High revs vs High torque

It would've been more wise to make this a poll.

I would have to say a high torque monster, there is no better thrill (to me) then being rocketed back to your seat.

 

Revs.

The Torque monsters are for those who don't want to downshift.

Actually the best is the best of both worlds: F512M

 

I made a poll and added it to this thread, and moved it to gen. where it will get the most views.

Vote Auraraptor for Classic's Moderator!

 

TORQUE Without doubt

That adrenalin rush when your head is flung back and you get that funny feeling in your stomach is unrivalled!

 

If I had to limit myself, I would choose torque. But with the 550, no choice necessary. You can shift if you want or just leave it close. You could drive the whole north coast section of Highway 1 in 4th gear if you wanted and not miss much.
Where I live all the roads are two lane mountain roads and with high revving cars, which I have one of too, you can get in trouble passing unless you hit a high rev gear downshift, whereas, with the 550 unless you are way our of the powerband, any gear will get the job done and the right one will always bring that smile of "ohmygod, this is such a great car".

 

It all depends how extreme. I don't find the S2000 all that fun to drive because it really suffers at low revs. But the 360, even though it is certainly no torque monster, is perhaps the most rewarding car I've ever driven, although far from the fastest. I've driven Porsche TT's that are truly remarkable in their level of "grunt", but are not as much pure fun as the 360. I like high revs, usually much more interesting sounds from the exhaust, as long as I don't have to give up too much torque.

Gary

 

I think anything over about 300 ft-lbs of torque is a great street car. If it will also rev to the moon, so much the better. But if I were forced to choose one over the other, it would be torque because it make for a nicer stuck in traffic, quiet on the highway drive.

 

That's why there is a gearstick in it so you can keep it above 5000 rpm!!
The 360 though is in my eyes also the best of both worlds!!
You really can't compare the 360 with the S2000! 3.6l against 2.0 l !!!
Compare the S2000 with any other 2.0 l engined cars!!! Now, which is best??
Even alot of turbocharged 2.0 l engines aren't as good or fast!!

 

Yeah, the problem is that a 2 liters is just too small. If honda would chuck that engine in the trash and put a 3 liter 6 in it I'd have one tomorrow, that would be a great car. A very light car like the s2000 could live with a 3 liter, but a 3000 lb car needs at least 4 liters. A little smaller is ok if it's supercharged, but naturally aspirates 4 is the number. The new 420 (??) really going to be a wonderful car to drive.

 

I voted for the high torque. There is just something about being pushed back in your seat that is so much fun.

 

What would you guys consider high revs? I voted high torque, but is 7k high revs? 8k?

 

Well the current S2000 is 2.2L... so I'll compare it to a 944 Turbo S (2.5L), more power and nearly 80 more lbs of torque.

The S2000 is great, but it needs a turbocharger/supercharger.

 

High torque simply means large engine size ... does not matter how high or low tech the engine is it will produce torque.

High power on the other hand requires a high tech engine to be able to rev and hold together.

I thought the thrill from an engineering point of view about Ferraris was the high tech side?

For those that are voting high torque ... hmmm, are you sure you bought the right car?, as many GM or Ford V8 monsters will never be out torqued by sophisticated engines. That is why they make them like that, cheap to make, easy to drive and fast and have impressive figures for the magazines

In the end while high torque will give you the largest push, high power and a light car will accelerate faster overall thanks to gears ... but we do not want to go down this debate path again

Pete's opinion

 

I agree on the great adrenaline rush from high-G-forces!
However, it does NOT come from engine torque!

That flinging of your head and that feeling in your stomach comes from rear-wheel torque! And rear wheel torque comes from the multiplication of engine torque by gearing. And high revs allow you to use a higher multiplier from gearing! Yes, it requires you to expend some extra effort and downshift rather than simply mashing the loud pedal... but that adds to the fun for many of us.

Thus, like many of you, I want high torque to the rear wheels!
But I want it delivered via a higher revving engine rather than higher engine torque. Why? Because, given the same rear wheel torque, a higher revving lower torque engine will tend to be smaller and lighter, meaning I'll get higher acceleration in all four directions... which does far more for that adrenaline rush.

I think the poll would be much better worded like this:

Given the same torque to the rear wheels, would you prefer an engine with a higher redline or an engine with higher low-end torque?

Worded like that, I bet the results would be very different.

 

Well said Brian, well said.

Pete

 

It's a tough question. The higher the hp, the higher the wheel torque the engine can deliver. HP=performance, simple as that....but the way a car drives and feels is more the specs from a magazine. It also depends on if we are talking about a street car or a track car, the answer will be very different. In a street car, I want to be able to roll along in a parking lot then pull out into traffic smoothly and quickly, so the engine needs to work well below 2000 and really right off idle. I also like to be able to pass on the highway without it requiring a shift down, so it needs to pull well in the 2500-3000 range. That's just what makes a nice driving car to me. However, when I want to play, I want some revs to play with. So, 4+ liters (or a smaller engine on boost) and about an 8k redline is the perfect combination, at least to me. At 20 psi of boost, the 308 is something like 450 ft-lbs of torque, I almost always shift by 3500 around town, that will out accelerate most cars and doesn't make a lot of noise from the borla. But out on a back road, well then the revs are there...very similar to the type of power a 550 engine delivers. To me, it's just a wonderful balance.

 

We differ there... and I think that could be the crux of a good poll... I don't mind downshifting, even two gears down, to get the power to make a pass.

But I will agree that you can't ignore low-end torque... the ratio of low-end torque in first gear to weight needs to be adequate that you can launch well. But again, the key is strong launch... not engine torque. You can get a strong launch via reduced weight, lower first gear, or greater low-end torque. You need to engineer a good balance of all three.

But I will agree that a poor launching car, while perhaps just fine on a race track (where you're never below 30 or more), is a bit painful on the street.

 

Where is the fun in that .

I think you need 2 cars a practical car and a Ferrari. When the mood is NOT for gear changing and 'driving' the car take the other car

Pete

 

I don't think we differ by much. Earier I said that any car with 300 ft-lbs of torque is a great car to drive on the street....your 360 come very very close to that, a stock 308 or s2000 doesn't. I don't mind dropping a couple gears when I want to go, but I just don't like to need to do it as part of normal driving...and again a 360 easily meets that criteria. It's pretty hard to build an engine revs high but still pulls and drives well at low rpms, I think that ferrari has always done a great job at delivering them....but I also thing there recent move to larger and larger displacements is long over due.

I can't for the life of me understand what would poses them to have built sub 3 liter 12s or why it's taken them 40 years to inch (or mm ?) their way up to about 6 liters, were the us companies have been for 40 years in general production and about 100 years on top shelf cars. The weight and cost are pretty much set once you pick the number of cylinder, so going from 3 to 6 liter changes very little except the power it makes. To be fair, a 4 valve overhead cam engine makes about the same torque as a 6 liter old school pushrod 2 valve. Anyway I think they are building wonderful engines these days.

 

I dunno but Torque is definately cheaper.

 

Torque without a doubt.
Some of the cars discussed above are totally gutless and require constant shifting.

In an ideal world one adds some NOS or supercharging to the torque, like e.g. a DLM supercharged Viper, the only car I've seen taken on a Busa.