Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Desk\s+top\s+Dyno\s+fun\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Desk\s+top\s+Dyno\s+fun\s*$/: 13 ]

Total 13 documents matching your query.

1. Desk top Dyno fun (score: 1): Author: "Ronak, TP (Timothy)" <Timothy.Ronak@AkzoNobel.com>; Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 17:10:42 -0500; My guess as to why the Power falls off at high RPM for larger displacement is pretty simple. The bigger the slugs the faster it eats up horsepower at RPM. That is why the larger inch motors are best; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00079.html (8,052 bytes)
2. RE: Desk top Dyno fun (score: 1): Author: "Frank Marrone" <itswonderful@attbi.com>; Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 15:58:09 -0800; I'm not sure it's all that simple. There is an effect of friction with the longer stroke configuration but that only accounts for part of the advantage the smaller motor. I'm not sure extra reciproc; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00081.html (9,214 bytes)
3. RE: Desk top Dyno fun (score: 1): Author: "Bob Palmer" <rpalmer@ucsd.edu>; Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 18:37:41 -0800; Apparently, my assertion that engines should be compared on an equal cfm basis needs some further explanation. What I said earlier was that a 400 ci motor at 2000 rpm, to a zeroth order approximatio; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00089.html (8,999 bytes)
4. RE: Desk top Dyno fun (score: 1): Author: "Frank Marrone" <itswonderful@attbi.com>; Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 18:49:03 -0800; Bob, but what I don't understand is why does the smaller motor make more power than the bigger motor at the SAME RPM at the high RPMs? My simplistic thinking would be that the bigger motor should mak; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00090.html (8,273 bytes)
5. RE: Desk top Dyno fun (score: 1): Author: "Bob Palmer" <rpalmer@ucsd.edu>; Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 19:59:44 -0800; Consider this; why does any engine of a given displacement reach a point where it begins making less horsepower at higher rpm? The same reason, say a 289 would make less horsepower at 6,500 rpm than; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00091.html (8,300 bytes)
6. RE: Desk top Dyno fun (score: 1): Author: "Derek White" <derekw@sltnet.lk>; Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 10:59:12 +0500; Tim is talking about reciprocating weight, not rotating weight. It takes a lot of force (and power) to continuously accelerate, decelerate, accelerate the rods and pistons. Since the acceleration an; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00093.html (10,363 bytes)
7. RE: Desk top Dyno fun (score: 1): Author: "Frank Marrone" <itswonderful@attbi.com>; Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 21:38:56 -0800; Derek, interesting! I don't think this is what is going on in the engine simulator however because there is no way to enter weights of reciprocating components in this software. The software would ha; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00094.html (8,656 bytes)
8. RE: Desk top Dyno fun (score: 1): Author: "Frank Marrone" <itswonderful@attbi.com>; Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 21:43:20 -0800; Yes, my gut tells me this is the gist of it. Can anyone recommend a book that addresses these issues? I'd really like to read more about it. Frank; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00095.html (8,263 bytes)
9. RE: Desk top Dyno fun (score: 1): Author: "Ronak, TP (Timothy)" <Timothy.Ronak@AkzoNobel.com>; Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 10:23:10 -0500; I think that Bob and the others are on to the reasons for the difference and theoretical CFM is usually different than actual CFM. An example The HP differences may be related to volume and the actua; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00098.html (11,331 bytes)
10. RE: Desk top Dyno fun (score: 1): Author: "Bob Palmer" <rpalmer@ucsd.edu>; Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 09:00:07 -0800; Sorry, but I have to disagree with this whole "reciprocating mass acceleration/deceleration" loses horsepower argument. One might think this it true if you focus, for example, on the motion of a sin; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00102.html (8,645 bytes)
11. Re: Desk top Dyno fun (score: 1): Author: "Tom Witt" <wittsend@jps.net>; Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 10:42:56 -0800; I don't know if this is a factor, but a friend of mine who works for Shelby says that at a given displacement an engine will only make a certain amount of torque. Thus, (according to him) the only wa; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00104.html (9,695 bytes)
12. RE: Desk top Dyno fun (score: 1): Author: "Palmer, Robert L." <RPalmer@brobeck.com>; Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 11:42:52 -0800; In your specific case, I would expect the difference between your stroker and the stock 302 block (all other parts besides the short block being the same) to be simply ratio'd by 350/302=1.159. For; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00105.html (8,954 bytes)
13. RE: Desk top Dyno fun (score: 1): Author: "Frank Marrone" <itswonderful@attbi.com>; Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 00:02:42 -0800; Some more studying and experience recently gained with a higher quality engine simulator program has led me to believe that Derek may be the most correct in this matter. I now believe that the prima; /html/tigers/2003-02/msg00149.html (11,872 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 13
Page: [1]