5spd GT said:That quote doesn't mean anything and doesn't even go along with what your trying to point out. The engine revs quicker when gears are added and if your clutch is already having slipping problems...well guess what: "that could be the straw that breaks the camels back" Gears (under traction) will be harder on the driveline. Very simple process.
jstreet0204 said:You've yet to back a single thing you've said, and continue to pull this info out of your ass, so I'm not going to bother explaining to you anymore. Take a physics class, then maybe you'll grasp the concepts. BTW the answer to the question was Inertia Load which is much harder on an engine at high rpm than the friction caused by the rings on the cyl walls.
crew_dawg16 said:Just because the engine revs faster doesn't mean the clutch will slip. I'm quite sure that the clutch would be more likely to slip with more load and less revs than more revs and less load.
crew_dawg16 said:And the fact that you cannot grasp the concept of mechanical advantage in the form of torque multiplication is simply stunning given your post count.
crew_dawg16 said:I mean, c'mon, someone with 5,500 posts on stangnet has to know EVERYTHING by now right?
5spd GT said:Give Me TP - Why ban? A lock is fine...but on banning...no name-calling has taken place (that isn't in fun)...and no threatening or "bad" pictures are postedA nice quick lock will do the job
5spd GT said:I didn't really care what the answer was...
I'm not pulling anything out of anywhere...
So one has to take a physics class to understand physics or post on stangnet and make real world sense?
By the way I have took two classes in Physics
5spd GT said:Look in the bold: That is what I stated..."the straw that could break the camel's back". Reread what I posted...do you think some don't read the other post? I never said it would automatically slip. I said it would be more likely to slip than before the gears. All in context my friend
What is post count? I'm not for sure what your real point is here. When did I not understand mechanical advantage? They kept using this "load" deal...when the revs overcame the effiecent advantage. Then they try changing it up...I challenge them to reread all of that. If their bored of course.
Nope...
crew_dawg16 said:You stated that the lower gears (numerically higher) put more load on the drivetrain components forward of the rear-end, which is not true at all. If this was the case, the car would be slower than before due to the extra load put on the drivetrain.
crew_dawg16 said:You make no sense and remind me of another back-tracking poster that we had on here named EddieHaskell.
jstreet0204 said:You didn't make real world sense, you can't give a single thread or proof to back up anything you've said.
5spd GT said:So I need to come up with something better than a rubberband theory huh?
I haven't given a single thread or proof (confused on that anyways)...you mean post I'm assuming. That's funny...I guess if that is the case then you haven't either and where back at square one...so let's start over on this "debate"
jstreet0204 said:I've given plenty, and even tried to break down to the simplest terms with the rubberband example, which you still can't seem to comprehend. This isn't a debate over what gear is the best to choose. Laws of physics are not debatable, all of which go against the points you've tried to make.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?