Spunky and Old Fart.... indicate a Character... Hate I didn't have the
opportunity to meet you Dave....( or did I and can't remember? CRS )
Well next Years Party will have a Better Flavor I am sure... it was fun but
needs some work around the edges...
K
----------
> From: Marge and/or Dave Thomssen <mdthom@radiks.net>
> To: Land-speed Racers <land-speed@autox.team.net>
> Subject: Fw: Bonneville Transmissions and red faces?
> Date: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 12:33 PM
>
> Hey gang
> I got a kick out of Joe's comments. Even though I may be spunky (and a
> genuine old fart, not a semi-old fart) I was not red-faced at the
keyboard.
> I was trying to focus on the experience of the list. Racing is a
> combination of theory, analysis, and experience.
>
> Yes, Dave, keep your comments coming, they are very interesting, and just
> what we need to keep this thing going.
>
> Incidentally, I am amazed at the number of cars on the salt that do not
have
> quick change rear ends. Our experience shows that some minute changes
in
> final gearing made a difference in speed.
>
> Dave the Hayseed
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Joe Amo <jkamo@rapidnet.com>
> To: dahlgren <dahlgren@uconect.net>
> Cc: The Butters Family <bbutters@dmi.net>; <Land-speed@autox.team.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 12:46 PM
> Subject: Re: Bonneville Transmissions
>
>
> Dave, please keep your comments coming, it is obviously tough for you to
> hold back
> in key situations, and I rejoice in that. Your demeanor may bite
alittle,
> that is
> AOK on this list as most here are semi-grown up, plus we will eventually
see
> the
> face behind the web name at the salt or at "The Salt Talks" in the bend
in
> the
> road. I cant help lately envisioning Mr."Dave the Hayseed" (whom I was
> fortunate
> to meet at this years salt talks) typing on his keyboard with a beet red
> face, as
> he is a semi-old fart and seemed like quite a spunky fellow. Many,
likely
> most of
> us on this list really need the technical dialogue facilitated by all on
> this
> site, whether it be a "Rocket Scientist", a multi forum racing guru, and
> just as
> importantly so shmuck like me who might ask a very uninformed question
based
> on
> ignorance but fueled by a desire to learn.
> I think my caffeine buzz is peaking, just felt compelled to comment
on
> the
> value of this banter, old way, new way, your way my way, it all gives
> perspective
> that facilitates a better understanding to pursue speed.
>
> Joe (why yes I will be trying some different shifting at WOS in a couple
> weeks
> based on this) Amo
>
> dahlgren wrote:
>
> > I don't mean to flame or harass on this issue but I find it very
> > interesting and a core subject to the sport of land speed racing. So
> > please don't take any of it the wrong way hopefully...This is long and
> > may beg for the 'delete' key so be warned..
> >
> > if a theory is correct it works no matter what the variables are.. So i
> > did go out and put my car in second ..drove 100 feet a valid distance
in
> > my mind .. with the engine floored it was much slower than using 1'st
> > and second....car weighs 2500 lbs has about 150 hp and 170 ft lbs
> > torque..traction was not a problem in either case
> > I think your theory if it is going to work has to have unlimited
> > distance.. Acceleration does matter because if you are going faster
> > sooner then you have more distance left to achieve the peak velocity.
By
> > the way the long course in my mind is only 4 miles long in the first
> > place because the only way to reach the highest AVERAGE speed over a
> > mile is to have the entry and exit speeds be as fast as the car will
go.
> > A good example would be a car that enters the final mile at 250 and
> > exits at 275.. if I put more gear in the car it will accelerate to a
> > greater speed at the entrance because you have the is gearing advantage
> > for the whole 4 mile previous and will only go slightly slower at the
> > exit speed..I have been doing this since 1991 at bonneville and it
works
> > every time.. the downside is 1 it is harder on the engine(more rpm) to
a
> > small degree and 2 the driver hates the zero G input to the car and
> > complains about it seeming to float.. The downside to not using a
> > transmission are 1 it wastes valuable real estate waiting for the car
to
> > get up to speed. 2 if there is any problem with the run there is not
> > enough distance to ever recover 3 it is very very hard on the bearings
> > to lug the engine down to a very low rpm and apply full load. it is
also
> > very hard on the pistons for several reasons the most being if you have
> > a carb the main jets have no picked up yet and the engine will be very
> > lean and the high egts will hurt the engine (burned piston)..If you
have
> > mechanical injection the engine will surely be fat and take a while to
> > clear out if it does not wash the rings out..If you have EFI and it is
> > tuned right the air fuel ratio will be good but now you are making even
> > more power on the slow turning crank and beating the bearings to
death..
> > I really hate to blow my own horn.. but i have been racing
> > professionally since around 1975 24 hrs daytona Nascar winston cup
> > nascar Modified Bush cars..Drag races.. fastest car shootouts..won
> > zillions of races / championships / manufacturer titles / pole
> > positions..etc To be real candid if you went to every event held at
> > bonneville and set a record at every one i suspect you have still not
> > won enough....I am semi retired now as the pressure of all that every
> > day was too much for me but did learn so many tough lessons that they
> > are not forgotten.. I still consult, manufacture some parts that always
> > seem to end up on winning cars and travel around doing tune up work and
> > new product design for other companies. Do yourself a favor just for
> > laughs. Try it my way and see if you car is faster...what is to hurt by
> > running a different gear ratio for one pass or running the engine up in
> > rpm and keeping it in the power peak for a full pass???? If it is so
> > fragile that it can't stand the rpm then fix it...
> > At what RPM does your car make peak power?? peak torque??? In all my
> > years i have never seen a car that did not go faster with more torque
at
> > the rear wheels, though i have seen many cars with suspension that was
> > incapable of transmitting the power(fixable) and have seen drivers that
> > would not drive and apply the torque sensibly(replaceable) and have
seen
> > tires that would not hook up(selected wrong) and have seen cars that
> > were hopelessly constructed wrong(disposable).
> >
> > If you know the HP and torque #'s for your engine and the appropriate
> > rpm,very valuable info, and your car is still accelerating beyond the
> > last measured mile I am willing to bet you that if you work on the
> > gearing and shift points the car will go faster than it does now. will
> > the peak speed be greater?? maybe , maybe not.. is there a record for
> > exit speed?? not that i am aware of.. to attain peak speed in most
cases
> > the car has to run about 5 to 8% beyond the rpm for peak power through
> > the entire timed distance and not be able to go very much faster at the
> > 5 than it does at the 4 for the highest average speed. you should be
> > right at the wall when you have no more power left to overcome the aero
> > drag and rolling resistance with the engine is up to speed... If the
car
> > is not getting light then adding weight is worse than adding more tire
> > to get the bite to this this because the rolling penalties are less
than
> > the inertia problems associated with the weight. You should be racing
> > the lightest car that does not want to fly.. I would think that
anything
> > in the /CC classes can have any suspension they want. There are many
> > designs that will apply torque very softly to the tires and allow them
> > to hook up with small g loadings and do not rely on a great deal of
> > weight transfer. If spinning the tires is a problem i would look at
the
> > suspension and tires way before taking power out of the car by running
> > the engine in high gear only.......
> >
> > my opinion for what it is worth or not...but a real good topic to kick
> > around..
> > Dahlgren
> >
> > The Butters Family wrote:
> > >
> > > Well sort of your Pro stocker would have to be able to leave the
line
> in
> > > high gear and you would have to be able to run with the throttle wide
> open
> > > for max. engine efficiency, neither of which are going to happen.
> Believe
> > > Kieths car showed the increased speed because he was able to run
with a
> > > whole lot less wheel spin. First of all we are talking about speed
at a
> > > given distance, matching final gear ratio to the cars power will
> determine
> > > ultimate top speed of course. My theory is that speed at distance is
> > > determined by the total power available to do the job. With gearing
> you
> > > can change your et, even cut your terminal velocity with two short of
> gears
> > > but have little effect on how fast you are going at any given point.
If
> your
> > > street car has a stick shift go out and run it between two points as
> hard
> > > as you can using all the gears, then do it in say second and high,
your
> > > speed should be nearly identical. The only explanation I have for
> this
> > > is that even though the et was muuuch slower the motor was able to do
> the
> > > same amount of work. While you would think blitzing threw the HP
peak
> > > several times would gain speed, apparently chugging threw it builds
the
> same
> > > speedOriginal Message ----- Well thats my story, my car is a 53 stude
> > > running a hemi BB/cc with a 3 speed TF, I'm sure it would be just as
> fast
> > > with direct drive and a push to 60mph, wheel spin is a big problem.
> Hope
> > > theis helps let you know where I am comming from. Best regards, Kvach
> > > From: dahlgren <dahlgren@uconect.net>
> > > To: The Butters Family <bbutters@dmi.net>
> > > Cc: Marge and/or Dave Thomssen <mdthom@radiks.net>; Land-speed Racers
> > > <land-speed@autox.team.net>
> > > Sent: Monday, August 28, 2000 1:22 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Bonneville Transmissions
> > >
> > > > So if I understand this right then... If I put my pro stock car in
4th
> > > > and leave the starting line that that at the end of the quarter
mile
> the
> > > > car will go the same speed as if i used all the gears?? When you
lose
> 5
> > > > mph at the quarter does your car go the same speed at the 5 as if
you
> > > > were not 5 mph down?? Why do all the 'big' streamliners keep
wanting a
> > > > longer course ??? How fast does your car or cars you have messed
with
> go
> > > > ??? I am sure that if I start in any gear that my Pontiac i drive
on
> the
> > > > street will go exactly the same speed at the 5 no matter what gear
I
> > > > start in.. but going 125 is not much of a challenge either. How do
> > > > explain away the change of shift points in Keith Turks car making
203
> at
> > > > the 3 instead of 197 at the 5???? Doesn't having the correct
gearing
> and
> > > > going as fast as soon as possible make the course appear to be
longer
> > > > because you are going faster sooner and have more distance left to
get
> > > > the last MPH out of the car??
> > > >
> > > > to quote "We got a 225 record with 183cid 3rd gear only???
Nebulous"
> > > >
> > > > Is this the theory you are using?? Do you think the 225 might of
been
> a
> > > > 245 with all gears working??
> > > >
> > > > well we got a 216 record 219 qualifying with a 91cid gas lakester
and
> > > > went 213 at the 1/4... used all 5 gears.. which one is more
efficient
> > > > ??? and that was on the first pass.... Do you think if we left in
high
> > > > gear that the car would of gone 219 at the 5 on 91 inches ???
What's
> the
> > > > physics behind your theory??
> > > >
> > > > Oh yeah and the e-mail you quote.. what's that thing doing on the
long
> > > > course at 179 if you should be going over 175 at the quarter in the
> > > > first place???
> > > >
> > > > Hate to make this sound like a flame but I really can't figure out
the
> > > > logic behind it all.. Help me be smarter and tell me how this is
all
> > > > supposed to make sense..
> > > > A very confused engineer..
> > > > Dave Dahlgren
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The Butters Family wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > This has been my experience with every car I've
ever
> > > messed
> > > > > with, the speed it was able to generate in a given distance
> hadnothing
> > > to
> > > > > do with the number of gears you shifted it threw, just the power
it
> had
> > > > > available to do the job. Kvach----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: Marge and/or Dave Thomssen <mdthom@radiks.net>
> > > > > To: Land-speed Racers <land-speed@autox.team.net>
> > > > > Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2000 7:35 PM
> > > > > Subject: Bonneville Transmissions
> > > > >
> > > > > > Well, gang our experience might be interesting. In 1979 we ran
> the
> > > > > Original
> > > > > > Goldenrod streamliner (the one from Denver) with my flathead
> (unblown
> > > on
> > > > > > gas) and a T-10 4 speed. It ran 179 MPH in the last mile and we
> > > thought
> > > > > the
> > > > > > gear spread was just right for the motor until something
> malfunctioned
> > > in
> > > > > > the transmission and it locked in high gear. We pushed it off
as
> fast
> > > as
> > > > > we
> > > > > > could (60Mph) and it chugged off barely able to pull away from
the
> > > push
> > > > > > truck. The quarter time and the 2 and the 3 mile were slow, but
it
> ran
> > > > > > 179MPH in the last mile anyway. Anyone have similar experience
> that
> > > might
> > > > > > suggest that a long course car doesn't need a transmission at
all?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Dave the Hayseed
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
>
>
>
>
>
>
|