Re: Peak HP vs Torque (Ftlbs, Newton Meters) be clear what you are talking about
Torque is not a measure of power, horsepower is a measure of power. Torque is force, the distance that force is moved through results in power. 50 foot pounds of torque at 5000 rpm is identical to 25 foot pounds of torque at 10000 rpm.
Torque by itself is meaningless. It is the torque times a given RPM that is meaningful. What is significant on a street bike (and is not generally well enough appreciated) is the shape of the curve of horsepower versus RPM. Why a twin typically feels so much better as a street bike, is because a twin will typically make more power sooner. Whatever RPM you are at, just whack the throttle and the bike leaps. On an 600 inline four, if you are below 4000 rpm or so and whack the throttle, you might as well be riding a vespa. You are lucky to be getting 25 horses down to the road.
Ducatti may say "torque wins races, not horsepower", but it ain't their engineers saying it. What they may mean to say is "a broad and flat power curve does better in races then a narrow peaky power curve given similiar peak power levels".
I stand by my assertion. I could clarify it by saying "all other things being equal, a two cylinder engine will never make as much power as a four cylinder engine", but I think the meaning was clear in the original context.
So you can increase torque by moving to a larger piston with a longer stroke, but that then limits your peak piston velocity significantly. If you do the math (I can't, but I can point you to some Kevin Cameron articles that can), you will find that in terms of peak power, you gain faster by increasing RPM at the cost of torque then you gain by increasing torque at the cost of RPM.
Don't get me wrong, I ride and love twins. But if twins were so magical for racing, why is Ducatti getting ready to crush their old twins with a new desmo V four? Why is Honda moving from dominant twins and fours to V fives? Why are formula 1 racers V12's and V16's (I think, not really into F1).
Here's some more blanket statements to bother you
1) A system at rest will remain at rest until some outside force acts on it.
2) A closed system cannot produce more energy then it consumes.
3) Liquids are not compressible.
I agree blanket statements should be made carefully, what is most of math and physics is full of them.