answersLogoWhite

0

not sure what your asking is even a question - more a collection of words with a question mark at the end but this may be relevant to your ques... i mean words..

Torque per se does not affect a car's acceleration ability. The spread of torque between the engine's maximum speed and the corresponding speed for the next higher gear does. If your car drops significantly from its torque peak when you change gear (that's you, Celica VVTi) then that can affect your acceleration.

All the talk in magazines about torque being important in the real world is because most people are conditioned by the government to drive at low engine speed, and expect to be able to accelerate hard from low revs. In reality a more powerful car will always be faster than a less powerful car, regardless of their respective torque outputs, given the proviso above, if driven to the engine's power peak.

In respect of the RX-7, which is beautifully geared to drop neatly into the meat of secondary turbo boost for every new gear, you can rest assured that the relatively low torque output is completely irrelevant so long as you rev to just short of the bleeper.

And, let's face it, that's what you'd do anyway right?

HP is rated at 255bhp on paper however due to a gentlemans agreement between auto makers in Japan at the time Mazda lied about the power output. Cars tested leaving the factory were found to be more like 300+bhp in the higher spec models (R1 / R2 models)

at the time in japan all major car makers agreed they wouldn't make cars more than 255bhp. hence why Mazda embelished the truth somewhat.

hope this helps, as you can tell i have an awfull lot of time on my hands.

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago

What else can I help you with?

Continue Learning about Engineering

How do you change the primary and secondary coils with igniter on your 1990 rx7?

hey i have mint pics step by step how to do it my e mail is pmeigeljr@yahoo.com


Why a Rotary Engine is More Efficient than Piston System?

Having untangling that tangled grammar... +++ I assume you understand the basics of both types of engine, despite not using the term "reciprocating". +++ The steam-turbine is usually designed to expand the steam through its full pressure / volume / temperature range, so from high inlet pressure to a partial vacuum in the condenser, which reverts the exhaust stem to water for feeding back to the boiler. +++ The turbine's steam flow is from inlet to exhaust through steady stages, so each part of the turbine is at a constant temperature; hence low thermodynamic losses. The rotor and inter-stage stator blades are designed to give as smooth a flow as possible while extracting the maximum turning-moment in each stage. The reciprocating engine (unless of uniflow type) uses the same passages between valve and cylinder for both live (inlet) and exhaust steam, hence creates alternating steam flows with a certain amount of wasteful heat-cycling. +++ The turbine is entirely rotative, so develops equivalent power from much less moving mass, avoiding inertia and vibration problems. The back-pressure created on the exhaust stroke in a reciprocating engine is minimised but some is still necessary for mechanical cushioning against the high inertia of heavy piston, piston-rod, crosshead and connecting-rod as the stroke reverses. (Although their travel is a harmonic oscillation, which lessens the inertia to some extent naturally.) However it also loses power in compressing a small amount of used steam as the valve closes to exhaust and starts to open to inlet. +++ To sum up, the inertial and internal-frictional mechanical losses, and the thermodynamic losses, in a turbine are far less than in a reciprocating engine of equivalent power.