If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
That is why I asked the question it makes sense. Also, it was an SE TJ I
looked at it yesterday. He is a young kid at work and his dad gave him the TJ because his car died. It gave his dad a new excuse to get a Rubicon. He see me with my TJ and has a ton of questions I told him I do not know some of the answers but I know where to ask. -- Coasty SEMPAR PARATUS (ALWAYS READY) Remove The SPOOGE To Reply "L.W. ("ßill") Hughes III" > wrote in message ... > Before the 31"s my Brother-in-law's '94 YJ four banger could go any > speed he wanted on the straight and level, and got a ticket for ninety, > after the extra weight limited that to seventy miles per hour and that's > with a tailwind: http://home.att.net/~taschers/beach03.jpg > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > http://www.billhughes.com/ > > Coasty wrote: >> >> Yep another one, >> A friend has a 2.5L TJ X, 5 speed tranny,with standard OEM tires >> 215/75R-15, >> he wants to put 31s on it. His question to me how bad will his mileage >> suffer? He averages about 17-18 MPG now with gas the way it is he uses >> the >> TJ as the daily driver and drives 120 miles round trip to work each day. >> >> -- >> Coasty >> SEMPAR PARATUS >> (ALWAYS READY) >> >> Remove The SPOOGE To Reply |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Greg wrote: > Daughter's 95 YJ with 2.5 sucked on gas stock, sucked on gas with 31"s, > and still sucks on gas with 33"s and 4.88s. > My '95 YJ with the 4 cyl. Had 30x9.50's on it and now has 235-70's. On a measured 135 mile round trip commute it averages 20 mpg...with either tire on it. Just has a bit more pick up with the 235's My wife's '94 YJ with a 6 cyl. Had 215-70's on it when we got it. Now has 30x 9.50's. On the same 135 mile commmute, it also averages around 20 mpg. The only way tire size seems to have affected the gas mileage was by the change in the speedo reading. Over an actual measured course, not using the odometer as a reference, the mileage didn't hardly change. -- Old Crow '82 FLTC-P "Pearl" '95 Jeep YJ Rio Grande SENS, TOMKAT, BS#133, DOF#51, MAMBM "There's only *one* RE" |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Bill,
E=mc² is not a formula from classical mechanics, which is what you are talking about here. The energy to get a wheel, or any other object, spinning depends on its "inertial mass", which is usually called "moment of inertia", and the effective radius. Calculus gives the formula E=1/2 IR², which is similar to the formula for a moving object, E=1/2 mv², where m is the mass of the object and v is the velocity. Now, once you get an object moving or spinning, there is NO energy required to keep it doing that, unless there are losses. In a vehicle, losses are friction, air resistance, and that hundred pound girlfriend's credit card usage. The wheels on Lance's bike have to be light because of the need to accelerate, decelerate, and turn. Big heavy mountain bike wheels would slow him down, but not for the reasons you state. Earle "L.W. (ßill) Hughes III" > wrote in message ... > Horsepower, or imagine the the force you would need to peddle your > bicycle, now put your Jeep tire on the bicycle and peddle. E=mc². The E > stands for energy. The m stands for inertial mass, which is similar to > (but not the same thing as) weight. C squared stands for the speed of > light multiplied by itself. I would say Lance Armstrong bike wheel are > very light right about now in france, not like his mountain bike. > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > http://www.billhughes.com/ > > RoyJ wrote: > > > > The reason you use a 13 pound flywheel is to allow maximum ACCELERATION > > of the engine. The reason for lightweight tires is to allow > > ACCELERATION. The reason to not take your girlfriend along is > > ACCELERATION So what does weight have to do with steady state? (other > > than the additional wear on the bearings?) > > > > L.W.(ßill) Hughes III wrote: > > > > > Hi Dave, > > > To keep something turning takes more horsepower the heavier it is, > > > that's why the drag racers use a thirteen pound aluminum flywheel and > > > lighter rims and tires. Of course, that flywheel also stores energy, > > > that will made the stock V6 buick power CJ with it's fifty pound > > > flywheel easily crawl over rocks that would easily stop a couple of > > > hundred more horsepower in a 350" Chevy V8. I know taking your hundred > > > pound girlfriend with you down the drag strip will cost you a tenth of a > > > second. As far as sprung and unsprung weight, all I know is it makes a > > > great deal of difference in their ride and cornering ability, like road > > > racers need independent suspension to win. > > > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > > > http://www.billhughes.com/ > > > > > > Dave Milne wrote: > > > > > >>I read somewhere that every lb of unsprung weight is worth 10 lb of sprung > > >>weight ; don't know if that's true or not. > > >> > > >>Dave Milne, Scotland > > >>'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Earle,
Yes, I know that's why I wrote the definition of C squared as the speed of light. Lance, will happy to know you have the secret of spontaneous energy in that your wheel will never stop spinning. Size means nothing to you, if you had a big enough lever you could move the earth. Where the rest of us have to deal with centrifugal, kinetic, and inertia. God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O http://www.billhughes.com/ Earle Horton wrote: > > Bill, > > E=mc² is not a formula from classical mechanics, which is what you are > talking about here. The energy to get a wheel, or any other object, > spinning depends on its "inertial mass", which is usually called "moment of > inertia", and the effective radius. Calculus gives the formula E=1/2 IR², > which is similar to the formula for a moving object, E=1/2 mv², where m is > the mass of the object and v is the velocity. > > Now, once you get an object moving or spinning, there is NO energy required > to keep it doing that, unless there are losses. In a vehicle, losses are > friction, air resistance, and that hundred pound girlfriend's credit card > usage. The wheels on Lance's bike have to be light because of the need to > accelerate, decelerate, and turn. Big heavy mountain bike wheels would slow > him down, but not for the reasons you state. > > Earle > > "L.W. (ßill) Hughes III" > wrote in message > ... > > Horsepower, or imagine the the force you would need to peddle your > > bicycle, now put your Jeep tire on the bicycle and peddle. E=mc². The E > > stands for energy. The m stands for inertial mass, which is similar to > > (but not the same thing as) weight. C squared stands for the speed of > > light multiplied by itself. I would say Lance Armstrong bike wheel are > > very light right about now in france, not like his mountain bike. > > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > > http://www.billhughes.com/ > > > > RoyJ wrote: > > > > > > The reason you use a 13 pound flywheel is to allow maximum ACCELERATION > > > of the engine. The reason for lightweight tires is to allow > > > ACCELERATION. The reason to not take your girlfriend along is > > > ACCELERATION So what does weight have to do with steady state? (other > > > than the additional wear on the bearings?) > > > > > > L.W.(ßill) Hughes III wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Dave, > > > > To keep something turning takes more horsepower the heavier it > is, > > > > that's why the drag racers use a thirteen pound aluminum flywheel and > > > > lighter rims and tires. Of course, that flywheel also stores energy, > > > > that will made the stock V6 buick power CJ with it's fifty pound > > > > flywheel easily crawl over rocks that would easily stop a couple of > > > > hundred more horsepower in a 350" Chevy V8. I know taking your hundred > > > > pound girlfriend with you down the drag strip will cost you a tenth of > a > > > > second. As far as sprung and unsprung weight, all I know is it makes a > > > > great deal of difference in their ride and cornering ability, like > road > > > > racers need independent suspension to win. > > > > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > > > > http://www.billhughes.com/ > > > > > > > > Dave Milne wrote: > > > > > > > >>I read somewhere that every lb of unsprung weight is worth 10 lb of > sprung > > > >>weight ; don't know if that's true or not. > > > >> > > > >>Dave Milne, Scotland > > > >>'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Perpetual motion, was the word I was looking for to explain your
never ending spinning wheel. All though with a little help you may make a gyroscope run forever "L.W.(ßill) Hughes III" wrote: > > Hi Earle, > Yes, I know that's why I wrote the definition of C squared as the > speed of light. > Lance, will happy to know you have the secret of spontaneous energy > in that your wheel will never stop spinning. Size means nothing to you, > if you had a big enough lever you could move the earth. Where the rest > of us have to deal with centrifugal, kinetic, and inertia. > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > http://www.billhughes.com/ > > Earle Horton wrote: > > > > Bill, > > > > E=mc² is not a formula from classical mechanics, which is what you are > > talking about here. The energy to get a wheel, or any other object, > > spinning depends on its "inertial mass", which is usually called "moment of > > inertia", and the effective radius. Calculus gives the formula E=1/2 IR², > > which is similar to the formula for a moving object, E=1/2 mv², where m is > > the mass of the object and v is the velocity. > > > > Now, once you get an object moving or spinning, there is NO energy required > > to keep it doing that, unless there are losses. In a vehicle, losses are > > friction, air resistance, and that hundred pound girlfriend's credit card > > usage. The wheels on Lance's bike have to be light because of the need to > > accelerate, decelerate, and turn. Big heavy mountain bike wheels would slow > > him down, but not for the reasons you state. > > > > Earle > > > > "L.W. (ßill) Hughes III" > wrote in message > > ... > > > Horsepower, or imagine the the force you would need to peddle your > > > bicycle, now put your Jeep tire on the bicycle and peddle. E=mc². The E > > > stands for energy. The m stands for inertial mass, which is similar to > > > (but not the same thing as) weight. C squared stands for the speed of > > > light multiplied by itself. I would say Lance Armstrong bike wheel are > > > very light right about now in france, not like his mountain bike. > > > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > > > http://www.billhughes.com/ > > > > > > RoyJ wrote: > > > > > > > > The reason you use a 13 pound flywheel is to allow maximum ACCELERATION > > > > of the engine. The reason for lightweight tires is to allow > > > > ACCELERATION. The reason to not take your girlfriend along is > > > > ACCELERATION So what does weight have to do with steady state? (other > > > > than the additional wear on the bearings?) > > > > > > > > L.W.(ßill) Hughes III wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Dave, > > > > > To keep something turning takes more horsepower the heavier it > > is, > > > > > that's why the drag racers use a thirteen pound aluminum flywheel and > > > > > lighter rims and tires. Of course, that flywheel also stores energy, > > > > > that will made the stock V6 buick power CJ with it's fifty pound > > > > > flywheel easily crawl over rocks that would easily stop a couple of > > > > > hundred more horsepower in a 350" Chevy V8. I know taking your hundred > > > > > pound girlfriend with you down the drag strip will cost you a tenth of > > a > > > > > second. As far as sprung and unsprung weight, all I know is it makes a > > > > > great deal of difference in their ride and cornering ability, like > > road > > > > > racers need independent suspension to win. > > > > > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > > > > > http://www.billhughes.com/ > > > > > > > > > > Dave Milne wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>I read somewhere that every lb of unsprung weight is worth 10 lb of > > sprung > > > > >>weight ; don't know if that's true or not. > > > > >> > > > > >>Dave Milne, Scotland > > > > >>'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
I didn't invent perpetual motion. Newton did. The wheel would keep
spinning forever, except for friction from the bearings, road and air. What keeps the Earth spinning? What happened to Stephen Cowell, anyway? I think that we need his expert opinion here. Earle "L.W. (ßill) Hughes III" > wrote in message ... > Perpetual motion, was the word I was looking for to explain your > never ending spinning wheel. All though with a little help you may make > a gyroscope run forever > > "L.W.(ßill) Hughes III" wrote: > > > > Hi Earle, > > Yes, I know that's why I wrote the definition of C squared as the > > speed of light. > > Lance, will happy to know you have the secret of spontaneous energy > > in that your wheel will never stop spinning. Size means nothing to you, > > if you had a big enough lever you could move the earth. Where the rest > > of us have to deal with centrifugal, kinetic, and inertia. > > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > > http://www.billhughes.com/ > > > > Earle Horton wrote: > > > > > > Bill, > > > > > > E=mc² is not a formula from classical mechanics, which is what you are > > > talking about here. The energy to get a wheel, or any other object, > > > spinning depends on its "inertial mass", which is usually called "moment of > > > inertia", and the effective radius. Calculus gives the formula E=1/2 IR², > > > which is similar to the formula for a moving object, E=1/2 mv², where m is > > > the mass of the object and v is the velocity. > > > > > > Now, once you get an object moving or spinning, there is NO energy required > > > to keep it doing that, unless there are losses. In a vehicle, losses are > > > friction, air resistance, and that hundred pound girlfriend's credit card > > > usage. The wheels on Lance's bike have to be light because of the need to > > > accelerate, decelerate, and turn. Big heavy mountain bike wheels would slow > > > him down, but not for the reasons you state. > > > > > > Earle > > > > > > "L.W. (ßill) Hughes III" > wrote in message > > > ... > > > > Horsepower, or imagine the the force you would need to peddle your > > > > bicycle, now put your Jeep tire on the bicycle and peddle. E=mc². The E > > > > stands for energy. The m stands for inertial mass, which is similar to > > > > (but not the same thing as) weight. C squared stands for the speed of > > > > light multiplied by itself. I would say Lance Armstrong bike wheel are > > > > very light right about now in france, not like his mountain bike. > > > > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > > > > http://www.billhughes.com/ > > > > > > > > RoyJ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The reason you use a 13 pound flywheel is to allow maximum ACCELERATION > > > > > of the engine. The reason for lightweight tires is to allow > > > > > ACCELERATION. The reason to not take your girlfriend along is > > > > > ACCELERATION So what does weight have to do with steady state? (other > > > > > than the additional wear on the bearings?) > > > > > > > > > > L.W.(ßill) Hughes III wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Dave, > > > > > > To keep something turning takes more horsepower the heavier it > > > is, > > > > > > that's why the drag racers use a thirteen pound aluminum flywheel and > > > > > > lighter rims and tires. Of course, that flywheel also stores energy, > > > > > > that will made the stock V6 buick power CJ with it's fifty pound > > > > > > flywheel easily crawl over rocks that would easily stop a couple of > > > > > > hundred more horsepower in a 350" Chevy V8. I know taking your hundred > > > > > > pound girlfriend with you down the drag strip will cost you a tenth of > > > a > > > > > > second. As far as sprung and unsprung weight, all I know is it makes a > > > > > > great deal of difference in their ride and cornering ability, like > > > road > > > > > > racers need independent suspension to win. > > > > > > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > > > > > > http://www.billhughes.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > Dave Milne wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>I read somewhere that every lb of unsprung weight is worth 10 lb of > > > sprung > > > > > >>weight ; don't know if that's true or not. > > > > > >> > > > > > >>Dave Milne, Scotland > > > > > >>'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Earle,
No, but I bet you sold those little spring loaded centrifugal force thingie to fit in a child's bicycle wheel, designed to remove their money. Are we teasing Mike Romain, here or what? ;-) God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O http://www.billhughes.com/ Earle Horton wrote: > > I didn't invent perpetual motion. Newton did. The wheel would keep > spinning forever, except for friction from the bearings, road and air. What > keeps the Earth spinning? What happened to Stephen Cowell, anyway? > I think that we need his expert opinion here. > > Earle |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Exactly what I'd expect to see, Bill not withstanding. You can run into
some issues if the tire size change is enough to get you in a bad spot in the power curve(too high in 4th, too low in 5th) for your normal driving speed. Old Crow wrote: > > Greg wrote: > >>Daughter's 95 YJ with 2.5 sucked on gas stock, sucked on gas with 31"s, >>and still sucks on gas with 33"s and 4.88s. >> > > > My '95 YJ with the 4 cyl. Had 30x9.50's on it and now has 235-70's. > On a measured 135 mile round trip commute it averages 20 mpg...with > either tire on it. Just has a bit more pick up with the 235's > > My wife's '94 YJ with a 6 cyl. Had 215-70's on it when we got it. Now > has 30x 9.50's. On the same 135 mile commmute, it also averages around > 20 mpg. > > The only way tire size seems to have affected the gas mileage was by > the change in the speedo reading. Over an actual measured course, not > using the odometer as a reference, the mileage didn't hardly change. > > -- > Old Crow > '82 FLTC-P "Pearl" > '95 Jeep YJ Rio Grande > SENS, TOMKAT, BS#133, DOF#51, MAMBM > "There's only *one* RE" > |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Blather. Go take an introductory physics course.
L.W.(ßill) Hughes III wrote: > Horsepower, or imagine the the force you would need to peddle your > bicycle, now put your Jeep tire on the bicycle and peddle. E=mc². The E > stands for energy. The m stands for inertial mass, which is similar to > (but not the same thing as) weight. C squared stands for the speed of > light multiplied by itself. I would say Lance Armstrong bike wheel are > very light right about now in france, not like his mountain bike. > God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O > http://www.billhughes.com/ > > RoyJ wrote: > >>The reason you use a 13 pound flywheel is to allow maximum ACCELERATION >>of the engine. The reason for lightweight tires is to allow >>ACCELERATION. The reason to not take your girlfriend along is >>ACCELERATION So what does weight have to do with steady state? (other >>than the additional wear on the bearings?) >> >>L.W.(ßill) Hughes III wrote: >> >> >>>Hi Dave, >>> To keep something turning takes more horsepower the heavier it is, >>>that's why the drag racers use a thirteen pound aluminum flywheel and >>>lighter rims and tires. Of course, that flywheel also stores energy, >>>that will made the stock V6 buick power CJ with it's fifty pound >>>flywheel easily crawl over rocks that would easily stop a couple of >>>hundred more horsepower in a 350" Chevy V8. I know taking your hundred >>>pound girlfriend with you down the drag strip will cost you a tenth of a >>>second. As far as sprung and unsprung weight, all I know is it makes a >>>great deal of difference in their ride and cornering ability, like road >>>racers need independent suspension to win. >>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O http://www.billhughes.com/ >>> >>>Dave Milne wrote: >>> >>> >>>>I read somewhere that every lb of unsprung weight is worth 10 lb of sprung >>>>weight ; don't know if that's true or not. >>>> >>>>Dave Milne, Scotland >>>>'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
I have, along with calculus.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O http://www.billhughes.com/ RoyJ wrote: > > Blather. Go take an introductory physics course. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Tire pressure question... which number do I follow? | ijosef | Technology | 7 | June 21st 05 09:54 PM |
Tire size ideas? | Mac | VW air cooled | 2 | June 21st 05 02:33 AM |
Calculating Tire Pressure question? | Tom Nakashima | VW air cooled | 3 | May 4th 05 02:28 PM |
Question: Tire size for 15x8 rims, stock gears, mpg differences | [email protected] | Jeep | 7 | May 3rd 05 02:04 PM |
tire size question | Mike Coonrod | General | 3 | February 11th 04 09:34 PM |