Page 100 quote from Kevin Leaper
' Although I love bike engine cars on the track, for a use on the road they're nearly always a poor second THANKS TO LESS TORQUE AND NO
REVERSE !'
Hmm.... cec must be better !
Hmmm, and there was me thinking the torque and power were just produced at a different part of the rev range.....
With no particular affiliation either way.....
all he's saying is that what you BEC boy really want is a metro engine
Perversely the MSA have ensured that I need a reverse gearbox on track, I refit the centre bearing prop for the out-season blats on the road!!
It's much quieter, less vibes and just so much better on the road with no reverse gearbox.
Yep, I need a Metro engine, but I'd probably refit a hairdrier unit to the Metro it came from... hmmm... ..... ....
quote:
Originally posted by r1_pete
Hmmm, and there was me thinking the torque and power were just produced at a different part of the rev range.....
With no particular affiliation either way.....
not the same old torque vs BHP discussion.
the answer is they're intertwixed and intertwined. Torque * rpm = BHpower.
If torque was the king of all things supercars would have diesel engines. And as much as I like my turbo diesel it ain't no Lambo..... And yes
the Le Mans diesel did very well but that was also partially reduce pit stops...
If Kev reckons his BEC hasn't got enough torque then he's not using his rev range properly!!
then again what he might be saying is that there isn't enough torque to produce adequate power in a rev range suitable for day-to-day driving.
200bhp from a bike engine @ 14k is nice to some ears but usually not for long.....
But he was talking about engine choices for an MG Midget...........