Wisconsin S2k

http://vettenet.org/torquehp.html

maybe this will explain it better. while there may not be "as much" room for improvement on the S2000 as say a mustang GT, there STILL IS room for improvement. which is why the 4.57 gears work and make the car faster.

you're talking a whole lot of numbers and theories and whatever, but real world experience tells us that you are missing part of the equation, or you are calculating incorrectly.

as ryan said. go out and drive one, and race one, and you will get quite a wake up call. until then, there's nothing more you can say.

jasonw

Wisconsin S2k

this is comepletely different. he's calling it "crap" because obviously there is something you've either missed or aren't calculating correctly. and all you're doing is talking without actually carrying out the calculations nor trying real world examples. when an engineer designs a plane, do they just say "well this is what it looks like should or shouldn't be", then build the plane and send it up with people right off the bat? no. they calculate it, design it, re-calculate, test, etc. all you've done here is the first part where you say "well i dont think you're right".

you continue to be adamant that gearing won't help the S2000. so, rather than talk about it all day long, prove it. i've shown you video, as well as how many other people on this site have this mod, will tell you the same damn thing... that 4.57 gears make the car faster.

so far all you've talked about is calculating this or that and using "science crap", without having actually shown me a graph of your calcuations, or anything else like that. go ahead, calculate it on a graph, and then show me how the area under the curve from say 0-100mph is "equal" between the two.

and even after that proves you incorrect, go out and try it. race against one, then come back and tell us we're wrong.

mikegarrison

I've been on board the very first flight of an airplane. All airplanes have first flights, and all people on board those airplanes are trusting that the engineers did in fact "get the science crap" correct.

hpark

we've had this argument before....with all sorts of engineers, mathmaticians, rocket scientists chiming in........bringing out graphs, calculus, shifting points, summation, etc..........in summary, shorter gears = faster S.

jasonw

I see 3 logical fallacies that immediately come to mind:

1. Citing the habits of Mustang & Camaro owners is not proof. They are obviously willing to sacrifice many aspects of a car to feel like they are pushed into the back of the seat. That "feeling" does not equal more speed.

2. Focusing entirely on 0-60 and 1/4 mile times (or streetracing) is misleading. You need to compare other intervals that don't always place you at the peak of your powerband at the end of the race for instance. There will be times when the lower geared car is lower in the power band because it has to shift sooner. The stock car will be accelerating faster when this happens.

3. I don't think Mike was saying that you can't make an improvement in your 0-60 or 0-100 times. He was just saying it will be small and probably even smaller on anything but a straight line race. The world is full of nuances.


You'll get a much better understanding if you study the concepts and see how they produce results instead of studying (a limited number of) results and basing your conclusions on that.

mikegarrison

Actually, I've said that within a reasonable range it won't make a big difference. I've also pointed out that you can use gearing to optimize for particular tasks.

Your experience is that 4.57 gears give you a better 1/4 mile result than 4.11 gears. OK, I'll buy that. You aren't going to gain seconds, but if 4.57 is a better optimization for that particular task (standing 1/4) then you may make small gains. This is not because the car has any more power, but because you stay in the power band a little bit more efficiently.

If that is what you want to optimize the car to do, then great. But that does not mean that "gears" are a general purpose improvement for the performance of the car. Basically, the butt dyno is lying to people when they feel the extra torque. The problem is that they don't have the extra torque for as long, and it all pretty much evens out.

(My first post in this thread said it "won't buy you anything". I think it is clear I was oversimplifying a bit when I said that. With careful optimization it can buy you something small for a given task, but only at the cost of giving up something small somewhere else.)

Wisconsin S2k

right, but you get the point. the plane wasn't just built without actually doing any of the calculations first right? right. they don't build a plane after one engineer simply talks about calcuations and figures without actually designing it, doing the full calculations over and over, and using computer modeling as well.


but back to the topic, the same goes here. i've given you real world examples, but you choose to ignore them and claim it's just "driver skill".

here are timeslips from my very first time at the track with new gears. it was fairly warm that day, so the heat was an issue. none the less, either my gears made the car faster, or my car just "happened" to be running faster that day than any other time in it's life, not to mention trap faster than any other stock S2000 has ever trapped, even though it was like 80 degrees out and muggy. notice i run these times even with terrible 2.22 60' times. hell i even ran a 13.9 once off a 2.3 or 2.4 60' time. no stock S2000 could do that.

in other words, the gears help.

Wisconsin S2k

please tell me you're kidding. they don't do it to "feel pushed back into the seat". they do it because it actually DOES make the car faster. go post this on a camaro or mustang forum and see what happens.

wrong again. i've raced S2000's from rolls at starting speeds anywhere from low 10mph rolls all the way up to 80mph rolls. and i'm still pulling on them the entire time.

you may want to look into this yourself. i think that you're needing to do some extensive research on gearing and its effects on a car's acceleration.

Wisconsin S2k

i never said this would knock a second off your 1/4 mile time. however, if 6 cars by 100mph isn't a fairly decisive indication that one car is faster than the other, then i dont know what is. not to mention a higher trap speed.

no one here is talking about butt dynos. im talking about real world instances, the countless number of other 4.57 gear owners out there, not to mention 1/4 mile trap speeds and ETs. where in there, do I talk about "it feels faster". i'm a big anti-butt-dyno person, so i'd be the last person to say "it feels faster". it doesn't feel faster. it IS faster.

yeah the trade off is loss of top speed. however, you can't even call it that. my car is now limited to about 150-155mph which is what a stock S2000 is drag limited to. so really IMO no top end was lost. and your initial post made it sound like no matter what, in the end, they are even, and neither will be faster than the other. when this is simply not the case. one is significantly faster than the other.