Who really is the fool here?
You really should read http://personal.riverusers.com/~yawpower/tqvshp.html .

And no, I don't agree with shingles.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by shingles
[B]actually, you want to shift where when you get to the next gear, you will be at the meat of your torque curve.

 

I stand by that as a one-liner to simplify the principles involved, which my later posts clearly show. Rather childish to throw it out in here, but it is clearly intended to be a red herring.

BTW, Csaba Csere has used the same line in the same context - full disclosure rather than snap quotes is on order IMO.

Now, back to your post - you were saying....?

 

This is true because the peak HP is so close to the redline. If, theoretically, the peak HP was at 7000rpm and it fell off dramatically after that, it might make more sense to shift before the redline in order to keep the average HP as high as possible.

That's what I was getting at. If you are forced to shift before the HP starts to fall off significantly because of the lower redline, then that will put you further down on the HP curve in the higher gear. This could translate, all else being equal, to a lower average HP which would me a slower acceleration time. Of course , this theory neglects the new gearing that the '04 is suppose to be getting and the actual shape of the HP curve because it is unknown at this point. I'm really going to be surprised if peak HP is only 300rpm below the max.

 

Cdelena,
I don't see where the question is with fifth. To me, looks like you always have more wheel force ("kg" on left axis) when you are in the lowest gear # for a given road speed. Fifth gear always gives more wheel force than 6th. There's no need for 6th from a racing perspective on this car as you can reach terminal speed in 5th, right?

Anyway, the correct answer is: stay in gear until (a) redline or (b) when you get more power (or wheel torque, or force which are all synonymous) by upshifting, whichever comes first. Not "where you will be in the meat of the torque curve" (though that certainly helps achieve "b"!).

 

It's true that shifting at 8300 will land you in VTEC in every gear except the first-second shift (which is a lousy 5400), but consider this:

1. shifting from 2nd to 3rd at 8300 rpm - you exit 2nd with 240 HP and enter 3rd with 170 HP

2. shifting at 8900 exits 2nd at 229 HP and enters 3rd with 193.

So by redlining it you lose 11 and gain 23. Not a tough decision in my mind.

And that does not take into account the torque multiplying factor of the lower gear. If you calculate that into the equation, holding second to redline looks even better.

On most cars it is almost never advantageous to shift before redline. Even if you take the gearing advantage (of the lower gear) out of the picture and just look at engine HP, you would have to make more HP in the higher gear to make it worthwhile.

Go find a dyno chart and see if you can make the same HP at 6000 or 6500 as you can at 8900 (that's where you'll be in 3rd and 4th by shifting at 8300). In our car, the engine makes about 229 HP at 8900 rpm. You would have to be doing 7700 in the next gear to just equal that, and none of the gear ratios we have will get you there. The closest ones are 4-5 and 5-6 where if you hold it till 8900 you land in the next gear at 7500, but that's still less HP than the previous gear had at redline.

If you want to play with it yourself, go here where I have an Excel spreadsheet you can download that will show you rpm & speed in each gear and let's you play with shift points and such. With a dyno chart at hand, it makes for interesting reading.

.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by FCGuy
[B]Cdelena,
I don't see where the question is with fifth.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by FCGuy
[B]Cdelena,
I don't see where the question is with fifth.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by modifry
[B]It's true that shifting at 8300 will land you in VTEC in every gear except the first-second shift (which is a lousy 5400), but consider this:

1. shifting from 2nd to 3rd at 8300 rpm - you exit 2nd with 240 HP and enter 3rd with 170 HP

2. shifting at 8900 exits 2nd at 229 HP and enters 3rd with 193.

 

Speculating is worthless. Just wait for the car to be released and tested. I'm confident that Honda engineers with a 10% larger engine should be able to produce as fast, if not faster S. I don't think a slower redesigned S with a larger engine would be very good for sales/marketing. Marketing it would be a nightmare as the target audience are car enthusiasts. Who wants to buy a slower car??? Not to mention embarassing for Honda in general. When was the last time a performance engine replaced the previous generation that made the car SLOWER!? I'm sure it is pretty rare that happens.