Wisconsin S2k

so the bottom line here is:

4.57 gears are an advantage in straight line acceleration overall, assuming you start at a speed before 100-105mph, because this is where they even out roughly.

on a track, while conceding that some corners or instances the 4.57 gears may not help, for a good majority there should be some more notable advantage. every tenth of a second counts. however, if you dont competitively track race, like me, you really don't care either way.

your city mpg will go up. so will ease of daily driveability since you can stay in a higher gear and still have decent down low "force" and response.

so, is that worth $700? IMO yes.

energetic

Bottom line from my point of view. I will stick to my original gear!

Am surprised! 5 pages in one day! WOOOW!

SilverKnight

gears sound liek they would be nice but first i dont drag race and next thats a pretty extensive drive train mod and would def kill my Extended warranty on some big areas.

undertow

Well, I figured there would have been a lot more negative performance situations with the way you're aggressively dismissing the gear mod. Sounds like you're just here to argue at this point.

jasonw

[QUOTE=Wisconsin S2k,Aug 24 2005, 01:12 AM] HP is a function of work over time.

jasonw

see below on where YOU ARGUED AGAINST THAT And even gave a !

[QUOTE=Wisconsin S2k,Aug 23 2005, 05:19 PM]but what you're ignoring is the fact that OVERALL, they are an improvement in acceleration.

Wisconsin S2k

jason, look at the graph that CrazyPhuD made. it's plotted using F or Force. (he calls force "effective torque")

In other words, each point on that line, can be plotted in as F in the F=ma equation. if you want to find out what "a" is, simply take the result at any one of those points on the line and divide it by "m". this could then create another graph giving you the acceleration of the cars throughout the entire mph range.

so again, horsepower plays NO PART in ANY of these equations.

Force is obtained by multiplying torque (not horsepower) at a given rpm, by the final drive, primary reduction, and current selected transmission gear. this gives you the "plot" that CrazyPhud made. every spot on the lines he has on his graph is a representation of the equation above.

horsepower is not used to calculate acceleration, since F=ma, or F/m=a

jasonw

[QUOTE=Wisconsin S2k,Aug 24 2005, 09:39 AM] if you want to find out what "a" is, simply take the result at any one of those points on the line and divide it by "m".

Wisconsin S2k

yes and I stand corrected after seeing crazyphud's graph. if racing starting at speeds above 105, there is really no difference, in which case the gears obviously do not give an advantage.



and yes, overall. every single mph range you gave the 4.57 geared S2000 will still win. what you are failing to see is the area under the curve. see when the stock S2000 has the advantage, the advantage is smaller than what the 4.57 geared S2000 has?

40-70, 62-94, 40-94, all of those, the 4.57 geared S2000 will win. i've done plenty of races starting at speeds where I was in a higher gear than the stock S2000, and the 4.57 car still ends up ahead and is still faster. a perfect example of this.

I raced greg from a 75mph roll, where I started in 4th gear. he started in 3rd. we raced, and he eventually shifted to 4th at 90mph. at 105 I shifted to 5th. we ended at about 115mph as he was topping out 4th and I was in 5th. and guess what? I was ahead of him by over a car length. obviously, as you get closer to that 105 mark, the difference is not as big as starting at a lower speed. but the difference is still there. we actually did this race 2 or 3 times.

if it makes you feel better, i'd be more than happy to video tape racing using the speeds you gave and prove to you it's still faster. we can even swap drivers to be sure it's not the driver.


Your argument is that this only applies to 1/4 mile and specific speed ranges that favor the 4.57 gears.

it applies to 1/4 mile and all speed ranges for a roll (in the real world) starting below 105mph. assuming we don't race for only 5 or 10mph. cuz after all, I always race from 56mph to 65mph. in this instance, you're correct, the 4.57 gears would lose. but again, in the real world, who races for a mere 9mph??

r26372

6 cars at 100mph is what, half a second? Out of 14? 3% difference?

Six cars is a huge difference and so is a half a second.

And by the time you get to a half mile, what would the result be? How about when you get to a mile? Two miles? But you don't care, right? Because the race track is only 1/4 mile long. That's what I mean about optimizing for one particular situation.

I can't say for the 4.57 gears vs stock. But, 4.44s will accelerate from 0 to top achievable speed much faster than the stock car. Simple logic here, which doesn't seem to be getting through. If both cars have six speeds and one car accelerates through the gears faster in each of those 6 speeds and both have the same achievable top speed, why would the car that accelerated through the gears be the same? As I posted before the AP1 with stock gears has a theoretical top speed of 167 which can't be obtained because of a lack of power and aerodynamics. The 4.44s bring top speed down to 154 which is possible and easier to obtain because the gears are easier to go through. So from 0-154 my car will win by a silly margin because I have an 8% gearing advantage in every gear up to the top speed. When my car was stock it would lose steam with the top down around 140 or so and the very slowly accelerate higher. Now it continues to pull without issue. It doesn't take fancy math or equations to witness things like this.

Also, because this is not a difficult concept, I am a little in fear of my next flight to Vegas. Just kidding, I'm sure you are a smart guy when it comes to airplane engineering, but as you said you could be wrong, and in this case there is no question that you are.