Torque Vs Handling

So, you were actually making a really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really.......

.....really, really obvious point then that cars with quite a bit of weight and a chassis that wasn't sorted by one of the greatest F1 drivers of all time aren't as quick at getting around corners as supercars?

Wow, let me grab a pen and write that one down! I'll have to remember that!
Click to expand...

The NSX Vs Skyline is one example video I found my point is regarding the whole VTEC range of cars not just the NSX why you keep narrowing it to the NSX baffles me - the video is only an example sheesh

I don't post here much often have I said something in the past to you that has caused you to respond in such a manor to my thread even if its pointless or a stupid post its my right to post but it sure does not deserve a response like the one in your post. Unless I have said something directed at you I think the sarcasam is uncalled for.
 
lol im sorry but this is a bit of a silly argument/

Torque vs handling? how do you compare the two as one if a measure of power and the other a subjective state which refers to how well a car can deal with corners,

Now you put a MORE torquey engine into the NSX (which has better handling) and im sure the NSX would beat the skyline. If you swapped the engines over, it would show the relative weakness of the vtech design as the performance would be impacted largely due to the higher weighing skyline which would then lose.

So More Torque> Less Torque
More handling> Less handling

Car with More Torque and Mediocre handling equals same time as Car with less torque and better handling.

id take the car with more torque and better handling pls.
 
IPBA said:
The NSX Vs Skyline is one example video I found my point is regarding the whole VTEC range of cars not just the NSX why you keep narrowing it to the NSX baffles me - the video is only an example sheesh

I don't post here much often have I said something in the past to you that has caused you to respond in such a manor to my thread even if its pointless or a stupid post its my right to post but it sure does not deserve a response like the one in your post. Unless I have said something directed at you I think the sarcasam is uncalled for.
Click to expand...

I should really get around to sticking a big ol' disclaimer on each of my posts, warning that sarcasm may be found and that no offense should be taken....

At any rate - I guess I should go through the mea maxima culpa routine, so many apologies for any offense I caused to you.

***edit***

Even if I'm right, and your comparison was about as pointless as they come :p
 
For a simpler, more eloquent and entirely silly answer to the question of torque vs. handling, watch Jeremy Clarkson's DVD where he's over in the States...

Big American tanks with big engines vs, European cars with non-horsecart suspension. ;)

Gran Turismo has a lot to answer for, tbh, as does the Fast and the Furious.
 
Ones a track focused jap super car.. the other a saloon car that happens to have some faster versions.. Dont get me wrong i love the skyline but unless actually turned into a race car they will be beaten on a track..

And sorry but the RB26DETT is more than a half decent engine. The Skyline was ruled out of a racing championship for a reason..

Its all about weight on track.. i thought most of us here knew that?

stupid agrument. :p
 
GTR is crap, are you lot serious? Forgotten about its epic success in racing?


The GT-R's success in motor racing was formidable, particularly in the annual 1,000 km race at the Mount Panorama circuit in Bathurst, Australia, where the winner in 1991 and 1992 was a GT-R (despite receiving additional 100 kg in weight penalties and a turbo pop off valve in 1992), and in the Japanese GT series where it has remained dominant up to the present day.

No other race victories by the GT-R could escape without controversies. At the 1990 Macau Grand Prix Guia touring car race, the factory backed R32 driven by Masahiro Hasemi led the race from the start to the finishing line which caused a wave of protests by the European entrants. The following year, the car was forced to carry a weight penalty of 140 kg and was up against the more competitive DTM BMW M3 and Mercedes-Benz 190E 2.5-16 Evolution II. A disgruntled Hasemi was forced to settle for fourth place. For the following and final year the weight penalty was reduced and works backed Hasemi returned with another privateer R32 that crashed in the race, while Hasemi would retire with engine failure. The GT-R's success at Mount Panorama in 1991 and 1992, both by Jim Richards and Mark Skaife, led to a change in formula regulations, which came to exclude turbocharged and four-wheel-drive cars in subsequent years. It also led indirectly to a move to the Super Touring Car category in the JTCC and the creation of the JGTC grand touring car series in Japan, where GT-Rs can only compete in rear-wheel drive form.

In the UK, Andy Middlehurst took the Nissan Skyline GT-R (R32) to two consecutive championship wins in the National Saloon Car Cup. Other championship titles include the 1993 Spanish Touring Car Championship.

Akira Kameyama has taken the GT-R to the Pikes Peak International Hillclimb race on three occasion winning in each Open Class for production cars he entered, one in 1993 with the R32,[2] another in 1996 with the R33[3] and again in 1998.[4] For the following year, Rhys Millen took a R33 Skyline GT-R to win the High Performance Showroom Stock category[5]
Click to expand...

edit - that 300zx which blitzed past at the end looked pretty nippy too :p
 
ZG002 said:
And sorry but the RB26DETT is more than a half decent engine.
Click to expand...

It's an engine with a reasonable amount of headroom for tuning without uprating the internals, and a large amount of headroom once you start strengthening. But it doesn't exactly set the world alight in stock form - the later versions were rated at 280PS, several leaving the factory with around 320. It's fast, but not hugely so.

ZG002 said:
The Skyline was ruled out of a racing championship for a reason..
Click to expand...

I know it was ineligible for competition in most touring car series after Group A died a death. That wasn't entirely down to the Skyline being too good though - the Sierra Cosworth had a hand in it in Britain for example :)

***edit***

Simon said:
JRS, out of interest what VTEC engined cars have you driven?
Click to expand...

Driven a couple of EP3 CTRs. Would have driven a S2000 on a trackday at Prestwold, but hopped into a Jaguar E-type instead as I knew that it would be much more fun :D

Both times I drove a CTR I found it too much work for not enough reward. Maybe I'm too used to pushrod V8 power delivery where everything happens down low and it's all over by 6500rpm, but if I'm going to beat nine bells o' **** out of an engine I'd like to get a bit more out of the experience. They were quick, no doubt about that. Just not as epically fast as people led me to believe before I actually got to drive one.
 
Last edited:
Vtec is only a disadvantage when you have to switch the low cam, if you know the track well and can judge the gears that wont happen so its not a factor?
 
JRS said:
It's an engine with a reasonable amount of headroom for tuning without uprating the internals, and a large amount of headroom once you start strengthening. But it doesn't exactly set the world alight in stock form - the later versions were rated at 280PS, several leaving the factory with around 320. It's fast, but not hugely so.
Click to expand...

There is a reason for that.. it was a gentleman's agreement in japan from the car manufactures not to go over 300ps i belive.. you will find the twin turbo supra is simular.. as you say it has "Reasonable headroom" for tuning on stock internals.. infact the stock internals can take around 500bhp i belive.. not too shabby for a "half decent" engine :p

im all for light cars now after trying a few different types out on track.. ive gone from really wanting a Skyline to now wanting a Caterham 7 ;) :D
 
ZG002 said:
There is a reason for that.. it was a gentleman's agreement in japan from the car manufactures not to go over 300ps i belive
Click to expand...

IIRC, the limit was 276hp.

ZG002 said:
as you say it has "Reasonable headroom" for tuning on stock internals.. infact the stock internals can take around 500bhp i belive.. not too shabby for a "half decent" engine :p
Click to expand...

It's a twin turbo - it's always going to see a big power gain when you start whacking the boost up. How long do they last with the wick turned up that high on a bone stock bottom end?

ZG002 said:
im all for light cars now after trying a few different types out on track.. ive gone from really wanting a Skyline to now wanting a Caterham 7 ;) :D
Click to expand...

Good man. Caterhams rule :)
 
silversurfer said:
Vtec is only a disadvantage when you have to switch the low cam, if you know the track well and can judge the gears that wont happen so its not a factor?
Click to expand...

And even then off cam it will pull better than a non-Tec car at those revs, say a Clio 16v or something.
 
JRS said:
They were quick, no doubt about that. Just not as epically fast as people led me to believe before I actually got to drive one.
Click to expand...

They are as fast as the horsepower figure suggests.

To be honest the CTRs aren't really Vtec engines. They are the new breed of iVTEC that don't really have that maniac mode of, say, the DC2 Integra Type R.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom