`82 comp package timeslips
07-07-2006, 01:56 PM
#16
Burning Brakes
Mark, i swear you have that reply in cut and past..lol
all you have to do is look at time slips from drag times to see.....that TQ and gears for same weight cars have a greater diferance than hp...440 MAG 375HP 480TQ COMPARED TO 426HEMI 427HP 490TQ HEMI average second faster at 60 but same to 1/2 or less at the 1/4mile average is 13.5
same gears same car...o almost forgot mph for the 440 was even faster than the hemi in some time slips (hard to know,some drags go up hill some down hill.)
other note old HP and TQ lists were at the crank not mutiplied threw gears and such.
HP is a made up term that has used TQ and rpm to be applied to real world stats ie: real horses can pull stated weight....transfered to what we now know as HP(HP is not a universal equation like TQ to mass is) NASA could beem our HP definition all over the univers but without our made up equation no intelignt lifeforms are going to understand it.(specialy if they spell like i do)
As for the p-car and the viper were they make the hp and tq is the story not thier top #s
but as you point out looks like david and goliath by thier #s but not so differant on the track.
Here is simple rule to move an object with leverage, ie; gearing you do not need streagth all you need is leverage and little to no power...but if you want to move it fast...yes you need power!
ALL THAT SAID I WISH MY CAR TO HAVE MORE HP!!!!!!!
or may be lower gears....hehehe
all you have to do is look at time slips from drag times to see.....that TQ and gears for same weight cars have a greater diferance than hp...440 MAG 375HP 480TQ COMPARED TO 426HEMI 427HP 490TQ HEMI average second faster at 60 but same to 1/2 or less at the 1/4mile average is 13.5
same gears same car...o almost forgot mph for the 440 was even faster than the hemi in some time slips (hard to know,some drags go up hill some down hill.)
other note old HP and TQ lists were at the crank not mutiplied threw gears and such.
HP is a made up term that has used TQ and rpm to be applied to real world stats ie: real horses can pull stated weight....transfered to what we now know as HP(HP is not a universal equation like TQ to mass is) NASA could beem our HP definition all over the univers but without our made up equation no intelignt lifeforms are going to understand it.(specialy if they spell like i do)
As for the p-car and the viper were they make the hp and tq is the story not thier top #s
but as you point out looks like david and goliath by thier #s but not so differant on the track.
Here is simple rule to move an object with leverage, ie; gearing you do not need streagth all you need is leverage and little to no power...but if you want to move it fast...yes you need power!
ALL THAT SAID I WISH MY CAR TO HAVE MORE HP!!!!!!!
or may be lower gears....hehehe
07-07-2006, 02:02 PM
#17
Administrator - "Tyson"
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Originally Posted by tommytomaso
or may be lower gears....hehehe
07-07-2006, 02:36 PM
#19
Administrator - "Tyson"
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
What, who me? No, you are thinking of someone else.
07-07-2006, 04:33 PM
#21
I installed 3.09 gearing in my car. The next morning when I woke up I had a full head of hair, had lost 40lbs, my bad back was cured, and my "virility" had returned as if I were 19 years old again. Thank you 3.09 gearing! 
07-07-2006, 06:58 PM
#22
Burning Brakes
DAMM!!!...were do i get them GEARS!!!! will it improve my IQ and make the hot ladys want me too..or should i wish for a blower to make all my dreams true.. 
07-07-2006, 07:14 PM
#24
Burning Brakes
Hacker, on the gear thing for real, in your opinion if topspeed isnt your aim did the gear change for the time and money spent, make a large enough improvement, or was the blower a beter bang for the buck? with the 81 auto i have, id rather have beter low speed responce then my 130 topspeed.
im not sure what my curant gears are 2.23s?
im not sure what my curant gears are 2.23s?
07-08-2006, 02:36 AM
#25
Rennlist Member
for one thing, a 3.09 rear end on a 2.22 gear box (if 84 or it would be 2.20 if S4) basically gives you a S4 gear box from 2nd on to 4th. remember the ole shift of the gear sets down by x%? for drag racing, that 1st gear now, (as i call sub-first) does make more torque to the rear wheels to 39mph as we all know now, but after that its a wash. if you can take advantage of the 3.09 and its new "sub -first" gear of 12.6:1 or something, you will have used more average hp over the quartermile and it would yeild a faster time. Having done standing starts successfully , i cant imaging a lower 1st gear , unless i had a 4x4 .
if a blower gives you anything more than 10% more HP, it will yield a better 1/4mile time no matter how well the 3.09 sub first hooks up!
MK
if a blower gives you anything more than 10% more HP, it will yield a better 1/4mile time no matter how well the 3.09 sub first hooks up!
MK
Originally Posted by tommytomaso
Hacker, on the gear thing for real, in your opinion if topspeed isnt your aim did the gear change for the time and money spent, make a large enough improvement, or was the blower a beter bang for the buck? with the 81 auto i have, id rather have beter low speed responce then my 130 topspeed.
im not sure what my curant gears are 2.23s?
im not sure what my curant gears are 2.23s?
07-08-2006, 03:13 AM
#26
Rennlist Member
I dont understand what you are saying below. you are comparing two cars with a 50hp difference. if driven correctly there is no point at which the greater torque engine'd car would have an advantage, mainly because the torque difference is less than 2% for both, but HP is grossly different. driver, set up, etc etc are so important as you know for drag racing. shape of HP curve is important and based on a set of gears, will determine the average or area used of the HP curve. sounds like from below that the hemi may have a much flatter HP curve. faster at the end is due to several factors. HP is the main factor, and includes torque. again , torque is a factor. HP tells the entire story. look at the HP seconds used in both cars, and you can tell who will accelerate fastest for more of the time.
AGAIN, acceleration = power/ (mass x velocity) this is simple law of physics that is never broken. what we are talking about is relatively simple.
Hp is comparitively equal to torque to the rear wheels at any speed. if any car at any speed is out accelerating you , he is putting more torque to the rear wheels through the gear box, right? this means he at that point, has more HP (or is utilizing more hp if both have the same HP)
power is a phyisics term. energy is a physics term. torque , or force in a rotational plane, is a physics term. Acceleration is physics term, so is velocity, distance , etc. POWER is the rate of doing work. you can do it slow. (ie, a big torque car with low HP) or you can do it fast ( big torque and HP car)
in fact, the fastest and the quickest cars have the greatest HP, and more accurately said, use/produce more HP /seconds than anyone else. HP/seconds, like kilowatt/hours is a physics term too, and is a unit measure of work. HP is power made up from english units of foot/lbs and rpms. remember, power=force x velocity. So, HP is a made up 'scale' based on horses and is torque x speed and then divided by a constant. we dont need to use HP , we can use something universal like Kilowatts if you would like.
Look more closely at the porsche and viper numbers. its not david and goliath at all, even on the track. if both cars with those dynos raced at the same weight, and this has happened many times. (rewards weight of 275lbs on a porsche in World challenge vs a newbee in a vet or viper) you see that both cars accelerate at all speeds at the same rate. WHY, because they have the same shaped hp curve for the most part, and if they didnt (as most vipers have a little flatter hp curve) , the porsche could make up for that , entirely, by use of closer ratios.
think about a simple example. use 2:1 factors , 1 car having 1000ftlbs at 5000rpm and another having 500ft-lbs at 10,000rpm. at any speed, both cars would have the exact same torque to the wheels through the gear box. providing the same shaped hp curve. even if the curves are dramtically differnt, the most both can make at any vehicle speed is limited by HP, not its max torque. this is why with an infinitely gear box, both cars would operate at max HP and produce the exact same torque to accelerate with.
Again and again, acceleration = power/(mass x velocity) go find a physics instructor and show this post to him. you will see that its the HP that matters, not the peak engine torque values. ITs torque to the rear wheels that accelerates you , and that is comparitively equal to HP.
what was your last sentence about????? Gearing gives more leverage at a slower rate of speed (proportionately) it doesnt change power, the absolute potential to accelerate a mass. gearing, in our uses, can be used to better use the available HP over an operational range. here is a simple rule for you:
acceleration is proportional to power, and for a given power, inversely proportional to velocity. if you want to move a mass quickly ( Like in a 1/4mile race) over a distance that is: work = force x distance and
power= force x distance/time or power=force x speed. power is the rate of doing work. exactly what it means .
Force or torque are just factors of the greater picture, power. taking one step further, energy!
dont confuse the engine torque values with the real force that moves you , that of torque at the rear wheels through the gear box.
Mk
AGAIN, acceleration = power/ (mass x velocity) this is simple law of physics that is never broken. what we are talking about is relatively simple.
Hp is comparitively equal to torque to the rear wheels at any speed. if any car at any speed is out accelerating you , he is putting more torque to the rear wheels through the gear box, right? this means he at that point, has more HP (or is utilizing more hp if both have the same HP)
power is a phyisics term. energy is a physics term. torque , or force in a rotational plane, is a physics term. Acceleration is physics term, so is velocity, distance , etc. POWER is the rate of doing work. you can do it slow. (ie, a big torque car with low HP) or you can do it fast ( big torque and HP car)
in fact, the fastest and the quickest cars have the greatest HP, and more accurately said, use/produce more HP /seconds than anyone else. HP/seconds, like kilowatt/hours is a physics term too, and is a unit measure of work. HP is power made up from english units of foot/lbs and rpms. remember, power=force x velocity. So, HP is a made up 'scale' based on horses and is torque x speed and then divided by a constant. we dont need to use HP , we can use something universal like Kilowatts if you would like.
Look more closely at the porsche and viper numbers. its not david and goliath at all, even on the track. if both cars with those dynos raced at the same weight, and this has happened many times. (rewards weight of 275lbs on a porsche in World challenge vs a newbee in a vet or viper) you see that both cars accelerate at all speeds at the same rate. WHY, because they have the same shaped hp curve for the most part, and if they didnt (as most vipers have a little flatter hp curve) , the porsche could make up for that , entirely, by use of closer ratios.
think about a simple example. use 2:1 factors , 1 car having 1000ftlbs at 5000rpm and another having 500ft-lbs at 10,000rpm. at any speed, both cars would have the exact same torque to the wheels through the gear box. providing the same shaped hp curve. even if the curves are dramtically differnt, the most both can make at any vehicle speed is limited by HP, not its max torque. this is why with an infinitely gear box, both cars would operate at max HP and produce the exact same torque to accelerate with.
Again and again, acceleration = power/(mass x velocity) go find a physics instructor and show this post to him. you will see that its the HP that matters, not the peak engine torque values. ITs torque to the rear wheels that accelerates you , and that is comparitively equal to HP.
what was your last sentence about????? Gearing gives more leverage at a slower rate of speed (proportionately) it doesnt change power, the absolute potential to accelerate a mass. gearing, in our uses, can be used to better use the available HP over an operational range. here is a simple rule for you:
acceleration is proportional to power, and for a given power, inversely proportional to velocity. if you want to move a mass quickly ( Like in a 1/4mile race) over a distance that is: work = force x distance and
power= force x distance/time or power=force x speed. power is the rate of doing work. exactly what it means .
Force or torque are just factors of the greater picture, power. taking one step further, energy!
dont confuse the engine torque values with the real force that moves you , that of torque at the rear wheels through the gear box.
Mk
Originally Posted by tommytomaso
Mark, i swear you have that reply in cut and past..lol
all you have to do is look at time slips from drag times to see.....that TQ and gears for same weight cars have a greater diferance than hp...440 MAG 375HP 480TQ COMPARED TO 426HEMI 427HP 490TQ HEMI average second faster at 60 but same to 1/2 or less at the 1/4mile average is 13.5
same gears same car...o almost forgot mph for the 440 was even faster than the hemi in some time slips (hard to know,some drags go up hill some down hill.)
other note old HP and TQ lists were at the crank not mutiplied threw gears and such.
HP is a made up term that has used TQ and rpm to be applied to real world stats ie: real horses can pull stated weight....transfered to what we now know as HP(HP is not a universal equation like TQ to mass is) NASA could beem our HP definition all over the univers but without our made up equation no intelignt lifeforms are going to understand it.(specialy if they spell like i do)
As for the p-car and the viper were they make the hp and tq is the story not thier top #s
but as you point out looks like david and goliath by thier #s but not so differant on the track.
Here is simple rule to move an object with leverage, ie; gearing you do not need streagth all you need is leverage and little to no power...but if you want to move it fast...yes you need power!
ALL THAT SAID I WISH MY CAR TO HAVE MORE HP!!!!!!!
or may be lower gears....hehehe
all you have to do is look at time slips from drag times to see.....that TQ and gears for same weight cars have a greater diferance than hp...440 MAG 375HP 480TQ COMPARED TO 426HEMI 427HP 490TQ HEMI average second faster at 60 but same to 1/2 or less at the 1/4mile average is 13.5
same gears same car...o almost forgot mph for the 440 was even faster than the hemi in some time slips (hard to know,some drags go up hill some down hill.)
other note old HP and TQ lists were at the crank not mutiplied threw gears and such.
HP is a made up term that has used TQ and rpm to be applied to real world stats ie: real horses can pull stated weight....transfered to what we now know as HP(HP is not a universal equation like TQ to mass is) NASA could beem our HP definition all over the univers but without our made up equation no intelignt lifeforms are going to understand it.(specialy if they spell like i do)
As for the p-car and the viper were they make the hp and tq is the story not thier top #s
but as you point out looks like david and goliath by thier #s but not so differant on the track.
Here is simple rule to move an object with leverage, ie; gearing you do not need streagth all you need is leverage and little to no power...but if you want to move it fast...yes you need power!
ALL THAT SAID I WISH MY CAR TO HAVE MORE HP!!!!!!!
or may be lower gears....hehehe
07-08-2006, 01:28 PM
#27
Burning Brakes
Mark thanks for taking the time for the phyisics lesson, i still cant seem to get around the simple fact that the basic premis of any object that moves from a dead stop has to use TQ to accelerate..it is my basic understanding of what TQ and HP is that may be giving me trouble. (or not) if i take your lesson above and transpose my meaning of TQ to your def, of HP it all makes perfect sence to me...so i guess my deslecsia has gone deeper then i thought!
AGAIN thanks for the time spent! And great RACE STORY you posted...still trying to watch the whole vid. im on dial up.....
2.20 gears to 3.09 thats not a slight dif and will afect engine speed hence were the power will be, have done the change with mopars and 4x4s.... realy needed with big tires(28'' tire to 35'' tire will need gear change to keep rpm and power in the usable range) im just not sure what kind of diferance it will have in the 81 928...is it worth the $$
AGAIN thanks for the time spent! And great RACE STORY you posted...still trying to watch the whole vid. im on dial up.....
2.20 gears to 3.09 thats not a slight dif and will afect engine speed hence were the power will be, have done the change with mopars and 4x4s.... realy needed with big tires(28'' tire to 35'' tire will need gear change to keep rpm and power in the usable range) im just not sure what kind of diferance it will have in the 81 928...is it worth the $$
07-08-2006, 02:51 PM
#28
Inventor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Theory is all well and good, but you have to qualify it with real world constraints. 928's don't have 6-speed gearboxes! So you need torque to fill in the blanks. Note that the S4 flappy is a torque switch (which raises the HP peak too).
HP is great. But we like 928's because they are Gran Turismos, and have a V8, not a boxer six.
...
In my current state of tune (5+ degrees cam advance, variable to 3), my little 4.5 has over 200rwtq at 3000rpm, which is on par or better than all of the higher HP engines, even turbos or CS. Paired with the three speed torque converter I get a flash torque of over 250rwtq or more on takeoff!
No rev'ing up before launch, no destracting shifting, just stab 'n steer!
HP is great. But we like 928's because they are Gran Turismos, and have a V8, not a boxer six.
...
In my current state of tune (5+ degrees cam advance, variable to 3), my little 4.5 has over 200rwtq at 3000rpm, which is on par or better than all of the higher HP engines, even turbos or CS. Paired with the three speed torque converter I get a flash torque of over 250rwtq or more on takeoff!No rev'ing up before launch, no destracting shifting, just stab 'n steer!
07-08-2006, 02:56 PM
#29
Rennlist Member
no problem!
Dont worry, your not alone. f=ma is still true, at all speeds even at a stand still at a launch. BUT, the force, has to be looked at from the wheels perspective. so, you can do one of two things. take the torque curve, at a rpm range and multipy the values times the gear ratios. (Say 3.09:1 in the sub-first on a 928 which would be 12.6:1)that gives you X torque to 39mph (redline in that new 3.09 sub first gear) at the next shift, you are at a ratio actually slightly taller than the stock 928 S4 1st gear. this is where the trade off begins. bottom line, after the launch of the 3.09, the gears all stack up pretty close, so there is no real difference, all the way to 5th gear. (which would be 3.09 vs the stock S4 of 3.2:1 in 4th gear which is also very close) in drag racing, the question is whether the extra gear 0-39mph could "hook up" vs a stock 1st gear that takes you to 55mph with no extra shift in there. I pointed everyone to a GREAT similator which you plug in your torque curve numbers and gear ratios with weights, and other factors and simulate a 1/4mile drag run. it even gives you a slip factor too! you get Gs of acceleration for every single speed increment, times to many distances along the way. check it out:
Now, you can do it that way, where you have multiplied torques, to get final forces at the rear wheel, or you can just look where you operate your car in the HP range and get all the answers there.
the problem that most folks have with this , is that they fail to realize that its the rear wheel torque through the gears that creates the force in (f=ma).
engine torque values are totally meaningless without a rpm attached to them.
Formula 1 cars have less than 250ft-lbs of torque at the engine, but because they rev to 19,000rpm the torque at the rear wheels at any speed, including launch, is the same as 1000hp big block chevy with 1000ft-lbs of torque .
at launch, the chevy would drop the clutch at 3000rpm and the F1 would dump the clutch at 12,000rpm. Both will have the same torque to the rear wheels providing the hp curves are the same shape. (which they are not, but you get the point) If you understand this, you get it!
Its misunderstood by the racing community as well. Look at all the hype of the Lemans winning R10 diesel vs the R8 gas engine . both 650hp, but one has 820ft-lbs of torque and they were talking that it would be tough on tires and hard to manage at the slow corners. Dead wrong. 650hp vs 650hp will produce the same torque at the rear wheels at any speed. the only diff, is the Diesel has a flatter HP curve vs the peaky hp curve of the R8. but, again, the closer gear ratios of the R8 makes up for that completely. the only spot where Audi had to make things tougher, was in the clutch, transmission, but not at the CV and tire areas where the forces would be the same. Publically, the manufacturer, drivers and others got this 1/2 wrong. the main gain was a more fuel effient engine, with lower rpms that could lower wear in the engine, at the cost of a higher weight engine due to its component weights being greater. The funny part of the Audi R10 was the fact that in actuallity, it got a HP increase over the R8 which was said to have only 550hp at the end of last season. the new R10 diesel ended up with 650hp (or greater) and broke all the records...... wow, big surprise. The racing world can be a real joke sometimes!!
as a side note, the real way to keep your car in the power range is with close ratio gear boxes, not just rear end selections. for a given spaced gear set, you chose the rear end for a particular range of operation. sure, if you do not change the rear end, and you go from a 25" tire to a 35" tire, you are shifting up this operational range. certainly it will hurt your out of the hole speed and acceleration in 1st gear. the change on a 928 is suspect to actual results of that car being able to utilize the 12:6:1 1st gear out of the hole with street tires. I have my doubts. especially have my doubts due to folks that have the 3.09 and have used it on the track and talked about how much they like it. ha ha. I have to laugh, as we talked about, after that new "sub 1st" the rest of the gears all match up with the ratios of a stock S4 (close enough) perception is reality, so they are right , the new 2nd is REAL quick, but other than the gear shift lever selection position, the old 1st gear at that same speed range is actually a bit quicker! try to explain this, and its like banging your head against the wall. some folks just dont understand the basics!
Hope this helps
MK
Dont worry, your not alone. f=ma is still true, at all speeds even at a stand still at a launch. BUT, the force, has to be looked at from the wheels perspective. so, you can do one of two things. take the torque curve, at a rpm range and multipy the values times the gear ratios. (Say 3.09:1 in the sub-first on a 928 which would be 12.6:1)that gives you X torque to 39mph (redline in that new 3.09 sub first gear) at the next shift, you are at a ratio actually slightly taller than the stock 928 S4 1st gear. this is where the trade off begins. bottom line, after the launch of the 3.09, the gears all stack up pretty close, so there is no real difference, all the way to 5th gear. (which would be 3.09 vs the stock S4 of 3.2:1 in 4th gear which is also very close) in drag racing, the question is whether the extra gear 0-39mph could "hook up" vs a stock 1st gear that takes you to 55mph with no extra shift in there. I pointed everyone to a GREAT similator which you plug in your torque curve numbers and gear ratios with weights, and other factors and simulate a 1/4mile drag run. it even gives you a slip factor too! you get Gs of acceleration for every single speed increment, times to many distances along the way. check it out:
Now, you can do it that way, where you have multiplied torques, to get final forces at the rear wheel, or you can just look where you operate your car in the HP range and get all the answers there.
the problem that most folks have with this , is that they fail to realize that its the rear wheel torque through the gears that creates the force in (f=ma).
engine torque values are totally meaningless without a rpm attached to them.
Formula 1 cars have less than 250ft-lbs of torque at the engine, but because they rev to 19,000rpm the torque at the rear wheels at any speed, including launch, is the same as 1000hp big block chevy with 1000ft-lbs of torque .
at launch, the chevy would drop the clutch at 3000rpm and the F1 would dump the clutch at 12,000rpm. Both will have the same torque to the rear wheels providing the hp curves are the same shape. (which they are not, but you get the point) If you understand this, you get it!
Its misunderstood by the racing community as well. Look at all the hype of the Lemans winning R10 diesel vs the R8 gas engine . both 650hp, but one has 820ft-lbs of torque and they were talking that it would be tough on tires and hard to manage at the slow corners. Dead wrong. 650hp vs 650hp will produce the same torque at the rear wheels at any speed. the only diff, is the Diesel has a flatter HP curve vs the peaky hp curve of the R8. but, again, the closer gear ratios of the R8 makes up for that completely. the only spot where Audi had to make things tougher, was in the clutch, transmission, but not at the CV and tire areas where the forces would be the same. Publically, the manufacturer, drivers and others got this 1/2 wrong. the main gain was a more fuel effient engine, with lower rpms that could lower wear in the engine, at the cost of a higher weight engine due to its component weights being greater. The funny part of the Audi R10 was the fact that in actuallity, it got a HP increase over the R8 which was said to have only 550hp at the end of last season. the new R10 diesel ended up with 650hp (or greater) and broke all the records...... wow, big surprise. The racing world can be a real joke sometimes!!
as a side note, the real way to keep your car in the power range is with close ratio gear boxes, not just rear end selections. for a given spaced gear set, you chose the rear end for a particular range of operation. sure, if you do not change the rear end, and you go from a 25" tire to a 35" tire, you are shifting up this operational range. certainly it will hurt your out of the hole speed and acceleration in 1st gear. the change on a 928 is suspect to actual results of that car being able to utilize the 12:6:1 1st gear out of the hole with street tires. I have my doubts. especially have my doubts due to folks that have the 3.09 and have used it on the track and talked about how much they like it. ha ha. I have to laugh, as we talked about, after that new "sub 1st" the rest of the gears all match up with the ratios of a stock S4 (close enough) perception is reality, so they are right , the new 2nd is REAL quick, but other than the gear shift lever selection position, the old 1st gear at that same speed range is actually a bit quicker! try to explain this, and its like banging your head against the wall. some folks just dont understand the basics!
Hope this helps
MK
Originally Posted by tommytomaso
Mark thanks for taking the time for the phyisics lesson, i still cant seem to get around the simple fact that the basic premis of any object that moves from a dead stop has to use TQ to accelerate..it is my basic understanding of what TQ and HP is that may be giving me trouble. (or not) if i take your lesson above and transpose my meaning of TQ to your def, of HP it all makes perfect sence to me...so i guess my deslecsia has gone deeper then i thought!
AGAIN thanks for the time spent! And great RACE STORY you posted...still trying to watch the whole vid. im on dial up.....
2.20 gears to 3.09 thats not a slight dif and will afect engine speed hence were the power will be, have done the change with mopars and 4x4s.... realy needed with big tires(28'' tire to 35'' tire will need gear change to keep rpm and power in the usable range) im just not sure what kind of diferance it will have in the 81 928...is it worth the $$
AGAIN thanks for the time spent! And great RACE STORY you posted...still trying to watch the whole vid. im on dial up.....
2.20 gears to 3.09 thats not a slight dif and will afect engine speed hence were the power will be, have done the change with mopars and 4x4s.... realy needed with big tires(28'' tire to 35'' tire will need gear change to keep rpm and power in the usable range) im just not sure what kind of diferance it will have in the 81 928...is it worth the $$
07-08-2006, 02:58 PM
#30
Administrator - "Tyson"
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Originally Posted by tommytomaso
Hacker, on the gear thing for real, in your opinion if topspeed isnt your aim did the gear change for the time and money spent, make a large enough improvement, or was the blower a beter bang for the buck? with the 81 auto i have, id rather have beter low speed responce then my 130 topspeed.
im not sure what my curant gears are 2.23s?
im not sure what my curant gears are 2.23s?
As for bang for the buck - the blower is worth every penny, even on a US 16V. I have less into this car than a nice 5-speed S4 sells for and my car has more power, lighter weight.
If it were not for my loud exhaust, it would be quite the sleeper.