Then you toss in the rearend ratios. For instance, for years we ran a
4:55 rear. When we rebuilt the car, we went to a shorter (4:88) and
found we had to shift too often, losing time. So we went to a 4:11
because the new engine pulls so well, and heaven has arrived, at least
as long as this Rebello engine survives.
--Pat K
"Michael R. Clements" wrote:
> Scot Zediker wrote:
>
> > Guess they're geared a
> > lot higher than my car,
>
> Which gave me a major epiphany (thank you Scot).
>
> This touches on a confusion I've always had about gearing
> terminology. From an engineer's point of view, the total gear
> ratio is measured as the rate of rotation of the crankshaft
> divided by the rate of rotation of the wheel of the car. That
> means 1st is higher than 2nd, etc.
>
> But often times, the colloquial terminology is the opposite. As
> an engineer, one would say that a Vette (for example) is geared
> lower than a Miata (for example). However, I've heard people
> (Scot, for example) say the opposite while meaning the same
> thing. That means the layman's meaning, and the engineer's
> meaning, of the same word, may be opposites.
>
> So in layman's terms,
>
> 1. Is 1st gear higher or lower than 2nd gear?
>
> 2. Is 1st gear taller or shorter than 2nd gear?
>
> 3. Is 1st gear "bigger" or "smaller" than 2nd gear?
>
> P.S.
>
> I think I'm finally understanding why people argue about power
> and torque so much -- they actually agree, but they attach
> opposite meanings to the same words!
>
> --
> Michael R. Clements
> mrc01@flash.net
> We must make clear that communism and the governments it now
> controls are enemies of every man on Earth who is or wants to be
> free.
> -- Barry Goldwater
|