In reply to a message from MGuar sent Mon 10 Jan 2011:
MGuar:
Your point on the final drive ratio is well taken; I suppose the
best situation would be to have a Hallibrand style diff so you
could change the final drive ratio to suit the track. Once the box
ratios are chosen and fixed, it’s all final drive choice.
For the street, I also argue for acceleration, and then back this
with an good overdrive 5th or 6th gear, so that freeway use doesn’t
become too droning.
In reply to a message from MGuar sent Sun 9 Jan 2011:
I’ve have to go along with Kirbert on the subject of ethanol in
current racing Corvettes. The sanctioning bodies and rules are not
likely to allow one competitor a particular advantage (ethanol
fuel - if indeed it an advantage under the rules (compression
limits, etc.)) without making it also available to the other
competitors. The whole idea is to keep a level playing field for
all, and not give one competitor an unfair advantage over the
others. Additionally, I am quite sure that Porsche, Ferrari, Aston
Martin, etc. have the moksee and skill to use ethanol as well, if
it offers such an advantage as you claim it offers the Corvette
team. Rather, I think it is more of a PR & Publicity move as
Kirbert has suggested.
Your latest posts demonstrate that although ethanol and methanol
can tolerate much higher compression ratios, it takes a much
greater quantity/volume of the stuff to generate the same or
greater power than gasoline because the BTU specific heat value of
each is quite a bit less than that of gasoline as demonstrated by
the chart I referenced. We are probably finally converging on this
subject by agreeing that with much higher compression ratios, one
can generate more power using ethanol or methanol, but it takes
gobs of the stuff to do it. Not economical or practical for the
street and the way most of us drive. As the expression goes, ‘‘How
fast do you want to go - How much money do you have?’’–
lockheed 92 XJS Cpe/97 LT1 Miami FL/ 96 XJS Cv 4.0 Austin TX
Austin, TX, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –
In reply to a message from lockheed sent Mon 10 Jan 2011:
The ALMS (American LeMans SERIES) rules allow any team the use of
ethanol. The factory Corvette team choose to use it know full well
the need for more frequent stops for refueling…
Here’s where you need to really understand race stragegy to fully
grasp why it’s and advantage to one team over another. I won’t
bore you with the details (which would easily fit an extremely fat
book)
Yes Ethanol/Methanol does make more horsepower than gasolene.
Only exremely recently was the use of alcohol mandaited at INDY
because of it’s greater safety. water both cools and dilutes
alcohol byond the flamibility point where gas floats on top of
water and use of water can cause the fire to spread…
Yes we are both in agreement that alcohol (in either form) has
the potential for greater horsepower. Further I agree with you in
that few here will want maximum horsepower from their cars…
With regard cost… if the conversion to 100% alcohol is your goal
you will find the actual conversion cost can be modest… Further
with gasolene over $3.00 and on it’s way to $5.00 within less than
2 years. the cost of a dollar a gallon even when twice as much is
required for ethanol at the refinery makes Alcohol cheaper not
more expensive. In racing applications it’s not unusual to pay more
than $7.00 a gallon for gas and some really high octane gas is over
$20.00 a gallon now… Thus in racing alcohol is really very much
cheaper! I would like to remind you ONCE AGAIN of the title of
this and it’s referance to trackday/race cars…
Simply to end this discussion on a friendly note, if you are
asking a politcal question about the greeness of alcohol or it’s
benefits I will agree that it’s extremely complex. However, Look at
Brazil and consider in the 1980’s they imported 100% of their fuel
needs. Their economy was in the tank… Today they import less than
10% and their economy is thriving…–
The original message included these comments:
current racing Corvettes. The sanctioning bodies and rules are not
likely to allow one competitor a particular advantage (ethanol
others. Additionally, I am quite sure that Porsche, Ferrari, Aston
Martin, etc. have the moksee and skill to use ethanol as well, if
it offers such an advantage as you claim it offers the Corvette
the chart I referenced. We are probably finally converging on this
subject by agreeing that with much higher compression ratios, one
can generate more power using ethanol or methanol, but it takes
gobs of the stuff to do it. Not economical or practical for the
street and the way most of us drive. As the expression goes, ''How
In reply to a message from MGuar sent Thu 13 Jan 2011:
‘‘I would like to remind you ONCE AGAIN of the title of this and
it’s referance to trackday/race cars…’’
So why did you initiate the fuel discussion by expounding about
your opinion on fuels, and continuing your dialogue about fuels
when the subject line is about transmission options, and once again
talking down to this group???–
lockheed 92 XJS Cpe/97 LT1 Miami FL/ 96 XJS Cv 4.0 Austin TX
Austin, TX, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –
In reply to a message from lockheed sent Thu 13 Jan 2011:
What do you see as your role here Mr. Lockheed? Actually before
that based on your postings thus far and to maintain peace on this
site may I strongly suggest that you ignore my postings in the
future and I will do the same in return to you?
I was speaking in a general way about the horsepower a
trackday/racecar made and why some transmissions which would be
acceptable on the street wouldn’t meet racetrack requirements…
You then attacked me because I said, about 300Horspower.
Yes I was off by 16 horsepower but reasonable men consider the
word ABOUT to allow a tolerance of 16 horsepower as reasonable in
a 300 hp…engine…
I responded in as reasonable fashion as possible about Things
done to a track day car which could not be done on a car for the
street.
The remark about alcohol was a passing comment.
Which you attacked.However everything you found wrong with my
statement refered to street cars.
So I’ll ask again what do you see your role here Mr. Lockheed.
exactly what is your objection?
Finally I find you claiming that I talk down to this group as both
wrong and offensive. Do you know the level of understanding of
every person on this site? So how am I talking down to them?–
MGuar
Wayzata Minnesota, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –
In reply to a message from MGuar sent Fri 14 Jan 2011:
''Yes I was off by 16 horsepower but reasonable men consider the
word ABOUT to allow a tolerance of 16 horsepower as reasonable in
a 300 hp…engine… ‘’
Well, lets see, by my math, 300-263= 37 Hp error, not 15 hp.–
lockheed 92 XJS Cpe/97 LT1 Miami FL/ 96 XJS Cv 4.0 Austin TX
Austin, TX, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php –
I just grabbed my Haynes Masnual chapter 1 page 20 bottom right of the page, shows 284 hp@5750 rpm 294 Torque@4500 rpm
I believe the original issue was one of will a stock transmission hold up not the exact specifications of Jaguar engine when I used the words About 300 horsepower.
Now I’ll let you have the final word and hence forth shall ignore you.
