torque vs bhp

corboy

Hi All,
I lost my car to the floods and I'm thinkin of investing in an SUV, am looking at the audi q7, vw touareg, bmw x5, porsche cayenne, range rover sport.

Just looking for some advice on the above and also what the difference is between bhp & torque, I want something with a bit of go, what is more important bhp or torque???

All info & comments appreciated,

Many Thanks

.Longshanks.

Best explanation i can give is that Bhp is energy output. Torque is how much weight is behind that, how much real ummph it has....
One is useless without the other (unless you have a rx-8 )

Big Nasty

Understeer is when you hit the wall with the front of the car and oversteer is when you hit the wall with the rear of the car. Horsepower is how fast you hit the wall and torque is how far you take the wall with you.

ShadowHearth

MCMLXXV wrote: »

Understeer is when you hit the wall with the front of the car and oversteer is when you hit the wall with the rear of the car. Horsepower is how fast you hit the wall and torque is how far you take the wall with you.

+1. f*cking legend

Stingray

This could be a never ending thread..

Torque is the force (think of trying to twist the top off a jar)
Bhp is how fast you apply the force (think of the twist when it releases)

They are both connected though, power is the amount of torque you have at any given Rev

If you've got school tomorrow and the Maths teacher asks the question here is the formula HP = rpm x torque x 5252

frag4

No math required cause the X5 has all the answers

corboy

ha ha ha, very good guys but i'm still a bit lost, lookin at the bhp & torque of each one

bhp torque
x5 218 369
q7 233 368
cayenne 250 228
rover sport 188 324
touareg 225 368


Big difference between them.....

corboy

any reassearch I do seems to say the x5 too but the touareg also seems to have good reviews. Merlin auction have a land rover sport at auction tomorrow so trying to rule it in or out by tonight

Stingray

Okay forget all the technical stuff, which is the nicest colour?..

cnocbui

Torque is for acceleration, BHP is for ultimate top speed.

This is a gross over simplification.

Big Nasty

corboy wrote: »

ha ha ha, very good guys but i'm still a bit lost, lookin at the bhp & torque of each one

bhp torque
x5 218 369
q7 233 368
cayenne 250 228
rover sport 188 324
touareg 225 368


Big difference between them.....

Given that I would go the Q7 - nice looking motor too!

Gary ITR

I spent the summer driving a Touareg. While it had great torque and acceleration you couldn't take a corner at any kind of speed, I was switching between the Toerag and a lowered/stiffened MK2 Golf that can corner with the best of them, I kept forgetting about the appalling handling and having brown pants moments in the Touareg

RobAMerc

Both are hugely important for performance, however I would have to say you could never get the full story from stats.

A car that produces high torque and high hp at high revs will be horrible to own, but the figures of max torque and max bhp could be staggeringly good.

driveability comes from good low end torque ( a complex mixture of stroke vs bore vs inlet length vs compression ratio ) which remains produced at the same level right across the rev range will produce more bhp.

Although most of the cars your interested in will be auto which should be able to keep the car in the right gear for you it will matter most that you go for the highest in both.

Of the ones you've mentioned, if you can live with the looks and the fuel bills - the Cayenne 4.5s would be in a different league as far as open road driving to the Diesel variants all the rest are likely to be.

If your going to go towing stuff though or any sort of milage maybe a diesel would be the best option.

Big Nasty

Onkle wrote: »

I spent the summer driving a Touareg. While it had great torque and acceleration you couldn't take a corner at any kind of speed, I was switching between the Toerag and a lowered/stiffened MK2 Golf that can corner with the best of them, I kept forgetting about the appalling handling and having brown pants moments in the Touareg

Jeep of any discription is always gonna have more sway, especially apparent when you are used to a nice flat good handling car. For me the Q7 ticks all the boxes, espaecially when you compare the torque / bhp ratings above.

JHMEG

I can go up a hill, extremely quickly, in a Civic Type R. Put a half ton trailer on the back and I can't go up that same hill. (Lots of power, little torque)

I can go up a hill, albeit slowly, in a Transit. Put a half ton in the back and I can still go up the same hill, and at roughly the same speed. (Lots of torque, little power)

peasant

corboy wrote: »

I'm thinkin of investing in an SUV, am looking at the audi q7, vw touareg, bmw x5, porsche cayenne, range rover sport.

Drive them all, pick your favourite, feck the figures.

corboy

thanks lads, I wont be using it off road or for much towing. Touareg is off the list so, that leaves the other 4 with most of you leaning towards the Q7, the only other i contemplated was the merc ml320 but the reviews wern't great nor were those for the cayenne, supposedly a lot of problems with them and expensive to repair, oddly enough....

Big Nasty

corboy wrote: »

thanks lads, I wont be using it off road or for much towing. Touareg is off the list so, that leaves the other 4 with most of you leaning towards the Q7, the only other i contemplated was the merc ml320 but the reviews wern't great nor were those for the cayenne, supposedly a lot of problems with them and expensive to repair, oddly enough....

Drove the earlier ML and it was lethal! Cayenne = Massive Wallet IMO, i.e. cost to buy, runnning costs, depreciation, etc.

corboy

ml320 cdi was the one i was lookin at "lethal"= good???


yeah the cayenne sounds like it might drinnk money with servicing and running costs

Big Nasty

corboy wrote: »

ml320 cdi was the one i was lookin at "lethal"= good???


yeah the cayenne sounds like it might drinnk money with servicing and running costs

The one I drove was an early one and I'm sure handling has improved with development but the one I drove scared me!

rccaulfield

For performance bhp and torque dont mean much- power to weight is king- sure ya cud have a 600bhp truck and wudnt accelerate much!

corboy

so I should include the weight of the beast in the equation

bhp torque weight
x5 218 369 2695
q7 233 368 3120
cayenne 250 228 2945
rover sport 188 324 3070
touareg 225 368 2945

JHMEG

2.7 to 3.1 tonnes:eek: Better get the V10 TDI.

Absurdum

corboy wrote: »

ml320 cdi was the one i was lookin at "lethal"= good???


yeah the cayenne sounds like it might drinnk money with servicing and running costs

The new ML 2006 on is a light years ahead of the one it replaced, that was awful. From your list, I'd go for the Cayenne, Q7, X5, Touareg, RRS in that order if. If it's the Cayenne then it's gotta be a V8...if your pockets are deep as hell.

JHMEG

Jeez, even the Americans reckon the Q7 is hindered by its size and weight.

http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Audi_Q7/Performance/

corboy

Thanks Absurdum, where would you out the ml320cdi in the list, and what about the q7 being too heavy for its 3l diesel if thst true then all the rest should be in the same boat????

Mr Benevolent

The X5 wins based on torque and lower weight. Like the others have said, it also depends on where in the RPM range max torque is developed. Best to drive 'em all and pick the one you like.

corboy

Sounds like thats the only real option, test drive them all,

Thanks for all the comments, I'll let you all know how i get on with the test drives,

That US article on the Q7 was pretty complimentary to be fair...

Thanks

Bandara

Hi OP

I've just bought a q7 last week, I'm a bit confused about the torque figures you give? Mine is 235bhp and torque is about 500???

Also the weight is 2380 (I know this as it was weighed last week and I have the cert)

I cannot recommend the Q7 enough, it's the first time I ever owned a car that wasn't a BMW, it looked at the Cayenne, the new X-Drive BMW X5 and I just was blown away by the Q7.

The interior design is far superior to anything else I seen on the market, I personally love the exterior, a lot of people seem to slag it off as ugly but I think it's stunning. Also the adjustable air suspension which comes as standard is excellent.

Make sure you get the full interior and exterior s-line packages and I got the upgrade to the Bang and Olufsen speaker system which is awesome.

If your around Dublin and you want to have a look drop me a line

HT.

conneem-TT

corboy wrote: »

so I should include the weight of the beast in the equation

---

bhp---torque---weight
x5

---

218----369

---

2695
q7

---

233

---

368

---

3120
cayenne ---250

---

228

---

2945
rover sport -188

---

324

---

3070
touareg ---- 225----368

---

2945

Those weights are way off, should be along the lines of,

---

bhp---torque(lb/ft)---weight(kg)
x5

---

218----369

---

2175
q7

---

233

---

368

---

2325
cayenne ---250

---

228

---

2160
rover sport -188

---

324

---

2600
touareg ---- 225----368

---

2300

Hammertime wrote: »

Hi OP

I've just bought a q7 last week, I'm a bit confused about the torque figures you give? Mine is 235bhp and torque is about 500???

Also the weight is 2380 (I know this as it was weighed last week and I have the cert)

Your torque figure is in Nm and is right, previous figures were quoted in lb/ft. Your weight figure is about right also.

The OP is best off driving them to find which is best for him, wheter it is grunt, ride, space, comfort ect..

Iron Hide

If its grunt your after, X5 is good. The figures say so and having driven one it has a good bit of poke for an suv, Ride and comfort are acceptable but the space is pretty piss poor...