User Login    
 + Register
  • Main navigation
Login
Username:

Password:


Lost Password?

Register now!
Fast Search
Slow Search
Google Ad



Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



« 1 (2)


#11 Re: HP is not important?
Mawler1 Posted on: 2009/12/10 12:42
in my project car - July'74 120Y (B210) I had planned replacing it's original H145 centre with a H150 I had, but as I plan to eventually run a nice L series - I replaced it with the Borg warner 68 out of my first 120Y...

I tend to drive my cars a little on the hard side so it was extra insurance too...

as for traction it very rarely sees bitumen - and in the previous car I have seen it smoking it up on a very dry piece of dirt... to the point where the tyre could not be seen in the wheelarch...

all with 69 horsepower...


#12 Re: HP is not important?
crispdollaz Posted on: 2009/12/11 2:00
Are you saying that engines reving to 14k is out of this world?


#13 Re: HP is not important?
1000Coupe Posted on: 2009/12/11 2:04
Not in F1


#14 Re: HP is not important?
1000Coupe Posted on: 2009/12/11 2:05
or 2 strokes


#15 Re: HP is not important?
crispdollaz Posted on: 2009/12/11 3:00
Quote:

datsik wrote:
I think what crispdollaz is saying is : given the two engines specified, were put into cars with identical ratioed diffs, and if both have a gearboxes with ratios which meant that at max rpm both cars had the same velocity, the forces the diffs would see would be identicall, because the high revving motor would need to be have a large reduction in speed. this large reduction increases the torque at the tailshaft.

the only time more torque is true...is if both engines have gearboxes with equal gear ratios.

datsik gets me.

I guess my understanding is slightly swayed then from this discussion. I suppose horsepower alone may be misleading, depending on what sort of an engine we're talking about - diesel truck engine, 4cyl motorcycle engine, etc. However I do believe that torque ALONE is just as misleading as horsepower; in literature you'll find the terminology is intermixed when describing the need for a beefier diff because you have "more power".

I think the Tech Wiki might need to be updated to at least include a reference to gear ratio alongside the engine peak torque, if its agreeable that engine torque alone does not dictate the torque found in the driveshaft.

I like that we've also discussed "tramping" (although I've never heard it described with that term) - I race shifter karts and here we have a similar problem... however since there is nothing but wheels, a hollow axle, chain, and transmission, this instant torque caused by an engine spool when the drivetrain bounces can cause CRANKSHAFT shearing!

Thanks for the discussion!


#16 Re: HP is not important?
Mildman Posted on: 2009/12/11 8:05
Quote:

by crispdollaz on 2009/12/11 12:00:03

Are you saying that engines reving to 14k is out of this world?


Pretty much out of the Datsun world, I dont think anyone has a gear box that would have such a crazy first gear either.

I guess if you change from torque at the crank to torque at the tailshaft/diff you will have it nailed, then you have to take into account the ratio of your lowest gear too. In a rough way most people would just multiply the engine torque by 4 to get torque at the diff.



« 1 (2)



You can view topic.
You cannot start a new topic.
You cannot reply to posts.
You cannot edit your posts.
You cannot delete your posts.
You cannot add new polls.
You cannot vote in polls.
You cannot attach files to posts.
You cannot post without approval.

[Advanced Search]