Today's new cars are way overpowered...

[dfkrug]

I suppose you mean using the calculator?

The calculator link provided by GMANBART uses an equation to calculate ET from
the weight and power, or power, if you know the ET and weight. Torque is not part
of the equation at all.

They used to publish the equation in the back of R&T magazine, but it is no longer
there. Some web searching could find it.

 

[KennyG]

Time out before this argument spins out of control. If Horsepower is in the equation, Torque is inherently in the calculation. The two variables in engine power output are torque and rpm. The equation is simple. HP = (Torque x RPM) / 5252 if Torque is in Ft/lbs. That's why a diesel that develops 200 Ft-lbs of torque at 3000 RPM (red-line) has the same Horsepower as a gas engine that develops 100 Ft-lbs of torque at 6000 RPM (red-line). Obviously the diesel will have more punch in normal driving, but in drag racing most of the operation and power output is in the upper RPM range near red line. Two normally aspirated gasoline engines with the same red line and same horsepower are going to have similar torque peaks.

You can see this in comments in other threads where people note the advantages of the Ecoboost turbo over the Ford 5 liter in everyday driving even though the max HP is not much different. The reason is the wider torque curve the turbo provides that improves driveability. However, in a drag race, the difference wouldn't be so great. (Not that drag racing F-150s makes much sense to me.)

 

[AGRIMAN]

2 '67 impala SS, 9 various Firebirds, 3 Camaros, 2 Chargers '66, '69, a Sport Fury, '68 GTX, 2 '73 Buick Regals, one with Stage 1, '85 442, and honestly about 2 dozen others. My wife and I are active in a couple of charitable car clubs and have been playing with classics for 40+ years. This is my wife's weekend toy. View attachment 451154

Very nice. I'm a Ford man to the bone, but I still appreciate all American muscle and all the hard work that goes into restoring them. I'm also a big believer in charitable causes and give back.

Mighty fine job sir. Keep up the good work.

 

[toppop52]

The calculator link provided by GMANBART uses an equation to calculate ET from
the weight and power, or power, if you know the ET and weight. Torque is not part
of the equation at all.

They used to publish the equation in the back of R&T magazine, but it is no longer
there. Some web searching could find it.

I was just wondering if the statement was based on the calculator, you answered that. Torque certainly has a physical impact on et, I understand the calculator method, just wasn't sure if that's what you were referring to. Thanks.

 

[toppop52]

Very nice. I'm a Ford man to the bone, but I still appreciate all American muscle and all the hard work that goes into restoring them. I'm also a big believer in charitable causes and give back.

Mighty fine job sir. Keep up the good work.

Thank you! With this past years events, we've donated north of $220K in the last 14 years, not bad for a club with 57 member families.

 

[toppop52]

By the way, one of my cars was a '66 Fairlane that came with a 200/3 speed. I bought an old '68 police car with 428/C6, freshened everything and swapped it into the Fairlane along with buckets and console as well as the steering column from a '67 Cyclone. It was one of only two Fords I've done of my own, but it was a sweet ride!

 

[Steppenwolfe]

I really don't understand everything you guys are talking about here, BUT, I will tell you this. My Ford Super Duty with the power stroke engine, and whatever, 800 foot pounds of torque is, flies like a bat out of he!!, and is the quickest machine off the line I ever had. It is wicked fast...

 

[amaxwell]

I'm old enough to remember when that was a "goal" rarely attained. I bought one of the first (1968) Plymouth Road Runners; 383 cu. in. and 335 hp. It could do 130 mph, but in normal highway driving, on a good day I could get as much as 13 mpg.:laughing:

Yeah ,but gas was 31 cents a gallon then.

 

[turnkey4099]

Yeah ,but gas was 31 cents a gallon then.

And wages were about 1/10 what they are now.

Harry K

 

[motownbrowne]

They just showed on the news that "adjusted for inflation" gas is cheaper now than in the late 60s when it was under $0.40/ gallon. Crazy.