Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Overdrives\s+and\s+rpm\]\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Overdrives\s+and\s+rpm\]\s*$/: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. Re: Overdrives and rpm] (score: 1): Author: Thomas Wiencek <wiencek@anl.gov>; Date: 02 Jul 2001 08:59:59 -0500; Does compressing the tire change the circumference? I don't think so. Can anyone measure the circumference of their tires and report the length? This should give a good average. There is also an expa; /html/alpines/2001-07/msg00011.html (13,771 bytes)
2. Re: Overdrives and rpm] (score: 1): Author: Thomas Wiencek <wiencek@anl.gov>; Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:10:09 -0500; I think somewhere in the archives there is more information about tire sizes. The stock Alpine tires were 5.50 x 13 or 5.90 x 13. These were 82 series tires so the diameter is (0.82 x 2 plus 13 = 22.; /html/alpines/2001-06/msg00271.html (9,728 bytes)
3. Re: Overdrives and rpm] (score: 1): Author: Thomas Wiencek <wiencek@anl.gov>; Date: 28 Jun 2001 09:26:52 -0500; Where did you get your diameters from? They seem a little high. Check out this site for all size tires. Welcome to the Turbo! Saab tire size calculator! Thanks to our friends at Miata.net, We've ...; /html/alpines/2001-06/msg00272.html (10,318 bytes)
4. RE: Overdrives and rpm] (score: 1): Author: "Bill Blue" <dablue@worldnet.att.net>; Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 16:50:52 -0500; I just rechecked the Coker Tire site. They do not have 5.60 or 5.90's, but they do have the 6.00-13. They are B.F. Goodrich Silvertowns and the diameter is given as 23.78". It appears the aspect rati; /html/alpines/2001-06/msg00276.html (10,440 bytes)
5. Re: Overdrives and rpm] (score: 1): Author: Ron Tebo <tebomr@cadvision.com>; Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 06:05:42 -0600; Could it be possible that some people are using true diameter to calculate while others are using rolling diameter? Ron Tebo; /html/alpines/2001-06/msg00284.html (11,056 bytes)
6. Re: Overdrives and rpm] (score: 1): Author: rnanzig@webtv.net (robert nanzig); Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 08:22:27 -0400 (EDT); Could it be possible that some people are using true diameter to calculate while others are using rolling diameter? Ron Tebo -- Interesting question Ron. Are you suggesting the tire expands to a meas; /html/alpines/2001-06/msg00285.html (7,307 bytes)
7. Re: Overdrives and rpm] (score: 1): Author: Thomas Wiencek <wiencek@anl.gov>; Date: 29 Jun 2001 09:13:14 -0500; Wouldn't the rolling diameter be less since the tire is compressed? Could it be possible that some people are using true diameter to calculate while others are using rolling diameter? Ron Tebo; /html/alpines/2001-06/msg00287.html (11,259 bytes)
8. RE: Overdrives and rpm] (score: 1): Author: "Paul and Susan Almjeld" <palmjeld@home.com>; Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 12:32:41 -0500; Hi all: the actual difference between "actual" and "rolling" is not a significant factor in this equation. Assuming 1 inch of "compression" while rolling, there is not a significant difference in mph; /html/alpines/2001-06/msg00290.html (12,533 bytes)
9. Re: Overdrives and rpm] (score: 1): Author: "Greg Locke" <glocke@ihug.co.nz>; Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 09:23:19 +1200; Hello all too There is also an expansion factor as the tyre speeds up, and enlarges due to "centrifugal effects". According to a book I have this is .02% per mph, so at 60 mph would be 1.2%, or the b; /html/alpines/2001-06/msg00293.html (14,404 bytes)
10. Re: Overdrives and rpm] (score: 1): Author: Ron Tebo <tebomr@cadvision.com>; Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 05:56:42 -0600; No, I'm suggesting that the rolling diameter of a radial would be less than it's true diameter because of it's compression when on the car. The same idea would be less true with a bias-ply because o; /html/alpines/2001-06/msg00295.html (8,002 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 10
Page: [1]