machin wrote:Raptor22/Strad... are you suggesting it doesn't take energy to move something from rest?
If it takes energy (I can assure you; any movement requires energy) and it takes a certain time (again; it does) that means you can describe the motion in terms of power just as well as you can in terms of torque.
I repeat; power and torque are simply two different ways of describing engine output. Using either power or torque to work out acceleration will get you the same answer; as long as you do the maths correctly!
Machin, we're not arguing that energy is not required. I agree that power provides a means of simple comparison, not arguement there. What we are saying is that what is measured is torque. That is converted to a power number to use as comparison.
When engineers set up a car for the race track they work the gearing to keep the engine within its maximum torque band whilst producing torque at the wheel produce power.
I have never argued that power is unimportant. In fact the formula P=2piNT/60 shows the relationship clearly.
The point that is being missed is that power on its own tells us nothing about performance. We need torque and at what RPM that T is being generated to determine where best power is produce to convert in speed (v).
Red Bull is a driving example. slow on the straight, fast through the corners, especially out of them because they have geared the drivetrain to keep the engine between it torque and power peaks for the better part of the lap.
Petrol heads become fixated on the power but that does not exist unless the energy (fuel) is converted into mechanical energy (measured as BMEP) that produces torque and RPM.
The only really effective ay to compare engine 1 to engine 2 is to measure its BrakeMEan Effective Pressure (BMEP). Thats translates to T and N which yields P for ease of comparison. But P is always presented at XXXXRPM