4x4 Action Group

Torque to Weight Ratio

User avatar
Chris Stoffel
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 555
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 9:54 pm

Torque to Weight Ratio

#1

Post by Chris Stoffel »

Grips have been thinking. It seems as if it is something he often does. When he has time of course.
So Grips thought that for 4x4ing the torque to weight ratio would be more important than the power to weight ratio.
I agree with Grips. When one is working at slow speeds torque counts most.

So, lets get some some Nm/weight ratios. OK? :D
Suzuki Jimny - Hobbit Car :cry:

User avatar
KurtG
Location: London
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 13 times
Posts: 2405
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2018 12:52 pm

#2

Post by KurtG »

210.5 N.m. /ton

Paj SWB with 441N.m.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Flex is overrated

User avatar
Jeanvn
Location: Mossel Bay
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 1:21 pm

#3

Post by Jeanvn »

212NM/t

Jeep Wrangler TJ.
Not bad for a NA petrol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
105 Land Cruiser
Amabroekies v6

User avatar
ThysleRoux
Location: Cape Town
Been thanked: 1 time
Posts: 949
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 7:32 pm

#4

Post by ThysleRoux »

RooiTjiep @ 400nm/1840kg equates to 217 Nm/ton
I refuse to be POLITICALLY CORRECT to impress others - Deal with it
FLEX is UNDERRATED :twisted:

Reenen
Location: Berg
Posts: 644
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 6:15 pm

#5

Post by Reenen »

275nm/t
My vrou se navara

Reenen
Location: Berg
Posts: 644
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 6:15 pm

#6

Post by Reenen »

235nm/t
Safari stasiewa, petrol

245nm/t
Safari bakkie, diesel

297nm/t. Soon to be safari

User avatar
XJ Junkie
Location: Cape Town
Been thanked: 1 time
Posts: 1599
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:47 pm
Contact:

#7

Post by XJ Junkie »

If the purpose is to show offroad power, then when you’re in low range, you need to multiply the reduction. Otherwise the thread doesn’t make sense.

That’ll really show how much force you’ve got.
Disclaimer: Uninformed, no research, just very strong opinions

Reenen
Location: Berg
Posts: 644
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 6:15 pm

#8

Post by Reenen »

Ek is aan stoei om vir my Mercedes w123 n crawl ratio van 348:1 te gee, met 500nm op engine...

User avatar
ThysleRoux
Location: Cape Town
Been thanked: 1 time
Posts: 949
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 7:32 pm

#9

Post by ThysleRoux »

XJ Junkie wrote:If the purpose is to show offroad power, then when you’re in low range, you need to multiply the reduction. Otherwise the thread doesn’t make sense.

That’ll really show how much force you’ve got.
I agree with you, but it's a starting point Neil. Apoc needs to revive the crawl thread that he started on the 4xwheelbarrowaxledesignforum

Sent from my FIG-LX1 using Tapatalk

I refuse to be POLITICALLY CORRECT to impress others - Deal with it
FLEX is UNDERRATED :twisted:

User avatar
XJ Junkie
Location: Cape Town
Been thanked: 1 time
Posts: 1599
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:47 pm
Contact:

#10

Post by XJ Junkie »

I don’t think it’s a starting point because there are enormous variances in reduction ratios.
Disclaimer: Uninformed, no research, just very strong opinions

User avatar
ThysleRoux
Location: Cape Town
Been thanked: 1 time
Posts: 949
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 7:32 pm

#11

Post by ThysleRoux »

Multiplying zero usable torque results in zero usable torque. The torque converter of an autobox can be a useful benefit or have a negative influence, dependung on terrain. In thr same way extra low low range ratios can be positive or negative, depending on the specific situation. In other words no technical spec is always the "useful" one in all circumstances, but all comparissons have to start at some point.

Sent from my FIG-LX1 using Tapatalk

I refuse to be POLITICALLY CORRECT to impress others - Deal with it
FLEX is UNDERRATED :twisted:

User avatar
Chris Stoffel
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 555
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 9:54 pm

#12

Post by Chris Stoffel »

XJ Junkie wrote:
Thu Aug 02, 2018 9:24 pm
I don’t think it’s a starting point because there are enormous variances in reduction ratios.
It would be nice if someone can show us how to work it out when the reduction of gears is considered. It will make this thread better and more complete.
Suzuki Jimny - Hobbit Car :cry:

Reenen
Location: Berg
Posts: 644
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 6:15 pm

#13

Post by Reenen »

1ste rat ratio x low range ratio x diff ratio
Bv
4 x 2 x 4.11=32.88 ratio
Nou moet jy nog torque en revs en band grootte ook in bring

User avatar
grips
Location: kathu
Has thanked: 39 times
Been thanked: 134 times
Posts: 1169
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2018 5:08 am

#14

Post by grips »

Little Patrol 230kw and 500nm

384nm/t

Yank Ranger

272nm/t

Shows just how weight is a performance killer. With 70kw and 100nm more the Yank Ranger is defeated by the little v8 Patrol

I plan to build a 408 stroker for the Yank Ranger and strip off all items that add extra weight. Will then move the 347 stroker to Little Patrol.
This will give Little Patrol 461nm/t
You will never find me without Stroh or a 4x4 :D

User avatar
XJ Junkie
Location: Cape Town
Been thanked: 1 time
Posts: 1599
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:47 pm
Contact:

#15

Post by XJ Junkie »

What a lot of guys forget is that the moment you put in bigger tyres without out a diff ratio correction, the Nm will reduce in direct proportion to the percentage increase in tyre size.
Disclaimer: Uninformed, no research, just very strong opinions

Post Reply