One thing leads to another... mean 318?
Yopur not on the exact same page as we are. I under stand what your saying.
As far as Ben Strader, perhaps his statmement is for the drag track only since around corners, you might want more torque than your competition to get out of the turn quicker?
(Edit/spelling)
If it’s a corner deal, you use lowest RPM off the corner and gear for it. You’d be surprised how many drives haven’t a clue what their corner RPM is.
I can say (and I’ve said it before but I don’t want to be redundant but it’s worth repeating) that torque is a giant pain in the *** most of the time. If you have a ton of torque at the gear change, or coming off the corner, you have a harder time getting it hooked up without blowing the tires off of it.
Same with a gear change in a drag car. If you are at or near peak torque on the gear change, it can be a nightmare getting it hooked. That’s why gear ratio and RPM outruns torque and taller gears every single time.
Let’s again look at your example of torque verses HP above.
If you increase the stroke and the HP increases at a lower RPM, what did you gain? If you increase the stroke and get an inverse torque/HP curve, what did you gain? If you increase the stroke and loose useable RPM above peak torque, what did you gain?
If your metric is smoking tires then torque is all that and then some. When performance is what you want, then an over square geometry with RPM and gear is the winner every time.
One more example. Look at the small block mopar. There are 3 different displacements, and Chrysler they had the option to develop the larger displacements with any geometry they thought worth it. And yet, the chose the same stroke and rod ratio but increased the bore. The 360 didn’t follow this because it has smog geometry and it was to deal with emissions more than performance.
I will be home soon and I’ll post all of what Bettes says in his book about TQ and HP.
