Loosing weight..., more effective on our cars than others?
05-05-2003, 12:41 PM
#21
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 1,987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok... this is very simple math. F20C = hi revving 4 cyl. If you want more power and torque, then put it into a lower gear and rev the sucker up.
You don't drive the S2k the way you would a Mustang, Corvette or a Modena. Drive with the mentality of having an F-1 car and the car will perform.
I'm sure if you rev it up, your issue with torque will be solved. If you want a car with more low end torque, then sadly you're in the wrong car unless you're willing to pour in quite a bit into serious mods.
You don't drive the S2k the way you would a Mustang, Corvette or a Modena. Drive with the mentality of having an F-1 car and the car will perform.
I'm sure if you rev it up, your issue with torque will be solved. If you want a car with more low end torque, then sadly you're in the wrong car unless you're willing to pour in quite a bit into serious mods.
05-05-2003, 12:44 PM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Elistan,
Yes we're on the same wavelength.
Brandon,
I'll link this to another new thread unless someone shoots this idea down quickly..
jeffbrig,
No, I'm trying to solve a different problem than the final gears. Increasing the gear ratio is increasing the usability of low RPMS by increasing torque multiplication (at the cost of top speed). I'm trying increase the usability of *high* RPMS by reducing the large speed difference between the fly wheel and clutch disk. Even with increased final gears, reducing fly wheel speed will benefit because you have easier access to peak horsepower from a *standing start*. If dumping the clutch at 8000 RPM is as easy (and non-harmful) to do as down-shifting, the S2000 would never be criticized as being a bad drag racer.
Yes we're on the same wavelength.
Brandon,
I'll link this to another new thread unless someone shoots this idea down quickly..
jeffbrig,
No, I'm trying to solve a different problem than the final gears. Increasing the gear ratio is increasing the usability of low RPMS by increasing torque multiplication (at the cost of top speed). I'm trying increase the usability of *high* RPMS by reducing the large speed difference between the fly wheel and clutch disk. Even with increased final gears, reducing fly wheel speed will benefit because you have easier access to peak horsepower from a *standing start*. If dumping the clutch at 8000 RPM is as easy (and non-harmful) to do as down-shifting, the S2000 would never be criticized as being a bad drag racer.
05-05-2003, 03:06 PM
#24
Registered User
Originally posted by StrangeDaze
As to the flywheel idea, aren't you just moving your gearing around in the drivetrain? I haven't read all of the posts on this idea yet, but my initial reaction is you've just moved your gearing around and if the total gear reduction is the same, you'll end up with the same wheel torque. Whether or not there'd be any functional advantage to doing that would best be answered by an automotive engineer (which I am not).
As to the flywheel idea, aren't you just moving your gearing around in the drivetrain? I haven't read all of the posts on this idea yet, but my initial reaction is you've just moved your gearing around and if the total gear reduction is the same, you'll end up with the same wheel torque. Whether or not there'd be any functional advantage to doing that would best be answered by an automotive engineer (which I am not).
05-05-2003, 03:16 PM
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A friend pointed out something interesting:
Even though we're reducing RPM differences between clutch and flywheel by 1.5 in the example above, we're also increasing load on the clutch by 1.5. The question is, does the increase in flywheel output cancel out the benefit from reduced RPM?
My intuition says no, the benefits of less clutch slip outweigh the increased load. But I have no facts to back this up.
Any thoughts?
Even though we're reducing RPM differences between clutch and flywheel by 1.5 in the example above, we're also increasing load on the clutch by 1.5. The question is, does the increase in flywheel output cancel out the benefit from reduced RPM?
My intuition says no, the benefits of less clutch slip outweigh the increased load. But I have no facts to back this up.
Any thoughts?
05-05-2003, 06:18 PM
#26
Registered User
My intuition says no also, because as you've said we still only end up with 230 lb-ft at the flywheel. That's easily handled by plenty of even low-performance cars.
05-12-2003, 09:34 AM
#27
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: MILL NECK
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You still need hp to push through air: lets say you have an S2 that has the sam hp to weight ratio as another car that has 400hp and weighs more, all other things being equal the 400hp car will have a much higher top speed. Although on the race track usually the lighter car will perform better, unless its a NASCAR track.
05-12-2003, 10:41 AM
#28
Registered User
More to Brandon's point, it is not easy to reduce weight in the S and still have a civilized daily driver. Our car is already pretty light.
For example you might save a pound or two on high-buck wheels. You could save maybe five pounds per wheel with custom spun aluminum wheels (but they'll get dented everytime you replace the tires, like my buddy's RX7 auto-x hoops).
The exhaust is one of the few easy spots (single Ti outlet will save 40+ lbs).
Not sure about the seats.
We've had a few weight loss threads but I haven't seen a good exact list of what is possible.
For example you might save a pound or two on high-buck wheels. You could save maybe five pounds per wheel with custom spun aluminum wheels (but they'll get dented everytime you replace the tires, like my buddy's RX7 auto-x hoops).
The exhaust is one of the few easy spots (single Ti outlet will save 40+ lbs).
Not sure about the seats.
We've had a few weight loss threads but I haven't seen a good exact list of what is possible.
05-12-2003, 05:42 PM
#30
Originally posted by MACH5GSXR
You still need hp to push through air: lets say you have an S2 that has the sam hp to weight ratio as another car that has 400hp and weighs more, all other things being equal the 400hp car will have a much higher top speed. Although on the race track usually the lighter car will perform better, unless its a NASCAR track.
You still need hp to push through air: lets say you have an S2 that has the sam hp to weight ratio as another car that has 400hp and weighs more, all other things being equal the 400hp car will have a much higher top speed. Although on the race track usually the lighter car will perform better, unless its a NASCAR track.