> > difference being that speed, while dependent on availible power, is also
> > a function of gearing. Example (non LBC) My works Moto-crosser was
> > extremely modified for power. In fact the versions we rode put out almost
> > twice the power of the un-modified version. BUT the top speed was about
> > 20 mph SLOWER. Because the purpose was to get there quick, not faster.
>
I don't know who wrote this part of the thread, but I'm curious now.
How can any engine produce twice the stock power and have a lower top
speed? I guess it's possible that if the powerband distribution was
changed significantly, this could happen, but I'm more inclined to
believe it was the result of a transmission and/or rear end gear
ratio change. If so, what's the relevance?
I may be reducing the argument too much, but if an engine
modification results in the car travelling faster at any given
position, be it cruising down the highway, or 100 feet from a
stoplight, some attention needs to be paid to the brakes to make sure
they're still up to snuff. If a new engine allows the car to get up
to 50 mph between the stoplight and the nasty hairpin curve, whereas
the old engine would only get the car to 30 in the same distance,
then you're presenting the brakes with more of a challenge.
Scott
|