Home
Don't have an account? Create one now! It's always free!


Forgot Password
Ed's Auto Parts - Mention MOTORGEN for a Discount!
Motorgen Sponsor: McLeod Racing
Motorgen Sponsor: American Muscle - Add style and performance to your Stang
Motorgen Sponsor: Hall Fabrication & Racing
Motorgen Sponsor: Injectors Plus - Performance Fuel Delivery Systems
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-16-2009, 02:19 PM   #101
joedlsjoedls is offline
Senior Member
 
joedls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 94cobra69ss396 View Post
Can you run a 28 inch tire with 3.73 gears and tell me what mph you show for 6000rpm?

Also know that a Slick will grow as you go sown the track. So if we use a 26 inch slick it will act like a taller tire further down.

Without allowing for any growth and/or variances in the tire, a 28" tire with 3.73 gears will be running ~134 MPH @ 6000 RPM in fourth gear.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

HP numbers are good and all, but they are like asking someone how much they can bench. What difference does it make if I can still kick your ass?
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2009, 02:22 PM   #102
BRUTAL64BRUTAL64 is offline
Neanderthal
 
BRUTAL64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 5,320
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vettezuki View Post
I have to go for a few hours, I'll run this later. But yes, the tire changes in diameter is where the real world differences in speed as a function of gearing changes.
Just for shits. WEIGHT can limit the rpms the engine is able to turn.


What ever could be MORE important than Motorgen??????????




Hey, I just noticed I have OVER 1000 posts on this site. Damn, what the hell would I have to say that takes that many posts???????
__________________
64 Vette Roadster 400 ci
1990 F150 351 ci SuperCharged
48 Harley Pan Head 76 ci
2016 Nissan Altma
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2009, 06:13 PM   #103
VettezukiVettezuki is offline
I, Vettezuki
 
Vettezuki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 14,754
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BRUTAL64 View Post
Just for shits. WEIGHT can limit the rpms the engine is able to turn.


What ever could be MORE important than Motorgen??????????
Absolutely.

My implicit assumption was that given our power to weight ratio, the engine would have sufficient power to rapidly reach redline given either a 3.55 or 3.73 axle. I was isolating a single variable in the system. There is basically no cost difference with either axle, but there plausibly could be a few mph and/or couple tenths penalty one way or the other. My hypothesis would be that with the power to weight we're likely to have, the "slightly" taller rear axle, would result in faster ET and Trap in the 1/4. However, it is possible that while the top potential speed is lower with the shorter gear, it may reach that top speed faster enough to result in a faster ET. To model this properly we'd be changing from simple arithmetic to real math. I'm looking for accumulated experience.

Anyway, this is getting to the kinda splitting hair territory, but I enjoy that, so you have to endure it.
__________________
Motorgen on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Motorgen on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Motorgen Project Car
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(active)
Motorgen Project Car
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(back burner)
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2009, 06:14 PM   #104
VettezukiVettezuki is offline
I, Vettezuki
 
Vettezuki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 14,754
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BRUTAL64 View Post
. . . .

What ever could be MORE important than Motorgen??????????

. . . .
Making the scratch that allows me to underwrite this project is pretty important.
__________________
Motorgen on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Motorgen on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Motorgen Project Car
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(active)
Motorgen Project Car
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(back burner)
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2009, 06:20 PM   #105
VettezukiVettezuki is offline
I, Vettezuki
 
Vettezuki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 14,754
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joedls View Post
Without allowing for any growth and/or variances in the tire, a 28" tire with 3.73 gears will be running ~134 MPH @ 6000 RPM in fourth gear.
A tiny bit slower, but close enough.

6,000rpm (shift/redline)
Wide Ratio Top Loader
3.73 Axle
275/60x15 Tire

If we have enough power to turn this gearing (my guess is around 500 BHP with this much weight, very rough) and make it stick for a wicked 60', and click off clean shifts, this would be a consistent low mid 10 second pass.

__________________
Motorgen on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Motorgen on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Motorgen Project Car
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(active)
Motorgen Project Car
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(back burner)
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2009, 10:26 AM   #106
BRUTAL64BRUTAL64 is offline
Neanderthal
 
BRUTAL64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 5,320
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vettezuki View Post
Anyway, this is getting to the kinda splitting hair territory, but I enjoy that, so you have to endure it.

You mean endure it....like a tooth ache????
__________________
64 Vette Roadster 400 ci
1990 F150 351 ci SuperCharged
48 Harley Pan Head 76 ci
2016 Nissan Altma
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2009, 12:26 PM   #107
joedlsjoedls is offline
Senior Member
 
joedls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vettezuki View Post
A tiny bit slower, but close enough.

6,000rpm (shift/redline)
Wide Ratio Top Loader
3.73 Axle
275/60x15 Tire

[/IMG]
Since we're being nitpicky, your math is a little off. Here's how I calculated it.

MPH= ((RPM/(rear gear ratio*trans gear ratio))*60)/tire revs per mile

RPM = 6000
Rear Gear = 3.73
Trans gear ratio = 1
Tire revs per mile = 720.49
MPH = 133.95708

Thus my earlier posting that it would be ~134 MPH.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

HP numbers are good and all, but they are like asking someone how much they can bench. What difference does it make if I can still kick your ass?
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2009, 02:13 PM   #108
VettezukiVettezuki is offline
I, Vettezuki
 
Vettezuki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 14,754
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joedls View Post
Since we're being nitpicky, your math is a little off. Here's how I calculated it.

MPH= ((RPM/(rear gear ratio*trans gear ratio))*60)/tire revs per mile

RPM = 6000
Rear Gear = 3.73
Trans gear ratio = 1
Tire revs per mile = 720.49
MPH = 133.95708

Thus my earlier posting that it would be ~134 MPH.
My sheet does three things a little differently. It calculates circumference exactly on input tire size. A 275/60x15 is slightly less than 28 inches. Additionally for reasons I can't remember and forgot were in there it has built in corrections altering the revs per mile and revs through the transmission. Hence the reduction from your completely accurate pure calculation. I can alter my sheet to remove these built-in corrections and we'll come out to the same numbers exactly. But this would be a totally idealized, perfect circumference, no slop kinda situation. I suspect my sheet may model reality a little more closely, but I certainly can't give you the logical proof for the constants that are used. There, aren't you glad you asked?
__________________
Motorgen on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Motorgen on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Motorgen Project Car
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(active)
Motorgen Project Car
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(back burner)
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2009, 02:59 PM   #109
BRUTAL64BRUTAL64 is offline
Neanderthal
 
BRUTAL64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 5,320
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vettezuki View Post
Making the scratch that allows me to underwrite this project is pretty important.
"If" I wanted to donate a buck or two how would SOMEONE do this???
__________________
64 Vette Roadster 400 ci
1990 F150 351 ci SuperCharged
48 Harley Pan Head 76 ci
2016 Nissan Altma
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2009, 03:35 PM   #110
joedlsjoedls is offline
Senior Member
 
joedls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vettezuki View Post
My sheet does three things a little differently. It calculates circumference exactly on input tire size. A 275/60x15 is slightly less than 28 inches. Additionally for reasons I can't remember and forgot were in there it has built in corrections altering the revs per mile and revs through the transmission. Hence the reduction from your completely accurate pure calculation. I can alter my sheet to remove these built-in corrections and we'll come out to the same numbers exactly. But this would be a totally idealized, perfect circumference, no slop kinda situation. I suspect my sheet may model reality a little more closely, but I certainly can't give you the logical proof for the constants that are used. There, aren't you glad you asked?

So how many tire revs per mile does your sheet calculate? Because I calculated the revs per mile using the exact circumference of what a 275-60-15 tire should be. I don't allow for any variances and frankly I don't know how your spreadsheet could do that accurately, considering different variances between tire, tranny, and rear-end manufacturers.

Here is my calculation.

(((275/25.4)*.6)*2)+15 = 27.992125 (Tire diameter)

27.992125 * 3.1416 = 87.940059 (Tire circumference in inches)

87.940059/12 = 7.3283382 (Tire circumference in feet)

5280/7.3283382 = 720.49076 (tire revolutions per mile)
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

HP numbers are good and all, but they are like asking someone how much they can bench. What difference does it make if I can still kick your ass?
  Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:54 PM.