So, I was walking into work and there was a cherry red c6 out front today, and a woman smoking a cigarette outside said to the woman next to her, "I knew he had a small...."

I didn't hear the rest as the door closed behind me, but we all know those comments about how a hot car must be a sign of a lack of virility. It's a shame, but those not bitten by the hp bug are bound to say stuff like that, and there ought to be a way to help take those comments in stride, almost as an in-joke if possible.

today, I got to thinking about torque/weight relationships what with the new noble M15 (check it at www.seriouswheels.com) in the news and reading the dyno charts at www.ststurbo.com(turbo mounted where the muffler usually is... very weird. check the FAQ page to stifle your knee-jerk conclusions)

so..... I started to calculate the tq/weight relationship for my car... 261 lbft/3600 lb = .0725 lbft/lb
or, and I know that this is abusing the units, but stay with me.... .0725 ft = .0725 *12=.87 in. lol... so I'm packin a little under an inch. dang, that is kinda small.

a viper is 515 lbft/3400 lb, so .1515 ft=1.82, so viper drivers could be said to be "under 2 inches"

meh.... I know its dumb, but I thought it was funny anyway. patent examining can make the room spin some times...

4/6/2006 1:50:04 PM

i have some free time in my life - but damn...

4/6/2006 1:56:03 PM

i'm not even gonna calculate it bc i'd be crying. i'm sure i'd have like 1/8 of an inch. 120 hp/140 lb/ft or so

4/6/2006 2:25:20 PM

I'm not reading all that.

But, this raises a good question.

Would you rather have a small, but fully functional, p33n and your dream car or a big p33n and a rustbucket? I'm not talking about now when you have plenty of time to earn money...I'm talking midlife crisis time when you pretty much know whether or not you're going to be retiring in style or in a nursing home.

4/6/2006 2:57:49 PM

yeah the thing is this is a reverse correlation for what the average consumer would think.... except for the jacked up truck crowd where the bigger is better mentality presides


1033rwhp / 910rwtq
3200lbs

so 3.14" is this soft or hard? hahaha


oof... i don't even want to think about my t-bird 4400lbs ish i think.


[Edited on April 6, 2006 at 3:04 PM. Reason : .]

4/6/2006 3:02:34 PM

Quote :

"i have some free time in my life - but damn..."

for real... get a hobby or something.

4/6/2006 6:20:22 PM

I'm starting a new one next week, it's called studying for the patent bar, and I'll be doing it ~1.5 hrs a day every day for the next 3-4 months. woo. hoo. lucky. me.

4/7/2006 1:32:02 AM

can't believe I didn't think about this before.

The whole point was to establish an INVERSE relationship between the male-view positive attributes of a performance car and the pessimistic image backlash suffered at the hands of female detractors.

so.... since the better the torque to weight ratio results in a "longer" though small "inch" (the units just worked out, it is a nonsensical measure) measurement, the number resulting for a given car, say, the viper's 1.82 "inch" torq/weight represents its "compensation value, " get it?

so a 500 lbft car weighing 2000 lbs is a 1/4 ft or 3 inch compensation on the part of the owner. sweet.

so... this is a way to positively interpret a car's lack of tq/weight.... and also, high revvers like s2000's have less of a compensation than do trucky torque heavyweights like say, a mustang. muaahaha.

4/7/2006 12:53:45 PM

wouldn't the diesel trucks be the torquey heavyweights?

4/7/2006 12:57:05 PM

when people make comments to me about sports cars and little dicks i just whip mine out and they shut up pretty quick

4/7/2006 1:03:25 PM

ill remember that at the next mod party.

4/8/2006 10:51:01 PM