Do Not Sell My Personal Information Jump to content


Clarkson Knows Nothing About Cars


flotsam
 Share

Recommended Posts

Confirmation that fat, balding, flatulent Clarkson doesn't even understand the basics about cars. In a drag race between the Vanquish S and the Ferrari 575 he says:

"I've got 5 more bhp than Coogan in the Ferrari but I'm carrying an extra 100Kg and it's the weight that's costing me this race"

But it's the torque that gives you the push to accelerate not the bhp which is more a determinant of the top speed. Clarkson is talking rubbish and can't even drive as quickly as Simon "Pop Idol" Cowell!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to think Clarkson was just a opinionated journo who knew just enough about cars to get by

But after attending Top Gear (Cheers Fargo's mate!) I have changed my opinion completley...

It seems he writes the whole show, and may even own the name, but of course he's going to 'dumb down', i mean you want to appeal to as many people as possible..

And in all honesty, 575 vs Vanquish S - it is the weight thats gonna be the determining factor there!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


WHP is a result of Torque, they go hand in hand, although you can cheat the system by driving a lighter car. :)

Clarkson is a show on his own, I take his opinons with a pinch of salt, filter out his voice and just watch the pictures instead. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he is a bit of a wowwypop based on some of his oppinions (including slagging off lexus) but you gotta admit he can be funny, i read his column in the sun paper and top gear mag and he is funny for some reason.

still-----------i'd love to have his job,***** give me any car show presenters job, actually give me any job where i can drive a lambo or ferrari and im happy!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Confirmation that fat, balding, flatulent Clarkson doesn't even understand the basics about cars. In a drag race between the Vanquish S and the Ferrari 575 he says:

"I've got 5 more bhp than Coogan in the Ferrari but I'm carrying an extra 100Kg and it's the weight that's costing me this race"

But it's the torque that gives you the push to accelerate not the bhp which is more a determinant of the top speed. Clarkson is talking rubbish and can't even drive as quickly as Simon "Pop Idol" Cowell!

Power is the product of torque and speed of rotation. Acceleration is affected by both the amount of power being transferred through the wheels and the mass of the vehicle being accelerated (as well as other factors such as air resistance).

There are two ways of making an engine more powerful:

1- Increase the torque it produces at a particular rpm.

2- Increase the maximum speed it can spin at (i.e. raise its rev-limit).

Whether the power is produced by lots of torque at a low engine speed or lots of engine speed with a low torque has no bearing on the power or torque at the wheels since different gear ratios can increase torque at the cost of speed or vice-versa. It will however have an effect on driving style. Most "relaxed" road users would prefer driving at low engine speeds (since it's quieter and will wear the engine less) so would benefit from a higher torque. "Enthusiastic" or racing drivers, on the other hand, won't care so much about such things so can benefit more from high-revving engines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Confirmation that fat, balding, flatulent Clarkson doesn't even understand the basics about cars. In a drag race between the Vanquish S and the Ferrari 575 he says:

"I've got 5 more bhp than Coogan in the Ferrari but I'm carrying an extra 100Kg and it's the weight that's costing me this race"

But it's the torque that gives you the push to accelerate not the bhp which is more a determinant of the top speed. Clarkson is talking rubbish and can't even drive as quickly as Simon "Pop Idol" Cowell!

Power is the product of torque and speed of rotation. Acceleration is affected by both the amount of power being transferred through the wheels and the mass of the vehicle being accelerated (as well as other factors such as air resistance).

There are two ways of making an engine more powerful:

1- Increase the torque it produces at a particular rpm.

2- Increase the maximum speed it can spin at (i.e. raise its rev-limit).

Whether the power is produced by lots of torque at a low engine speed or lots of engine speed with a low torque has no bearing on the power or torque at the wheels since different gear ratios can increase torque at the cost of speed or vice-versa. It will however have an effect on driving style. Most "relaxed" road users would prefer driving at low engine speeds (since it's quieter and will wear the engine less) so would benefit from a higher torque. "Enthusiastic" or racing drivers, on the other hand, won't care so much about such things so can benefit more from high-revving engines.

I think it's a bit more complicated than that. Different engines as well as the gear ratios are important. I think I'm right in saying 2-valve engines, for example have more torque but less BHP than the equivalent 4-valve. Also luxury cars have the engines usually tuned for torque for effortless drivability whereas the Honda S2000 has a high revving low torque engine for thrashing about.

Whatever. The Stig seems to be a stand in for Clarkson's lack of driving abiilty, so I always feel cheated when Clarkson tries to drive a car on its limit. Like the Lotus which he couldn't get to slide but which one of the Lotus guys had to show him how.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's a bit more complicated than that. Different engines as well as the gear ratios are important.

Yes. Gear ratios can have two main effects.

1- They can't increase the power output of the engine but they can convert a high speed, low torque engine output into low speed, high torque wheel output or vice-versa.

2- By having more, better placed ratios, the driver will be better able to keep the engine speed in the power band.

I think I'm right in saying 2-valve engines, for example have more torque but less BHP than the equivalent 4-valve.

Sort of. A 2-valve engine will generally have a maximum torque output at a lower engine speed than a similar 4-valve engine. This doesn't mean it actually has more torque, just that you don't need to spin the engine so fast to access the torque.

A 4-valve engine will generally be able to produce more power than a similar 2-valve engine.

Also luxury cars have the engines usually tuned for torque for effortless drivability whereas the Honda S2000 has a high revving low torque engine for thrashing about.

This is basically matches what I said. More torque (or rather torque at lower engine speeds) makes for relaxed driving whereas high revving engines can usually produce more power (which is what you want for thrashing about).

Whatever. The Stig seems to be a stand in for Clarkson's lack of driving abiilty, so I always feel cheated when Clarkson tries to drive a car on its limit. Like the Lotus which he couldn't get to slide but which one of the Lotus guys had to show him how.

Yes, I'm sure the Stig and the the guy from Lotus are much better drivers. Also the German girl who recently drove his Jaguar S-type rather faster than he could round the Nurburgring :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also luxury cars have the engines usually tuned for torque for effortless drivability whereas the Honda S2000 has a high revving low torque engine for thrashing about.

This is basically matches what I said. More torque (or rather torque at lower engine speeds) makes for relaxed driving whereas high revving engines can usually produce more power (which is what you want for thrashing about).

Well no.

Different engine configurations can produce more torque rather than a shift in the torque peak. They can also produce flatter (but usually lower) torque curves. I was talking about engine torque which is what the torque figures actually refer to. You seem to have gearbox fixation and seem to be missing the point completel and making the same mistake as Clarkson.

Also, I believe the specificaitons of the engine torque are at the engine end of the gearbox. Obviously, the gear box would change the amount of torque available at the wheels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think clarkson is great!

and we all make mistakes from time to time...

Yes! But you wouldn't expect a doctor to not know the difference between an arse and an elbow.

i wouldnt expect them to know anything after some of the experiences i had in 2004, resulting in legal action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also luxury cars have the engines usually tuned for torque for effortless drivability whereas the Honda S2000 has a high revving low torque engine for thrashing about.

This is basically matches what I said. More torque (or rather torque at lower engine speeds) makes for relaxed driving whereas high revving engines can usually produce more power (which is what you want for thrashing about).

Well no.

Different engine configurations can produce more torque rather than a shift in the torque peak. They can also produce flatter (but usually lower) torque curves. I was talking about engine torque which is what the torque figures actually refer to. You seem to have gearbox fixation and seem to be missing the point completel and making the same mistake as Clarkson.

Also, I believe the specificaitons of the engine torque are at the engine end of the gearbox. Obviously, the gear box would change the amount of torque available at the wheels.

Sorry, I'm not quite sure which part of my reply you are disagreeing with but I'll try and clarify my point of view.

I agree that different engine configurations can produce more torque rather than just a shift in the torque peak BUT if one engine produces more torque at a particular engine speed than another then it is also producing more power at that engine speed so it's not relevant to the torque verses power argument.

The reason I keep mentioning torque and power at the wheels is because that's where it's needed to produce vehicle acceleration. Since the gears affect torque at the wheels it's just as important as the torque produced by the engine.

BUT

My original point was that if all other things were equal, a vehicle with more power, rather than more torque, will accelerate quicker. This is similar to what Clarkson said and, if it's wrong, I would very much like a clear explanation as to why.

Here's one way of looking at it (from a race drivers point of view):

The peak power output of an engine is usually produced close to its maximum speed (i.e. at the red line).

The peak torque output of an engine varies with engine configurations but is usually much lower than the red line.

Race drivers will usually try to keep the engine speed close to the red line when accelerating. I.E. They want maximum engine power, not maximum engine torque.

Here's another way of looking at it (from a Mathematical / Physics point of view):

Power is a measure of work done over a period of time.

Acceleration is effectively a measure of how quickly work can be done to convert the chemical energy stored in the petrol into kinetic energy of the vehicle.

Clearly there is a close relationship between the two.

Torque may APPEAR to be relevant if you consider the following:

Acceleration = force over mass

but force refers to the thrust applied to the vehicle (i.e. by the wheels not the engine).

Using this information we can take the race driver example further. For maximum acceleration the engine is kept close to the red-line for maximum engine power. By selecting the lowest gear possible this power can be supplied at a speed that matches the wheels with maximum torque.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

flotsam

I have removed your post as it was highly abusive and contained several direct personal attacks against bondms.

You have been warned about this sort of behaviour before.

Your post contained several valid points - if you wish to remake them, and continue the debate in a civilised and adult manner - please re-do your post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't there more important things to argue over guys, your both expressing your opinions, whether right or wrong, not worth getting in an arguement over, and yes i do thing clarkson is wrong most of the time, but he makes me laugh and provides entertainment, i bet most people only watch the show to see the cars, and how quick they are, not really intrested in the complete specs of them :whistling:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...




Forums


News


Membership