Power bands

[Drift Style S14]

simple question: whats the diffrence in the power band between a sr and a ka.

[mrdirty]

Stock?

I've been looking for stock dyno runs for ages to compare....no luck yet.

I hereby bump this 'cause it's a good question.

[luey02]

ka has a flatter torque curve compare to sr's sloping one.  but sr has more hp than torque at higher rpms ~5200, and stretches out longer than ka.

[mrdirty]

I think what he's asking (and what I want to know) is if you placed the sr dyno over the ka dyno (stock mind you) would there be any point where the ka has more torque? and if so to what rpm till the turbo brings it up...

[boosteds14]

u really cant compare the two because one in Natually aspirated and the other has forced induction <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=';)'>

[mrdirty]

I don't understand why can't you compare the two?

That doesn't make any sense...

[whateverjames]

you could but it wouldn't be fair. like comparing the r34 skyline engine to an SR. two different engines.

[crazycuban]

If its any help, here's my SR dyno chart...it's not stock, but theres nothing really that would drastically change the powerband (I/C, downpipe, exhaust, intake, etc.)...

www.evolutionautosports.com/images/cars/95%20240%20SX%20-%20Brian/dyno1.jpg

[wherezmytofu]

well since th ratio or stroke > bore in the ka the power band is lower......that is also an effect of the larger displcement and cheap ass cams <img src="http://www.zilvia.net/f/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/dozingoff.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':zzz:'>

[AceInHole]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (luey02 @ May 20 2002,12:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">ka has a flatter torque curve compare to sr's sloping one. but sr has more hp than torque at higher rpms ~5200, and stretches out longer than ka.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
all engines have more HP than torque at higher RPMS. &nbsp;

Since HP = Torque x RPM / 5252 (or was it 5225?), any RPM past ~5200 will be greater than 1, which multiplied by torque will yeild more HP per torque.

[wherezmytofu]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AceInHole @ May 21 2002,01:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (luey02 @ May 20 2002,12:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">ka has a flatter torque curve compare to sr's sloping one. but sr has more hp than torque at higher rpms ~5200, and stretches out longer than ka.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
all engines have more HP than torque at higher RPMS.

Since HP = Torque x RPM / 5252 (or was it 5225?), any RPM past ~5200 will be greater than 1, which multiplied by torque will yeild more HP per torque.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
done mind him...people r being brain washed that torque and hp r not corralated..

[Drift Style S14]

sorry failed to mention that i want to compaire a &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;turbo ka and a stock sr

[luey02]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (wherezmytofu @ May 22 2002,01:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AceInHole @ May 21 2002,01:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (luey02 @ May 20 2002,12:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">ka has a flatter torque curve compare to sr's sloping one. but sr has more hp than torque at higher rpms ~5200, and stretches out longer than ka.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
all engines have more HP than torque at higher RPMS.

Since HP = Torque x RPM / 5252 (or was it 5225?), any RPM past ~5200 will be greater than 1, which multiplied by torque will yeild more HP per torque.</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
done mind him...people r being brain washed that torque and hp r not corralated..</td></tr></table><span id='postcolor'>
tofu, I put you on the top 10 member poll and comment like that is what I get in return?! shame on you...

I admit I made a mistake tho....I know power and torque are related by that factor. &nbsp;What I meant was KAT torque starts flat then falls off at high rpm, which yields lower max power at high rpm, than a SR-T's upward sloping torque curve that yields a higher power rating than KAT at high rpm. &nbsp;Providing both engines outputs same max torque(max HP is what you're looking for right?)

My r/s meter states my max engine output is at 4400rpm so that's where my torque curve plateaus. &nbsp;If I had a sr, it probably be around 5500. &nbsp;


and um, Ace, let's get back to the basics. &nbsp;"all engines have more HP than torque at higher RPMS. " &nbsp;More? &nbsp;You can't really compare two different measurements, one is energy, another is rate of energy. &nbsp;If you meant higher number, ok, but that isn't really relevent to anything. &nbsp; Plain > and <, that's all.