Quote:
Originally Posted by Marty McFlew
True V6 HP is where V8hp was in the late 50s and early 60s. But V6 torque is not there yet. Tq in the late 50s were in the 300s. By the 60s tq was on average high 300s to in some cases close to 500.
|
Gearing more than makes up for the difference in torque.
Just because an engine is spinning fast doesn't mean the wheels have to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camarolover85
Yeah, it's a shame the V6 doesn't have the torque to back it up. I wish it was closer to 350 but I don't design engines I design electrical circuits so I don't
Know how much more power can be made haha
|
Look up brake mean effective pressure.
Basically, naturally aspirated engines have much tighter limitations on how much torque they can produce per litre of displacement. With only so much oxygen, you can only burn so much fuel, which produces only so much pressure. Small gains can be made, but most naturally aspirated engines of the same era are going to be pretty similar in terms of torque/L.
For example, while the 3.6L in the Camaro makes about 25% more hp/L than the LT1 does (93 vs 73) there is only about a 5% difference in torque/L (77 vs 73).
Also, don't confuse torque with power. You're in electrical, so I'll put it this way: torque is sorta equivalent to current, while rpms are like voltage. Power is the product of both.