
      Bay Area, CA
      Posts
      9,538
      Vehicles
      81 Scirocco S, 99 Viggen Coupe
      04-11-2012 05:34 PM #16
      Since when does a mk3 weigh 2500 pounds?
      Demokratikally Elekted Director of Espionage and Identity Theft and Minister of post-progressive-technical-melodic-avant-garde-metal for the Independent People's Republik of Offtopikstan
      Quote Originally Posted by TheDarkEnergist View Post
      Oh mellberg is cool, but his car certainly isn't helping that happen.
      Quote Originally Posted by TheDarkEnergist View Post
      u jus made bc 2 bitches are sweatin me.

    17. 04-11-2012 05:34 PM #17
      2690 with 2/3 tank. 160 wheel and 170 tourque. midengine. 6 cylinders. 5 speed short geared 4cyl n/a trans. enough power for me on the street. it is tough to stay out of trouble above/at those levels.
      Quote Originally Posted by slikaznricer View Post
      Dude, its the internet. Everyone trolls everyone. if you get butthurt, go buy some preparation H or troll back.

    18. Banned 85_305's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 31st, 2008
      Location
      Buffalo, NY
      Posts
      3,950
      Vehicles
      1999.5 Jetta TDI 5spd, MODDED
      04-11-2012 05:37 PM #18
      Quote Originally Posted by unintended acceleration View Post
      So by this logic, said car will be faster than any car with less than 260 torks? I bet you would completely smoke an S2000, BRZ and keep right up with the E90 M3 too because that car has only 295 torks, so you would stay right with him with your 260 torks.


      Joking aside, said car will only rev to ~4.5 RPM, have about 130 wheel HP and power the wrong wheels. I don't see much fun in this relatively speaking. Sure it may be fun compared to a Prius
      or Corolla but that isn't saying much.
      No, I'm not saying that at all.. merely that having a tremendous amount of torque WILL offset having lower amounts of hp. Just like hondas with 200-230hp but only 180ft-lbs of torque can run 12's; having insane amounts of one will counter having not-alot of the other. Remember: HP is an imaginery number derived off of torque, which can be seen in numerous ways.

      As far as how high the car rev's, that depends on how much I want to mod this car. My mkiv tdi I can spin the tach all the way out, which is about 5500rpms. I doubt I do the work required to make my mkiii spin 5500rpms, though. But I wont be drag racing the mkiii jetta; I am from, and my whole family lives, in the country. This means lots of hills and turns, which is what I really want to have fun with in my mkiii. Having tons of torque, with a very broad power-band, makes for a great road-course or hill-climber. The car already handles like a gocart stock; far better FEELING than my mkiv stock.
      Last edited by 85_305; 04-11-2012 at 05:40 PM.

    19. Banned 85_305's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 31st, 2008
      Location
      Buffalo, NY
      Posts
      3,950
      Vehicles
      1999.5 Jetta TDI 5spd, MODDED
      04-11-2012 05:39 PM #19
      Quote Originally Posted by mellbergVWfan View Post
      Since when does a mk3 weigh 2500 pounds?
      Since '98 when it was built? And the mk2's were even closer to 2k lbs than that.

      Quote Originally Posted by DrFrisker View Post
      2690 with 2/3 tank. 160 wheel and 170 tourque. midengine. 6 cylinders. 5 speed short geared 4cyl n/a trans. enough power for me on the street. it is tough to stay out of trouble above/at those levels.
      Sounds like a fun car

    20. Member Dr. Woo's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 28th, 2003
      Location
      Hampton, VA
      Posts
      3,989
      Vehicles
      '03 S2K '12 Focus
      04-11-2012 06:28 PM #20
      Quote Originally Posted by 85_305 View Post
      Which car is this?
      2012 Focus SE Hatch with SE Sport Package and a 5-speed.
      ├┼┤2003 S2000 | ├┼┘2012 Focus SE Sport | 2009 Pontiac G8 (2011-2011) | 2008 VW R32 (2007-2011) | 2006 VW GTI (2006-2007) | 2001 Audi A4 (2002-2006)
      SAVETHERING

    21. Member teklord69's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 28th, 2006
      Location
      Socal
      Posts
      798
      Vehicles
      BMW E39
      04-11-2012 06:54 PM #21
      Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Woo View Post
      Plenty of pep in my 160 hp, 146 lb/ft 2800 lbs car. It's very lively and I have lots of fun.
      Lies..lies..

    22. Member adrew's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 14th, 2003
      Location
      Texas
      Posts
      12,254
      Vehicles
      '12 Yaris, '14 Mirage, 2.7 liters total
      04-11-2012 07:05 PM #22
      Quote Originally Posted by teklord69 View Post
      Lies..lies..
      Even more dangerous than the BR-Z, right?
      Last edited by adrew; 04-11-2012 at 10:29 PM.
      Improving the signal-to-noise ratio

    23. Member
      Join Date
      Jun 15th, 2010
      Location
      Bergen County NJ
      Posts
      1,209
      Vehicles
      N54
      04-12-2012 04:29 PM #23
      Quote Originally Posted by 85_305 View Post
      No, I'm not saying that at all.. merely that having a tremendous amount of torque WILL offset having lower amounts of hp. Just like hondas with 200-230hp but only 180ft-lbs of torque can run 12's; having insane amounts of one will counter having not-alot of the other. Remember: HP is an imaginery number derived off of torque, which can be seen in numerous ways.

      As far as how high the car rev's, that depends on how much I want to mod this car. My mkiv tdi I can spin the tach all the way out, which is about 5500rpms. I doubt I do the work required to make my mkiii spin 5500rpms, though. But I wont be drag racing the mkiii jetta; I am from, and my whole family lives, in the country. This means lots of hills and turns, which is what I really want to have fun with in my mkiii. Having tons of torque, with a very broad power-band, makes for a great road-course or hill-climber. The car already handles like a gocart stock; far better FEELING than my mkiv stock.
      It absolutely will not. A 130 HP Golf TDI will accelerate just like a 130 HP Civic for the most part (of same weight). Torque is a force, not the amount of work that can be done over time. Without the time factor (HP) we might as well be discussing the weather.

      Look up trap speeds, 1/4 mile times, whatever you want between a Golf TDI and any other gasoline powered car (similar weight) that has the same HP but much less torque. They will accelerate at about the same rate.

      There is an almost direct correlation between HP to weight ratio and acceleration. That is the bottom line.

      If you are thinking of HP as an imaginary number, then this discussion can end here. No offense but that is just completely wrong on so many levels.

    24. Banned 85_305's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 31st, 2008
      Location
      Buffalo, NY
      Posts
      3,950
      Vehicles
      1999.5 Jetta TDI 5spd, MODDED
      04-12-2012 05:52 PM #24
      Quote Originally Posted by unintended acceleration View Post
      It absolutely will not. A 130 HP Golf TDI will accelerate just like a 130 HP Civic for the most part (of same weight). Torque is a force, not the amount of work that can be done over time. Without the time factor (HP) we might as well be discussing the weather.

      Look up trap speeds, 1/4 mile times, whatever you want between a Golf TDI and any other gasoline powered car (similar weight) that has the same HP but much less torque. They will accelerate at about the same rate.

      There is an almost direct correlation between HP to weight ratio and acceleration. That is the bottom line.

      If you are thinking of HP as an imaginary number, then this discussion can end here. No offense but that is just completely wrong on so many levels.
      Horsepower IS an imginary number, contrived for marketing. I'm also not disputing that hp to weight ratio has no effect on acceleration, because it does. But having a vehicle with a high amount of torque, in a very broad power band, with proper gearing, also goes a long way.

    25. Senior Member Aonarch's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 4th, 2006
      Location
      US 129/ GA SR 60
      Posts
      33,031
      Vehicles
      More than you can afford pal, Ferrari. But seriously, Ferrari.
      04-12-2012 06:23 PM #25
      because racecar
      Semper Fi | USMC '06-'14 | 0311 | 0331| 0933
      Aonarch's Blog!

    26. Member gsrroger's Avatar
      Join Date
      Sep 30th, 1999
      Location
      SoCal
      Posts
      3,383
      Vehicles
      Sidan
      04-12-2012 07:12 PM #26
      Quote Originally Posted by 85_305 View Post
      Horsepower IS an imginary number, contrived for marketing. I'm also not disputing that hp to weight ratio has no effect on acceleration, because it does. But having a vehicle with a high amount of torque, in a very broad power band, with proper gearing, also goes a long way.
      Power is not imaginary - it's an extremely real consequence of physics. And in some regimes, it's easier to measure power than anything else (I work in RF, we measure everything with s-parameters, which are a direct power measurement). To me, torque could be argued to be just as "imaginary" as power, because when you change gears, you change how much torque goes to the wheels - but you cannot change how much power goes to the wheels.

      All that said, in the real world, a torquey engine is still nice.

    27. Member worth_fixing's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 23rd, 2009
      Location
      St-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Qc
      Posts
      3,332
      Vehicles
      2014 Mazda3 Sport GS
      04-12-2012 08:43 PM #27
      260 ft-lbs or 260 Nm?
      Crank torque isn't a unit of measurement.
      http://badges.fuelly.com/images/sig-metric/286588.png
      The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten." -Benjamin Franklin
      Kind regards,
      James

    28. 04-12-2012 08:44 PM #28
      260 has to be a typo. im positive he meant 160ftlbs
      Quote Originally Posted by slikaznricer View Post
      Dude, its the internet. Everyone trolls everyone. if you get butthurt, go buy some preparation H or troll back.

    29. Member SchnellFowVay's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 20th, 2001
      Location
      Las Vegas, NV
      Posts
      10,826
      Vehicles
      Bent M
      04-12-2012 08:51 PM #29
      DO NOT FORGET THE TEKLORD CONSTANT

      Car < 151 ft.-lbs = dangerous going up hills

      Car > 151 ft.-lbs = safe, regardless of weight of car

      BMW 530iA > All Cars


      With this tool, you can discern that, at the very least, your car will be able to make it up hills safely.
      2000 BMW M Roadster - 5-speed
      2014 Mazda Mazda6 - 6-speed
      2013 Subaru Crosstrek XV - 5-speed
      2013 Honda Civic LX Sedan - Nannymobile

    30. Member SchnellFowVay's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 20th, 2001
      Location
      Las Vegas, NV
      Posts
      10,826
      Vehicles
      Bent M
      04-12-2012 08:52 PM #30
      Quote Originally Posted by DrFrisker View Post
      260 has to be a typo. im positive he meant 160ftlbs
      Unless it's a modified TDI . . .
      2000 BMW M Roadster - 5-speed
      2014 Mazda Mazda6 - 6-speed
      2013 Subaru Crosstrek XV - 5-speed
      2013 Honda Civic LX Sedan - Nannymobile

    31. Member bherman13's Avatar
      Join Date
      Sep 9th, 2010
      Location
      Newton, IL LocationB:__ Maryville, IL
      Posts
      2,566
      Vehicles
      B4S TDI Passat
      04-12-2012 08:54 PM #31
      Quote Originally Posted by DrFrisker View Post
      260 has to be a typo. im positive he meant 160ftlbs
      I'm assuming he meant diesel, but then again it could be a typo.

      Also, OP, this argument will not end well. Yes, torks are needed, but hp are the rate at which that torque is applied and during a race, time is all that matters. They must go hand in hand, and diesels don't rev very high so you need some higher gearing to make up for that anyways.

    32. Member Broduski's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 18th, 2008
      Location
      Central NC
      Posts
      4,443
      Vehicles
      My driveway looks like a shady used car lot
      04-12-2012 08:54 PM #32
      Quote Originally Posted by mellbergVWfan View Post
      Since when does a mk3 weigh 2500 pounds?
      When you cut it in half.
      77 F100, 83 244, 94 540i

    33. 04-12-2012 09:42 PM #33
      Quote Originally Posted by SchnellFowVay View Post
      Unless it's a modified TDI . . .
      why would he ask if his own car is fun? wouldn't he know that or not?


      mkiii owner doesnt know his own car must be worth 30k either then huh
      Quote Originally Posted by slikaznricer View Post
      Dude, its the internet. Everyone trolls everyone. if you get butthurt, go buy some preparation H or troll back.

    34. Member bherman13's Avatar
      Join Date
      Sep 9th, 2010
      Location
      Newton, IL LocationB:__ Maryville, IL
      Posts
      2,566
      Vehicles
      B4S TDI Passat
      04-12-2012 09:45 PM #34
      Quote Originally Posted by 16v_43v3r View Post
      When you cut it in half.
      When you buy it..... Mine fully loaded is about 2900 and is stock.

    35. 04-13-2012 02:02 AM #35
      Quote Originally Posted by 85_305 View Post
      No, I'm not saying that at all.. merely that having a tremendous amount of torque WILL offset having lower amounts of hp. Just like hondas with 200-230hp but only 180ft-lbs of torque can run 12's; having insane amounts of one will counter having not-alot of the other. Remember: HP is an imaginery number derived off of torque, which can be seen in numerous ways.


      You've taken much physics, yes? Oh wait, no. Probably not.
      Bowtie wearing, tattooed, Mustang driver

      Quote Originally Posted by Fritz27 View Post
      I was more annoyed with the implication of being a Browns fan.

    Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

    Posting Permissions

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