just-right said:And all that brass would make you loose acceleration :rofl:
It’s a lose lose situation

just-right said:And all that brass would make you loose acceleration :rofl:
just-right said:Vanne said:I think this data is missing the point, no one drops in 4.10 gearing for straight line performance. Lol. It's for coming in and out of turns where this really shines.![]()
Not quite, as you would have seen I included several graphs with the final drive ratio changes. I didn't add these with power and mass alterations because the effects are more uniform. The graphs are to illustrate the effects throughout the speed range i.e. acceleration out of a corner. Some of the other forum members highlighted the benefits of acceleration in 3rd gear on a nice windy B-road for example. :driving:
Coming out of a given corner you are transitioning from lateral to longitudinal g's and once you are not grip limited the figures and graphs posted are very much valid whether it is pure straight line performance or accelerating between corners (even if it is not exactly straight) Depending on the track it should help people choose the final drive to match the corners![]()
Vanne said:Also not sure how you came up with this, but Def not correct..
Vmax : 281.1 kph -> 284.5 -> 285.4
Your getting a higher top speed with 4.1? Maybe you got those figures inversely proportional?
Not quite, the original post states that it is due to operating closer to max power at vmax as the original 6th gear is too long in the interest of cruising rpm and fuel consumption. I'll try and explain.
Power is a function of torque and rpm, so equally torque is a function of power and rpm. To obtain torque at the wheels, the torque from the engine is multiplied by the gear ratio and final drive ratio, i.e. shorter final drive is more torque at the wheels. Then the torque is converted to a longitudinal force at the wheels by the effective rolling radius. There are obviously drive train losses as well.
At top speed there are no acceleration effects so all the resistance is formed by the aerodynamics, tyres and some other smaller contributors. The aerodynamics are dependend on the speed squared and the tyres to a very small effect are also dependent on the speed. The engine is linked to the speed through the aforementioned gear ratios, rolling radius etc.
What you want to do at vmax is be at maximum power. This is where the Z4M fails in its original configuration as we are some ~1000 rpm away from this. By shortening the gear ratio you improve the forces at the wheels two fold, get closer max power and increase the drivetrain torque multiplication.
I understand it can be a bit of a head scratcher and for some cars shortening the gear ratios will not result in the same outcome. I hope the explanation helps![]()
Aulday said:Or is it because it technically shortens the gear ratios relatively, and makes for use of a tighter RPM-powerband?
Smartbear said:Aulday said:Or is it because it technically shortens the gear ratios relatively, and makes for use of a tighter RPM-powerband?
Lowering the gearing increases the torque at the wheels![]()
Rob
Aulday said:Smartbear said:Aulday said:Or is it because it technically shortens the gear ratios relatively, and makes for use of a tighter RPM-powerband?
Lowering the gearing increases the torque at the wheels![]()
Rob
But at lower wheel RPMs, so same wheel HP.
Basically the new found wheel torque you now have at the beginning of 3rd, is wheel torque you had previously at the end of 2nd, and at the same wheel RPM. So I don't quite understand the logic.
just-right said:Vanne said:I think this data is missing the point, no one drops in 4.10 gearing for straight line performance. Lol. It's for coming in and out of turns where this really shines.![]()
Not quite, as you would have seen I included several graphs with the final drive ratio changes. I didn't add these with power and mass alterations because the effects are more uniform. The graphs are to illustrate the effects throughout the speed range i.e. acceleration out of a corner. Some of the other forum members highlighted the benefits of acceleration in 3rd gear on a nice windy B-road for example. :driving:
Coming out of a given corner you are transitioning from lateral to longitudinal g's and once you are not grip limited the figures and graphs posted are very much valid whether it is pure straight line performance or accelerating between corners (even if it is not exactly straight) Depending on the track it should help people choose the final drive to match the corners![]()
Vanne said:Also not sure how you came up with this, but Def not correct..
Vmax : 281.1 kph -> 284.5 -> 285.4
Your getting a higher top speed with 4.1? Maybe you got those figures inversely proportional?
Not quite, the original post states that it is due to operating closer to max power at vmax as the original 6th gear is too long in the interest of cruising rpm and fuel consumption. I'll try and explain.
Power is a function of torque and rpm, so equally torque is a function of power and rpm. To obtain torque at the wheels, the torque from the engine is multiplied by the gear ratio and final drive ratio, i.e. shorter final drive is more torque at the wheels. Then the torque is converted to a longitudinal force at the wheels by the effective rolling radius. There are obviously drive train losses as well.
At top speed there are no acceleration effects so all the resistance is formed by the aerodynamics, tyres and some other smaller contributors. The aerodynamics are dependend on the speed squared and the tyres to a very small effect are also dependent on the speed. The engine is linked to the speed through the aforementioned gear ratios, rolling radius etc.
What you want to do at vmax is be at maximum power. This is where the Z4M fails in its original configuration as we are some ~1000 rpm away from this. By shortening the gear ratio you improve the forces at the wheels two fold, get closer max power and increase the drivetrain torque multiplication.
I understand it can be a bit of a head scratcher and for some cars shortening the gear ratios will not result in the same outcome. I hope the explanation helps![]()
Smartbear said:Aulday said:Smartbear said:Lowering the gearing increases the torque at the wheels![]()
Rob
But at lower wheel RPMs, so same wheel HP.
Basically the new found wheel torque you now have at the beginning of 3rd, is wheel torque you had previously at the end of 2nd, and at the same wheel RPM. So I don't quite understand the logic.
If you accelerate side by side against an otherwise identical car, thcar with the lower gearing will beat it.
Rob
Argenta said:Shorter gearing? I’d like it longer if anything!![]()