|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
It's easier to get good 60' times with smaller diameter tires.
Especially with lower power cars and small diameter tires. (i.e. little to no wheel spin potential)
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,469
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,469 |
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
It's easier to get good 60' times with smaller diameter tires.
Especially with lower power cars and small diameter tires. (i.e. little to no wheel spin potential)
Please explain. I would think smaller diamater tire would have an easer time loosing traction/spin because
A. contact patch is smaller
B. Smaller tire equals more rpm effectavly giving more torque at the wheels at a gives engine speed.(if that makes anysense)
98 csvt t-red.. sho-shop intake, b&m, fidanza, spec1 clutch, Torsen, DMD,optimized Y& TB, Brullen, rear strut bar,h&r's,17" konig traffik's.
"I say what I mean and I do what i say"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,106
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,106 |
2.13 60'
Mods worth mentioning - Poly mount inserts, Koni/Eibach, LSD, 225/45/16 tires.
Mark
2000 Black CSVT
3.0L Hybrid - 206fwhp & 195fwtq
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by dubkatz:
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
It's easier to get good 60' times with smaller diameter tires.
Especially with lower power cars and small diameter tires. (i.e. little to no wheel spin potential)
Please explain. I would think smaller diamater tire would have an easer time loosing traction/spin because
A. contact patch is smaller
B. Smaller tire equals more rpm effectavly giving more torque at the wheels at a gives engine speed.(if that makes anysense)
A. Diameter and width are not the same thing.
B. Which would make an ATX launch better due to getting "free" stall rpm and an MTX require a slip from a lower rpm point.
Yes the higher effective final drive ratio would make it easier to spin the tires. Hence my second statement. 
However if you don't spin the tires significantly the short times will improve. That doesn't mean the entire run is better on shorter tire though. My statement was that it is "easier" to generate quicker 60' times on shorter tires.
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,356
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,356 |
Originally posted by 2.3Turbochicken:
I pulled a 2.23 outta the fiance's near stock atx se
How?? What was your time for that run??
The best 60' time i've cut with my ATX is a 2.58 with a run of 16.4 @ 85mph...
1999 Mystique LS V6
Alpine CDA-9807, Rear deck sub, Opt. TB, K&N RU-3530/MAF adaptor, custom heatshield, FSVT 17's, SCT 4-program chip, Eibach's/ST200's, Hella Fogs...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,469
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,469 |
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
Originally posted by dubkatz:
Originally posted by DemonSVT:
It's easier to get good 60' times with smaller diameter tires.
Especially with lower power cars and small diameter tires. (i.e. little to no wheel spin potential)
Please explain. I would think smaller diamater tire would have an easer time loosing traction/spin because
A. contact patch is smaller
B. Smaller tire equals more rpm effectavly giving more torque at the wheels at a gives engine speed.(if that makes anysense)
A. Diameter and width are not the same thing.
B. Which would make an ATX launch better due to getting "free" stall rpm and an MTX require a slip from a lower rpm point.
Yes the higher effective final drive ratio would make it easier to spin the tires. Hence my second statement.
However if you don't spin the tires significantly the short times will improve. That doesn't mean the entire run is better on shorter tire though. My statement was that it is "easier" to generate quicker 60' times on shorter tires.
that makes sense,
I understand width is diff. from diameter. But if you had a 10" diameter tire and a 24" the 24" would have alot more rubber contacting the ground. Obviously the diff. between say a 205/55/16 and a 205/45/16 is prob less than a .5" and would most liklely make zero impact on traction. It was just a thought, and now im just trying to prove im not a complete idiot 
98 csvt t-red.. sho-shop intake, b&m, fidanza, spec1 clutch, Torsen, DMD,optimized Y& TB, Brullen, rear strut bar,h&r's,17" konig traffik's.
"I say what I mean and I do what i say"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by dubkatz:
I understand width is diff. from diameter. But if you had a 10" diameter tire and a 24" the 24" would have alot more rubber contacting the ground.
How do you figure that?
For instance take the following:
225/50-16 & 225/45-16 tires
Both have the same tread width which is almost directly comparable to contact patch.
The 45 series tire is 1" smaller in diameter respectively.
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 10,015
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 10,015 |
The larger the tire diameter the "flatter" it acts as it contacts the road, so he is right in saying the the contact patch is larger on a bigger diameter tire - if you assume that there is the same amount of tire deflection on both tires.
2000 SVT Turbo 295hp/269ftlb@12psi
#1 for Bendix Brakes Kits!
Knuckles rebuilt w/new bearings $55
AUSSIE ENDLINKS $70
Gutted pre-cats $80/set
A lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,055
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,055 |
Originally posted by 99Mystique ATX:
Originally posted by 2.3Turbochicken:
I pulled a 2.23 outta the fiance's near stock atx se
How?? What was your time for that run??
The best 60' time i've cut with my ATX is a 2.58 with a run of 16.4 @ 85mph...
16.1@88. sticky tires pulling the ebrake to launch
Derek Johnson
88 TurboTBird 32psi, t3/t4 bb 50trim, megasquirt, 3 bar map, 50lb inj, roller cam w adj. gear, header, 3" downpipe and full exhaust, gutted intake manifolds, spec stg 3
95SE 3L gone
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by Stazi:
The larger the tire diameter the "flatter" it acts as it contacts the road, so he is right in saying the the contact patch is larger on a bigger diameter tire - if you assume that there is the same amount of tire deflection on both tires.
On his comparison (10" vs 24") it would be a notable difference.
However between a 24" & 25" tire the difference is going to be fairly negligable.
75.4" & 78.5" circumference respectively.
Let's take an average of .125 Pi radians or 22.5 degrees of rubber contact. Which would be on the high side.
That would be 4.72" & 4.9" or a 3.6% difference using the high end of the spectrum. A more realistic number would be around the 3% range.
For reference the difference in tread width alone between a 215 and 225 series tire is 4.7% That's not including the difference in diameter on top of that.
Hence my point was that the difference in the tire diameters we were talking about would have no significant effect on the contact patch.
His example had less then 1/2" difference or roughly under 1.5% difference in maximum contact area.
This doesn't even bring up tread pattern. That can have a much greater effect on actual contact area.
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
