Re: Altima SE V-6 vs. Accord LX V-6
 

On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 23:02:01 GMT, Raybender <raybender@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:

>
>
>Hawaii_SE-R wrote:
>
>> "Sean Dinh" <"seanny"@dinh@znet.com> wrote in message
>> news:1102464115.67875@news-1.nethere.net...
>> > You are so wrong. Horsepower is everything. Since the Altima has a 3.5 L
>> vs the
>> > Accord's 3.0 L, the Altima has more low end power. It would take off at
>> the line
>> > faster.
>>
>> Actually torque is much more important at the lower rpm than you seem to
>> understand. In fact, that low end power you are thinking of is actually
>> more torque than anything else. Torque *is* a specific measurement of the
>> vehicle's ability to push/pull an object/weight from a stop or lower speed.
>> You will reach the peak torque of an engine in the lower rpm range, exactly
>> where most of your acceleration occurs, while your peak horsepower occurs in
>> the upper rpm range, where you will accelerate slower. Don't beleive me?
>> Look at Horsepower and Torque charts and you will see where the peaks occur.
>
>Sean is correct and you are incorrect. Looking at a chart to find the torque
>and hp peaks doesn't tell you where maximum acceleration occurs.
>Easy to show from Newton's second law (F=ma) that maximum acceleration occurs at
>the POWER peak in any gear. Sorry, but you just have to do the physics here.

I've wondered about torque and HP too and didn't know the answer but
would like to.

As you state, F = ma (force equals mass times acceleration)

So, a = F/m (acceleration equals force divided by mass).

To accelerate the car, we need F (force).

Torque is force times distance. T = Fd

Solving for F and plugging that into our acceleration equation, we get

a = T/d/m (acceleration equals torque divided by distance divided by
mass).

For your particular car, the distance and the mass don't change. Hence
acceleration depends on torque only.

As the car goes faster and faster, you need horsepower to maintain
that torque at the higher RPMs.

There's some interesting background at
http://science.howstuffworks.com/fpte.htm.

Re:It works this way
 

Harry Cox wrote:

> On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 23:02:01 GMT, Raybender <raybender@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Hawaii_SE-R wrote:
> >
> >> "Sean Dinh" <"seanny"@dinh@znet.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1102464115.67875@news-1.nethere.net...
> >> > You are so wrong. Horsepower is everything. Since the Altima has a 3.5 L
> >> vs the
> >> > Accord's 3.0 L, the Altima has more low end power. It would take off at
> >> the line
> >> > faster.
> >>
> >> Actually torque is much more important at the lower rpm than you seem to
> >> understand. In fact, that low end power you are thinking of is actually
> >> more torque than anything else. Torque *is* a specific measurement of the
> >> vehicle's ability to push/pull an object/weight from a stop or lower speed.
> >> You will reach the peak torque of an engine in the lower rpm range, exactly
> >> where most of your acceleration occurs, while your peak horsepower occurs in
> >> the upper rpm range, where you will accelerate slower. Don't beleive me?
> >> Look at Horsepower and Torque charts and you will see where the peaks occur.
> >
> >Sean is correct and you are incorrect. Looking at a chart to find the torque
> >and hp peaks doesn't tell you where maximum acceleration occurs.
> >Easy to show from Newton's second law (F=ma) that maximum acceleration occurs at
> >the POWER peak in any gear. Sorry, but you just have to do the physics here.
>
> I've wondered about torque and HP too and didn't know the answer but
> would like to.
>
> As you state, F = ma (force equals mass times acceleration)
>
> So, a = F/m (acceleration equals force divided by mass).
>
> To accelerate the car, we need F (force).
>
> Torque is force times distance. T = Fd
>
> Solving for F and plugging that into our acceleration equation, we get
>
> a = T/d/m (acceleration equals torque divided by distance divided by
> mass).
>
> For your particular car, the distance and the mass don't change. Hence
> acceleration depends on torque only.
>
> As the car goes faster and faster, you need horsepower to maintain
> that torque at the higher RPMs.
>
> There's some interesting background at
> http://science.howstuffworks.com/fpte.htm.

Here's the way you need to work it out. Then to prove it, go test the acceleration
of your car in second gear somewhere past the torque peak and up on the hp curve, and
compare to acceleration AT THE SAME SPEED in third gear down near the peak of the
torque curve.

Start from

F= ma Newtons second law

Now the car is moving as you accelerate so.....

F x velocity = mav
But this is just

Power = mav,
so that for the moving car we have,

acceleration = Power / (mass x speed)

This is the equation you need to work with. Now to make all the units work out
correctly in the English pound - foot system, you need to express

Power = Horsepower x 550 ft-lb/sec
Mass = Weight (in pounds) / (32 ft / sec^2)
speed is in feet / sec
acceleration will then be in feet / sec^2

Hope this helps.

Frank

Re:It works this way
 

Harry Cox wrote:

> On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 23:02:01 GMT, Raybender <raybender@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Hawaii_SE-R wrote:
> >
> >> "Sean Dinh" <"seanny"@dinh@znet.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1102464115.67875@news-1.nethere.net...
> >> > You are so wrong. Horsepower is everything. Since the Altima has a 3.5 L
> >> vs the
> >> > Accord's 3.0 L, the Altima has more low end power. It would take off at
> >> the line
> >> > faster.
> >>
> >> Actually torque is much more important at the lower rpm than you seem to
> >> understand. In fact, that low end power you are thinking of is actually
> >> more torque than anything else. Torque *is* a specific measurement of the
> >> vehicle's ability to push/pull an object/weight from a stop or lower speed.
> >> You will reach the peak torque of an engine in the lower rpm range, exactly
> >> where most of your acceleration occurs, while your peak horsepower occurs in
> >> the upper rpm range, where you will accelerate slower. Don't beleive me?
> >> Look at Horsepower and Torque charts and you will see where the peaks occur.
> >
> >Sean is correct and you are incorrect. Looking at a chart to find the torque
> >and hp peaks doesn't tell you where maximum acceleration occurs.
> >Easy to show from Newton's second law (F=ma) that maximum acceleration occurs at
> >the POWER peak in any gear. Sorry, but you just have to do the physics here.
>
> I've wondered about torque and HP too and didn't know the answer but
> would like to.
>
> As you state, F = ma (force equals mass times acceleration)
>
> So, a = F/m (acceleration equals force divided by mass).
>
> To accelerate the car, we need F (force).
>
> Torque is force times distance. T = Fd
>
> Solving for F and plugging that into our acceleration equation, we get
>
> a = T/d/m (acceleration equals torque divided by distance divided by
> mass).
>
> For your particular car, the distance and the mass don't change. Hence
> acceleration depends on torque only.
>
> As the car goes faster and faster, you need horsepower to maintain
> that torque at the higher RPMs.
>
> There's some interesting background at
> http://science.howstuffworks.com/fpte.htm.

Here's the way you need to work it out. Then to prove it, go test the acceleration
of your car in second gear somewhere past the torque peak and up on the hp curve, and
compare to acceleration AT THE SAME SPEED in third gear down near the peak of the
torque curve.

Start from

F= ma Newtons second law

Now the car is moving as you accelerate so.....

F x velocity = mav
But this is just

Power = mav,
so that for the moving car we have,

acceleration = Power / (mass x speed)

This is the equation you need to work with. Now to make all the units work out
correctly in the English pound - foot system, you need to express

Power = Horsepower x 550 ft-lb/sec
Mass = Weight (in pounds) / (32 ft / sec^2)
speed is in feet / sec
acceleration will then be in feet / sec^2

Hope this helps.

Frank

Re: Altima SE V-6 vs. Accord LX V-6
 

You're getting things mess up.

T = Fd. F is perpendicular to d. This is a twisting motion, as in angular force.
F = ma. a is linear acceleration. You can't just plug those 2 equations together and
solve them. You need to deal T equation with angular acceleration, not linear.
Basically, you need more equations to translate those 2.

That site sucks. First it says the Mustang engine is not good for pulling a truck
because it lacks torque. Then it contradict its self by proving that the Mustang's
engine could put out as much torque as the diesel engine, through the use of gear.
And then it says that the Mustang's engine won't last pulling a truck.

If the author had a bit of brain cell, he would forget his argument about torque and
just conclude that the Mustang's engine could pull as well as the diesel engine, but
that it won't last as long operating full time at full load at 5k rpm. It has nothing
to do with torque, just pure power.

As I said before, massive recital of myth does not make it a fact.

Harry Cox wrote:

> As you state, F = ma (force equals mass times acceleration)
>
> So, a = F/m (acceleration equals force divided by mass).
>
> To accelerate the car, we need F (force).
>
> Torque is force times distance. T = Fd
>
> Solving for F and plugging that into our acceleration equation, we get
>
> a = T/d/m (acceleration equals torque divided by distance divided by
> mass).
>
> For your particular car, the distance and the mass don't change. Hence
> acceleration depends on torque only.
>
> As the car goes faster and faster, you need horsepower to maintain
> that torque at the higher RPMs.
>
> There's some interesting background at
> http://science.howstuffworks.com/fpte.htm.

Re: Altima SE V-6 vs. Accord LX V-6
 

You're getting things mess up.

T = Fd. F is perpendicular to d. This is a twisting motion, as in angular force.
F = ma. a is linear acceleration. You can't just plug those 2 equations together and
solve them. You need to deal T equation with angular acceleration, not linear.
Basically, you need more equations to translate those 2.

That site sucks. First it says the Mustang engine is not good for pulling a truck
because it lacks torque. Then it contradict its self by proving that the Mustang's
engine could put out as much torque as the diesel engine, through the use of gear.
And then it says that the Mustang's engine won't last pulling a truck.

If the author had a bit of brain cell, he would forget his argument about torque and
just conclude that the Mustang's engine could pull as well as the diesel engine, but
that it won't last as long operating full time at full load at 5k rpm. It has nothing
to do with torque, just pure power.

As I said before, massive recital of myth does not make it a fact.

Harry Cox wrote:

> As you state, F = ma (force equals mass times acceleration)
>
> So, a = F/m (acceleration equals force divided by mass).
>
> To accelerate the car, we need F (force).
>
> Torque is force times distance. T = Fd
>
> Solving for F and plugging that into our acceleration equation, we get
>
> a = T/d/m (acceleration equals torque divided by distance divided by
> mass).
>
> For your particular car, the distance and the mass don't change. Hence
> acceleration depends on torque only.
>
> As the car goes faster and faster, you need horsepower to maintain
> that torque at the higher RPMs.
>
> There's some interesting background at
> http://science.howstuffworks.com/fpte.htm.

Re: Altima SE V-6 vs. Accord LX V-6
 

In rec.autos.makers.honda Hawaii_SE-R <WhyUGottaSpam@me.com> wrote:
> I highly doubt you could produce more torque than the VQ35DE on your
> bicycle.

More than the Honda anyway. What was that, 214 lb/ft? ( what's a "tq" ?).
Assuming the pedal on the bicycle is one foot long, which it might not be,
and that I weigh 214 pounds, all I have to do is stand on the pedal.
214 lbs/ft of torque. I could get more by pulling up on the handlebar as I
pressed down on the pedal.
How many horespower is that? If I could pedal the bicycle at that rate for
one full second it would be 214/550 = .38 hp.

---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5

Re: Altima SE V-6 vs. Accord LX V-6
 

In rec.autos.makers.honda Hawaii_SE-R <WhyUGottaSpam@me.com> wrote:
> I highly doubt you could produce more torque than the VQ35DE on your
> bicycle.

More than the Honda anyway. What was that, 214 lb/ft? ( what's a "tq" ?).
Assuming the pedal on the bicycle is one foot long, which it might not be,
and that I weigh 214 pounds, all I have to do is stand on the pedal.
214 lbs/ft of torque. I could get more by pulling up on the handlebar as I
pressed down on the pedal.
How many horespower is that? If I could pedal the bicycle at that rate for
one full second it would be 214/550 = .38 hp.

---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5

Re: Altima SE V-6 vs. Accord LX V-6
 

dold@XReXXAltim.usenet.us.com wrote:
> In rec.autos.makers.honda Hawaii_SE-R <WhyUGottaSpam@me.com> wrote:
>
>>I highly doubt you could produce more torque than the VQ35DE on your
>>bicycle.
>
>
> More than the Honda anyway. What was that, 214 lb/ft? ( what's a "tq" ?).
> Assuming the pedal on the bicycle is one foot long, which it might not be,
> and that I weigh 214 pounds, all I have to do is stand on the pedal.
> 214 lbs/ft of torque. I could get more by pulling up on the handlebar as I
> pressed down on the pedal.
> How many horespower is that? If I could pedal the bicycle at that rate for
> one full second it would be 214/550 = .38 hp.
>
> ---
> Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5
>
Fianlly, someone who understands the difference between torque and
horsepower!

--
Rob Munach, PE
Excel Engineering
PO Box 1264
Carrboro, NC 27510

Re: Altima SE V-6 vs. Accord LX V-6
 

dold@XReXXAltim.usenet.us.com wrote:
> In rec.autos.makers.honda Hawaii_SE-R <WhyUGottaSpam@me.com> wrote:
>
>>I highly doubt you could produce more torque than the VQ35DE on your
>>bicycle.
>
>
> More than the Honda anyway. What was that, 214 lb/ft? ( what's a "tq" ?).
> Assuming the pedal on the bicycle is one foot long, which it might not be,
> and that I weigh 214 pounds, all I have to do is stand on the pedal.
> 214 lbs/ft of torque. I could get more by pulling up on the handlebar as I
> pressed down on the pedal.
> How many horespower is that? If I could pedal the bicycle at that rate for
> one full second it would be 214/550 = .38 hp.
>
> ---
> Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5
>
Fianlly, someone who understands the difference between torque and
horsepower!

--
Rob Munach, PE
Excel Engineering
PO Box 1264
Carrboro, NC 27510

Re: Altima SE V-6 vs. Accord LX V-6
 

I have a 2004 EX sedan with V6 and love it. The engine/transmission combo is
fantastic and the suspension/handling is superb. I would not put too much
stock into performance numbers unless they consistently show a major gap in
performance from a number of reliable sources. The cars are very evenly
matched and to obsess about a silly possible slight difference in 0 - 60 is
silly. Are you expecting to get into lot of drag races with Altimas? I don't
think the Altima V-6 is exactly cheap any more and I consider their rear end
to be butt ugly. If performance is that important then get a new Mustang GT
for around the same or less money. --- Steve


"tony kujawa" <tjktjk2003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:31jt2eF3ammgnU1@individual.net...
> On paper these should have pretty even performance #'s but the Altima
> beats
> the Accord soundly when comparing auto trannys, and trounces it when it
> comes to the 6 speed. Were talking 1/2 second in the quarter and 0-60 in
> the autos, and a full second for the 6 speed. What gives with the Honda?
> Either the hp #'s are off or it is a lot heavier than the Altima. And why
> oh why doesn't Honda make the 4 door and an LX version of a coupe in the 6
> speed? I really want a Honda due to the high resale and past ownership,
> but
> have had an older Maxima that I loved. The new Altima is very nice
> looking,
> but I've heard the interiors are cheap. Now I haven't driven either of
> them
> yet, so I guess I should really save judgement until then. What are your
> thoughts?
>
>

Re: Altima SE V-6 vs. Accord LX V-6
 

I have a 2004 EX sedan with V6 and love it. The engine/transmission combo is
fantastic and the suspension/handling is superb. I would not put too much
stock into performance numbers unless they consistently show a major gap in
performance from a number of reliable sources. The cars are very evenly
matched and to obsess about a silly possible slight difference in 0 - 60 is
silly. Are you expecting to get into lot of drag races with Altimas? I don't
think the Altima V-6 is exactly cheap any more and I consider their rear end
to be butt ugly. If performance is that important then get a new Mustang GT
for around the same or less money. --- Steve


"tony kujawa" <tjktjk2003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:31jt2eF3ammgnU1@individual.net...
> On paper these should have pretty even performance #'s but the Altima
> beats
> the Accord soundly when comparing auto trannys, and trounces it when it
> comes to the 6 speed. Were talking 1/2 second in the quarter and 0-60 in
> the autos, and a full second for the 6 speed. What gives with the Honda?
> Either the hp #'s are off or it is a lot heavier than the Altima. And why
> oh why doesn't Honda make the 4 door and an LX version of a coupe in the 6
> speed? I really want a Honda due to the high resale and past ownership,
> but
> have had an older Maxima that I loved. The new Altima is very nice
> looking,
> but I've heard the interiors are cheap. Now I haven't driven either of
> them
> yet, so I guess I should really save judgement until then. What are your
> thoughts?
>
>

Re: Altima SE V-6 vs. Accord LX V-6
 

By the way, I can't remember exactly where, but I have seen quarter mile
results in the mid 14's for the six speed Accord V-6. I highly doubt that
the Altima V6 six speed is doing mid 13's. Some magazines always report
times a lot slower than others. -- Steve


"Steven L Umbach" <n9rou@n0-spam-for-me-comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Lptvd.754789$8_6.629497@attbi_s04...
>I have a 2004 EX sedan with V6 and love it. The engine/transmission combo
>is fantastic and the suspension/handling is superb. I would not put too
>much stock into performance numbers unless they consistently show a major
>gap in performance from a number of reliable sources. The cars are very
>evenly matched and to obsess about a silly possible slight difference in
>0 - 60 is silly. Are you expecting to get into lot of drag races with
>Altimas? I don't think the Altima V-6 is exactly cheap any more and I
>consider their rear end to be butt ugly. If performance is that important
>then get a new Mustang GT for around the same or less money. --- Steve
>
>
> "tony kujawa" <tjktjk2003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:31jt2eF3ammgnU1@individual.net...
>> On paper these should have pretty even performance #'s but the Altima
>> beats
>> the Accord soundly when comparing auto trannys, and trounces it when it
>> comes to the 6 speed. Were talking 1/2 second in the quarter and 0-60 in
>> the autos, and a full second for the 6 speed. What gives with the Honda?
>> Either the hp #'s are off or it is a lot heavier than the Altima. And
>> why
>> oh why doesn't Honda make the 4 door and an LX version of a coupe in the
>> 6
>> speed? I really want a Honda due to the high resale and past ownership,
>> but
>> have had an older Maxima that I loved. The new Altima is very nice
>> looking,
>> but I've heard the interiors are cheap. Now I haven't driven either of
>> them
>> yet, so I guess I should really save judgement until then. What are your
>> thoughts?
>>
>>
>
>

Re: Altima SE V-6 vs. Accord LX V-6
 

By the way, I can't remember exactly where, but I have seen quarter mile
results in the mid 14's for the six speed Accord V-6. I highly doubt that
the Altima V6 six speed is doing mid 13's. Some magazines always report
times a lot slower than others. -- Steve


"Steven L Umbach" <n9rou@n0-spam-for-me-comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Lptvd.754789$8_6.629497@attbi_s04...
>I have a 2004 EX sedan with V6 and love it. The engine/transmission combo
>is fantastic and the suspension/handling is superb. I would not put too
>much stock into performance numbers unless they consistently show a major
>gap in performance from a number of reliable sources. The cars are very
>evenly matched and to obsess about a silly possible slight difference in
>0 - 60 is silly. Are you expecting to get into lot of drag races with
>Altimas? I don't think the Altima V-6 is exactly cheap any more and I
>consider their rear end to be butt ugly. If performance is that important
>then get a new Mustang GT for around the same or less money. --- Steve
>
>
> "tony kujawa" <tjktjk2003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:31jt2eF3ammgnU1@individual.net...
>> On paper these should have pretty even performance #'s but the Altima
>> beats
>> the Accord soundly when comparing auto trannys, and trounces it when it
>> comes to the 6 speed. Were talking 1/2 second in the quarter and 0-60 in
>> the autos, and a full second for the 6 speed. What gives with the Honda?
>> Either the hp #'s are off or it is a lot heavier than the Altima. And
>> why
>> oh why doesn't Honda make the 4 door and an LX version of a coupe in the
>> 6
>> speed? I really want a Honda due to the high resale and past ownership,
>> but
>> have had an older Maxima that I loved. The new Altima is very nice
>> looking,
>> but I've heard the interiors are cheap. Now I haven't driven either of
>> them
>> yet, so I guess I should really save judgement until then. What are your
>> thoughts?
>>
>>
>
>

Re: Altima SE V-6 vs. Accord LX V-6
 

"Steven L Umbach" <n9rou@n0-spam-for-me-comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Vvtvd.653028$mD.447682@attbi_s02...
> By the way, I can't remember exactly where, but I have seen quarter mile
> results in the mid 14's for the six speed Accord V-6. I highly doubt that
> the Altima V6 six speed is doing mid 13's. Some magazines always report
> times a lot slower than others. -- Steve

Yes, the 6 speed is in the mid 14's on the Accord COUPE. If the sedan
offered a 6 speed, it would be no question what car I'd go with.

Tony

Re: Altima SE V-6 vs. Accord LX V-6
 

"Steven L Umbach" <n9rou@n0-spam-for-me-comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Vvtvd.653028$mD.447682@attbi_s02...
> By the way, I can't remember exactly where, but I have seen quarter mile
> results in the mid 14's for the six speed Accord V-6. I highly doubt that
> the Altima V6 six speed is doing mid 13's. Some magazines always report
> times a lot slower than others. -- Steve

Yes, the 6 speed is in the mid 14's on the Accord COUPE. If the sedan
offered a 6 speed, it would be no question what car I'd go with.

Tony