TQ vs HP in its own thread! - Page 4 - Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > Tech Help> Engine
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #46 (permalink)  
Old 05-12-2010, 06:11 PM
Hippie's Avatar
Analog man in a digital world.
 

Last journal entry: HEI comparison.
Last photo:
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 2,255
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 3
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigLeoRocks
Okay..I got a little heated... I should know better than to call names. It is a kinder, gentler generation where nobody is held accountable. I apologize. Maybe it was uncalled for...I'm over here in Afghanistan in a warzone..surrounded by self-proclaimed geniuses and people who think they are ultra-important. Sorry if I offended anybody.
Your frustration is understood, more importantly your service is greatly appreciated.

Next time you hear some M119 105mm's popping off or ride in an FMTV A1 or A1R, LVAD or M939A1/A2 keep me in mind. I may have helped build part of it.

    Advertisement
Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #47 (permalink)  
Old 05-12-2010, 07:40 PM
4 Jaw Chuck's Avatar
Hotrodders.com Moderator
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Age: 46
Posts: 4,957
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 2
Thanked 88 Times in 71 Posts
Quote:
So far not one person has given any empirical or theoretical evidence to suggest torque matters more than horsepower.
Ha-ha, that reminds me of a funny poster.

__________________
Outlawed tunes from outlawed pipes
Quick reply to this message
  #48 (permalink)  
Old 05-12-2010, 11:27 PM
BigLeoRocks's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: arizona
Age: 38
Posts: 66
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thats quite funny. On a side note..I hope you guys will be getting your hockey team back!
Quick reply to this message
  #49 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2010, 06:07 AM
engineczar's Avatar
Hotrodders.com Moderator
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In Flowbench nirvana
Age: 52
Posts: 1,637
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 5
Thanked 45 Times in 41 Posts
Be safe over there Leo. Thank you for all you're doing.
__________________
BSE Racing Engines
Quick reply to this message
  #50 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2010, 06:18 AM
OLNOLAN's Avatar
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 1,039
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 367
Thanked 90 Times in 76 Posts
Good Analogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe G
From a strictly mathematical standpoint, the argument that HP is somehow "more important" than Torque is nonsense. Let me illustrate:

You need Torque and RPM to make HP. Thus, torque and RPM are both 'Factors' in determining HP.

As stated several times before,
(Torque X RPM) / 5252 = HP

Just for the sake of (friendly) argument, let's look at a similar equation,
(Length X Width) / 43560 = Acres

You are telling us that HP is 'more important' than Torque because you can make more HP with less Torque given a greater RPM.

By saying that, you would also agree that the Acreage of a lot is 'more important' than it's Length because you can make more Acreage with less Length given a greater Width.

It's nonsense.

The confusion here begins when you put HP and Torque in the context of racing and what's quicker and/or faster, because hundreds of other 'Factors' come into play, such as gearing, traction, weight, etc. etc.. Then it's not as simple as torque, RPM, and HP anymore.

Peace...
Good analogy Joe G., Here's a famous one by an old friend; Chemical plant shutdown by electrical failure. Work in progress. In meeting with plant managers, supervisor says we'll have it fixed in three days. Plant manager says, thats too long, put every available man on in. Supervisor says, got all the men I need, still gonna take 3 days. Plant manager could not understand.
Supervisor says, if I was piloting a ship across the ocean and the trip took 30 days, do you think that if we put 30 pilots on the ship we could get across the ocean in one day? Some folks just don't get it.
Quick reply to this message
  #51 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2010, 06:25 AM
How fast is fast enough?
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 29
Posts: 8,995
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 17
Thanked 315 Times in 295 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe G
From a strictly mathematical standpoint, the argument that HP is somehow "more important" than Torque is nonsense. Let me illustrate:

You need Torque and RPM to make HP. Thus, torque and RPM are both 'Factors' in determining HP.

As stated several times before,
(Torque X RPM) / 5252 = HP

Just for the sake of (friendly) argument, let's look at a similar equation,
(Length X Width) / 43560 = Acres

You are telling us that HP is 'more important' than Torque because you can make more HP with less Torque given a greater RPM.

By saying that, you would also agree that the Acreage of a lot is 'more important' than it's Length because you can make more Acreage with less Length given a greater Width.

It's nonsense.

The confusion here begins when you put HP and Torque in the context of racing and what's quicker and/or faster, because hundreds of other 'Factors' come into play, such as gearing, traction, weight, etc. etc.. Then it's not as simple as torque, RPM, and HP anymore.

Peace...

The argument is essentially you can have an engine with less torque and go faster if you still put more average power to the ground in equally prepped cars. And yes, you can have more torque and win, BUT it is not needed. Which goes to show, average HP put to the ground is all that matters- not torque.

Secondly acerage is not as important as dimensions, for reasons you stated.
Quick reply to this message
  #52 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2010, 08:36 AM
my87Z's Avatar
Veteran/Firefighter-EMT-I CRT
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: maryland
Age: 30
Posts: 1,685
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 6
Thanked 11 Times in 11 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigLeoRocks
Okay..I got a little heated... I should know better than to call names. It is a kinder, gentler generation where nobody is held accountable. I apologize. Maybe it was uncalled for...I'm over here in Afghanistan in a warzone..surrounded by self-proclaimed geniuses and people who think they are ultra-important. Sorry if I offended anybody.

i spent 6 months in Iraq on non volentary IA duty and a year in Guantanamo Bay (couldn't leave the compond for the whole year) and also did two 7 month cruises and one 5 month surge on carriers helping to launch the jets that bombed Afghanistan and Iraq. while in the Navy i was on deployment more than i was home, literaly. all this during my 6 yrs of service so i understand your frustrasion, and i dont believe that this generation isn't held accounatable just that less care about the consiquenses. but i believe that your frustration is a little misplaced, i dont always agree with AP but most of the time he gives good advice, and this thread is one of the things that this forum is all about, true AP is a stubborn, objective person and sometimes you just have to "agree to disagree" but this thread is obviously and intersesting topic due to the 4 pages of posts it has generated in the last 2-3 days. my advice for those who are irritated with AP and this thead would be to just not open it.

I'm home know and a civilian so i would like to thank you Leo for your service and wish you saftey during your last days over seas, i hope you come home safely
Quick reply to this message
  #53 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2010, 08:44 AM
How fast is fast enough?
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 29
Posts: 8,995
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 17
Thanked 315 Times in 295 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by my87Z
i spent 6 months in Iraq on non volentary IA duty and a year in Guantanamo Bay (couldn't leave the compond for the whole year) and also did two 7 month cruises and one 5 month surge on carriers helping to launch the jets that bombed Afghanistan and Iraq. while in the Navy i was on deployment more than i was home, literaly. all this during my 6 yrs of service so i understand your frustrasion, and i dont believe that this generation isn't held accounatable just that less care about the consiquenses. but i believe that your frustration is a little misplaced, i dont always agree with AP but most of the time he gives good advice, and this thread is one of the things that this forum is all about, true AP is a stubborn, objective person and sometimes you just have to "agree to disagree" but this thread is obviously and intersesting topic due to the 4 pages of posts it has generated in the last 2-3 days. my advice for those who are irritated with AP and this thead would be to just not open it.

I'm home know and a civilian so i would like to thank you Leo for your service and wish you saftey during your last days over seas, i hope you come home safely
I pretty much agree with that.



I have a buddy in Afghanistan right now, an lieutenant MP. He seems to be doing okay, but I imagine it has to get to him in some ways. I'll be glad when he's home.
Quick reply to this message
  #54 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2010, 10:03 AM
cool rockin daddy's Avatar
1.21 giga-watts???!!!!
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: wherever cool cars are
Posts: 1,535
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
And AP wa on such good behavior for a while. See he's gone back to his old ways. Oh well.
Quick reply to this message
  #55 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2010, 01:46 PM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 6,764
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 4
Thanked 427 Times in 366 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ap72
The argument is essentially you can have an engine with less torque and go faster if you still put more average power to the ground in equally prepped cars. And yes, you can have more torque and win, BUT it is not needed. Which goes to show, average HP put to the ground is all that matters- not torque.

Secondly acerage is not as important as dimensions, for reasons you stated.
I've really been trying to stay out of this but I'll stick a couple toes in.

Horsepower is a measure of work, torque is a measure of a particular kind of force (a force wanting to cause a rotation but not necessarily doing so).

Work is the result of a force resulting in a movement for a distance in a period of time. I once used the analogy a few weeks ago in this forum that if you used a lever against a heavy object that if the object couldn't be moved by the force applied that no work, therefore, no horsepower occurred no matter how much you sweated in the attempt.

I use a "lever" because it is a length suspended at some point by a fulcrum, therefore its movement is rotational, therefore, the forces in and out are torques.

The gasoline fueled engine has two points hot rodders worry about they are the torque peak and the horsepower peak. The torque is there from the moment the engine is started till it's wound up where it throws its rods. The horsepower is also there as simply stated as Torque times RPM. So an engine that turns slowly but makes big torque numbers can also make big horsepower numbers at those low RPMs. Engines that propel big ships come to mind. An engine that turns very fast but makes small amounts of torque can also make big amounts of horsepower at high RPMs. A Formula 1 engine comes to mind. But neither of these engines would be suitable powerplants in your F150. So this brings us to a conclusion that an engine has to be a size in proportion to its assigned task.

Back to "peaks"! The torque peak is nothing more than that place where the engine is taking the biggest breath it can. On a dyno an engine is typically accelerated at a rate of 300 RPM per second. The force it takes to limit the engine to this rate of acceleration is read as torque and computed to horsepower by Torque times RPM. OK, the actual formula has some stuff I'm leaving out to which there is a whole nuther story as to why 33,000 pounds per second and 5250 RPMs are used. But lets just stay simple for a while with Torque times RPM. RPM is a distance in time in one little statement. The torque is a force across a distance together they make "horsepower".

I keep getting in these side things, back to torque peaks. The torque is there below and above the peak, it can be tuned into horsepower thru the formula at any time. The torque and horsepwoer is variable with the amount and frequency each cylinder can contribute to the crankshaft. At RPMs under the peak the frequency are lower and the operating pressures are lower because the engine isn't yet spinning at a point where all the Beach Boy vibrations have become Good Vibrations in the intake and exhaust systems. So at the torque peak the engine is breathing as deeply as it ever will and the torque hits its max value. Past that point, there becomes insufficient time for the induction system to get mixture in and the exhaust system to get the poop out. So the absolute pressure in the cylinder begins to fall and the torque per revolution begins to fall. But back to the equation that Horsepower which is work accomplished keeps going up because the RPMs are raising faster than the torque is falling. This continues to the horsepower peak.

The horsepower peak is simply that point where the increasing RPMs cannot offset the falling torque. At that point the horsepower peaks and begins to fall. How quickly it falls will mostly depend on the carburation/injections ability to feed the engine, camshaft design, compression ratio and the efficiencies of the intake and exhaust systems. Some engines come up to the horsepower peak and just flop over in a dive to zero, others will flatten out for a while before they too flop into a power dive.

In a drag race, you want to operate the engine in an RPM range where it has its best acceleration. Typically that is the zone between the torque and horsepower peaks. This was the point of the close ratio transmission, it was intended to keep the engine within the range on shifts. The wide ratio was more suited for the street with a deep low and a wider spread till you got to high. But this forces you to operate the engine in a range that usually requires the engine to be over revved to come back on the torque peak with the upshift. Or you can shift on the power peak and bring the engine under the torque peak on the up shift. The dynamics of the engine, the trans gearing and those of the chassis will determine which choices result in the least time to the finish line. Obviously the perfect solution, short of an electric motor, would be an infinitely variable transmission that held the engine on the horsepower peak all the time as it changed ratios. But in spite of this being and engineer's wer dream for a hundred years, the technology involved still exceeds the material strengths and process controls we have, but that gap is closing at least to the point where underpowered cars like the Subaru Justy could commercially play with the idea.

Bogie

Last edited by oldbogie; 05-13-2010 at 02:06 PM.
Quick reply to this message
  #56 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2010, 02:04 PM
How fast is fast enough?
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 29
Posts: 8,995
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 17
Thanked 315 Times in 295 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldbogie
I've really been trying to stay out of this but I'll stick a couple toes in.

Horsepower is a measure of work, torque is a measure of a particular kind of force (a force wanting to cause a rotation but not necessarily doing so).

Work is the result of a force resulting in a movement for a distance in a period of time. I once used the analogy a few weeks ago in this forum that if you used a lever against a heavy object that if the object couldn't be moved by the force applied that no work, therefore, horsepower occurred no matter how much you sweated in the attempt.

I use a "lever" because it is a length suspended at some point by a fulcrum, therefore its movement is rotational, therefore, the forces in and out are torques.

The gasoline fueled engine has two points hot rodders worry about they are the torque peak and the horsepower peak. The torque is there from the moment the engine is started till it's wound up where it throws its rods. The horsepower is also there as simply stated as torque times RPM. So an engine that turns slowly but makes big torque numbers can also make big horsepower numbers at those low RPMs. Engines that propel big ships come to mind. An engine that turns very fast but makes small amounts of torque can also make big amounts of horsepower at high RPMs. A Formula 1 engine comes to mind. But neither of these engines would be suitable powerplants in your F150. So this brings us to a conclusion of an engine that has a size in proportion to its assigned task.

Back to "peaks"! The torque peak is nothing more than that place where the engine is taking the biggest breath it can. On a dyno an engine is typically accelerated at a rate of 300 RPM per second. The force it takes to limit the engine to this rate of acceleration is read as torque and computed to horsepower by torque times RPM. OK the actual formula has some stuff I'm leaving out to which there is a whole story as to why 33,000 pounds per second and 5250 RPMs is used. But lets just stay simple for a while torque times RPM. RPM is a distance in time in one little statement. The torque is a force across a distance.

I keep getting in these side things, back to torque peaks. The torque is there below the peak and above. It is variable with the amount and frequency each cylinder can contribute to the crankshaft. At RPMs under the peak the frequency is lower and the operating pressures are lower because the engine isn't yet spinning at a point where all the Beach Boy vibrations have become Good Vibrations in the intake and exhaust systems. So at the torque peak the engine is breathing as deeply as it ever will and the torque hits its max value. Past that point, there becomes insufficient time for the induction system to get mixture in and the exhaust system to get the poop out. So the absolute pressure in the cylinder begins to fall and the torque per revolution begins to fall. But back to the equation that Horsepower which is work accomplished keeps going up because the RPMs are raising faster than the torque is falling. This continues to the horsepower peak.

The horsepower peak is simply that point where the increasing RPMs cannot offset the falling torque. At that point the horsepower peaks and begins to fall. How quickly it falls will mostly depend on the carburation/injections ability to feed the engine, camshaft design, compression ratio and the efficiencies of the intake and exhaust systems. Some engines come up to the horsepower peak and just flop over in a dive to zero, others will flatten out for a while before they too flop into a power dive.

In a drag race, you want to operate the engine in an RPM range where it has its best acceleration. Typically that is the zone between the torque and horsepower peaks. This was the point of the close ratio transmission, it was intended to keep the engine within the range on shifts. The wide ratio was more suited for the street with a deep low and a wider spread till you got to high. But this forces you to operate the engine in a range that usually requires the engine to be over revved to come back on the torque peak with the upshift. Or you can shift on the power peak and bring the engine under the torque peak on the up shift. The dynamics of the engine, the trans gearing and those of the chassis will determine which choices result in the least time to the finish line. Obviously the perfect solution, short of an electric motor, would be an infinitely variable transmission that held the engine on the horsepower peak all the time as it changed ratios. But in spite of this being and engineer's wer dream for a hundred years, the technology involved still exceeds the material strengths and process controls we have, but that gap is closing at least to the point where underpowered cars like the Subaru Justy could commercially play with the idea.

Bogie
Bogie, I have the highest respect for you, and really appreciate your VERY through posts, especially this one where you pointed out having the highest horsepower down the track wins (my original point), but I have one small point to clarify.

MANY people shift too soon thinking that they want to fall right back to the torque peak. In fact you may want to fall a hair above it OR below it, depending on horsepower. If you shift to maximize the average horsepower across the track in most cases your shift will drop you to a point past the torque peak (but not always). The shift usually doesn't center the horsepower peak either since it is not a symmetrical curve.

The engine on its own will accelerate fastest at the torque peak if free spinning, BUT THE CAR WILL NOT. Many people confuse the two, thinking they are the same and thus reasoning that they should shift to place them at the torque peak.

Thus the only curve you need to concern yourself with is the horsepower, NOT the torque. select your gears and stall to keep you as near to the horsepower peak as you can all the way down the track and you will go as fast as the engine will allow.




Bogie, I know you are aware of these things, I just wanted to clarify any details that may have been overlooked. Again, I always appreciate the time and effort that surely goes in to your through posts.
Quick reply to this message
  #57 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2010, 02:53 PM
cobalt327's Avatar
WFO
 
Last wiki edit: Intake manifold
Last journal entry: 1980 Malibu Wagon
Last photo:
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Atlanta
Age: 59
Posts: 5,037
Wiki Edits: 1616

Thanks: 128
Thanked 597 Times in 546 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ap72
select your gears and stall to keep you as near to the horsepower peak as you can all the way down the track and you will go as fast as the engine will allow.
Really? There seems to be something "off" about that statement, no?
Quick reply to this message
  #58 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2010, 03:03 PM
How fast is fast enough?
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 29
Posts: 8,995
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 17
Thanked 315 Times in 295 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by cobalt327
Really? There seems to be something "off" about that statement, no?
There are a few assumptions, but people don't like to hear "the highest average power down the track produces the fastest times".

You need the highest amount of power to the wheels, perhaps it should read-

Select gears and stall to deliver the peak amount of power to the wheels all the way down the track and you will go as fast as the engine will allow- provided you can get it to hook.
Quick reply to this message
  #59 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2010, 03:15 PM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: illinois
Posts: 189
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ap72
There are a few assumptions, but people don't like to hear "the highest average power down the track produces the fastest times".

You need the highest amount of power to the wheels, perhaps it should read-

Select gears and stall to deliver the peak amount of power to the wheels all the way down the track and you will go as fast as the engine will allow- provided you can get it to hook.
OK maybe im confused, ap you said torgue didnt matter , now your saying average amount of power to the wheels, can you explain this to me , like a 4 year old?
Quick reply to this message
  #60 (permalink)  
Old 05-13-2010, 03:19 PM
Registered User
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 6,764
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 4
Thanked 427 Times in 366 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ap72
Bogie, I have the highest respect for you, and really appreciate your VERY through posts, especially this one where you pointed out having the highest horsepower down the track wins (my original point), but I have one small point to clarify.

MANY people shift too soon thinking that they want to fall right back to the torque peak. In fact you may want to fall a hair above it OR below it, depending on horsepower. If you shift to maximize the average horsepower across the track in most cases your shift will drop you to a point past the torque peak (but not always). The shift usually doesn't center the horsepower peak either since it is not a symmetrical curve.

The engine on its own will accelerate fastest at the torque peak if free spinning, BUT THE CAR WILL NOT. Many people confuse the two, thinking they are the same and thus reasoning that they should shift to place them at the torque peak.

Thus the only curve you need to concern yourself with is the horsepower, NOT the torque. select your gears and stall to keep you as near to the horsepower peak as you can all the way down the track and you will go as fast as the engine will allow.




Bogie, I know you are aware of these things, I just wanted to clarify any details that may have been overlooked. Again, I always appreciate the time and effort that surely goes in to your through posts.
I see guys who write about over-reving the engine 10% before shifting as the ideal point for max acceleration. In my experience, I try to get a feel for the machine and pull shifts where it feels right. For myself I don't use a shift light nor rev limiters (yes a missed shift can result in a blown engine that's called "risk"), or any other rocket science. I listen to the machine and try to give it what it wants for the situation it's in. If you just run the engine on the shift point, you can be replaced with a computer. The situation dynamics needs some judgement and computing, even with fuzzy logic isn't that good yet, so why act like your a computer.

I like your comment to symmetrical curves, true enough, for years dyno jockey's took the raw data and built these nice smooth curves when in fact the typical curve has holes and mounds all thru it. You as the driver need to find these and exploit them so just making up a rule of shifting isn't necessarily going to do that, but it probably makes a place to get started.

All you're trying to do is find the car's sweet spot and keep it as close to that as you can. The engine is but one component in that equation. I'll give it's the one variable you can instantly control, but not the only component. Gearing, tires, suspension, body stiffness are all doing their thing and you as a mechanic and the driver need to work together to optimize. As the driver you need to match all those dynamics to the environment you find yourself in. going in with a predetermined set of operating rules may not produce the best results for the circumstances.

Bogie

Last edited by oldbogie; 05-13-2010 at 03:33 PM.
Quick reply to this message
Closed Thread

Recent Engine posts with photos

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New toy for mikey powerrodsmike Garage - Tools 47 12-09-2008 01:28 PM
HP and TQ Guesses of my 357 build ORANGEGASM Engine 2 08-13-2008 07:08 PM
Would you rather low end TQ or HP ChevyThunder Hotrodders' Lounge 23 12-26-2005 10:29 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.