First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List Re: physics 160 book v.s. common sense (Danny) by "ROY D LUMSDEN" <rlumsden@tampabay.rr.com> Re: physics 160 book v.s. common sense by "ROY D LUMSDEN" <rlumsden@tampabay.rr.com> Re: physics 160 book v.s. common sense by "ROY D LUMSDEN" <rlumsden@tampabay.rr.com> Re: clock repair by "Bob Trimpe" <trimpe@fuse.net> Re: what is the odds by "Brian Sargent" <bjsbird1@yahoo.com> Re: Firebird-L Digest #1726 by "Brian Sargent" <bjsbird1@yahoo.com> Re: Hey Joe (was: Is it spring yet ?) by "Joe Brown" <jb.pb@gte.net> Re: Sub frame connectors by "Joe Brown" <jb.pb@gte.net> RE: physics 160 book v.s. common sense by "Mark Wurtzel" <mwurtzel@flash.net> Rear end options by "Mark Wurtzel" <mwurtzel@flash.net>
(back) Subject: Re: physics 160 book v.s. common sense (Danny) From: "ROY D LUMSDEN" <rlumsden@tampabay.rr.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:12:57 -0500 Danny, I'm soooo sorry. I wasn't calling YOU an "egg head book worm", I was referring to your TEACHER and his statement about skinny tires versus wide tires. After re-reading my statement, I can see how it must appeared. = Those who have been part of this list a long time know that I would never intentionally blast a fellow list member. Please, accept my apology. Roy ----- Original Message ----- From: "danny" <dannyboylll@qwest.net> To: "First Generation Firebird-L" <Firebird-L@oakmediacreations.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 12:44 AM Subject: RE: physics 160 book v.s. common sense (Roy) > First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List > = ......................................................................... > hey ROY you don't have to call me an egghead bookworm. i'm sorry, but i > don't think that you know me so you don't need to be insulting me. i = would > never insult someone that i didn't know. i am sorry if you don;t like my > posts. if you really don't like what i say just delete the email. or have > me kicked off the list. its that easy. i thought the topic was an > interesting one i am sorry that you don't think the same. OK... now i will > answer your example. you have a very good point. and yes my example = did > exclude many variables. i am sure that temperature of the tire makes a huge > difference (burnouts raise this) the surface of the road can very = greatly. > but one thing you mentioned was that the surface of the road would = provide > less traction if the small grooves and holes were filled with melted = tire > rubber. I have been out of the "labratory" a few times (been going to > dragraces for 12 years) and i have noticed that the point on the strip where > the cars launch seems very smooth from the hundreds and hundreds of launches > that have occured there. so would a car launch better on the surface of > that dragstrip or would it be faster at a normal stop light that didn't have > that smooth surface? -danny 68 400 coupe. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Firebird-L@oakmediacreations.com > [mailto:Firebird-L@oakmediacreations.com]On Behalf Of ROY D LUMSDEN > Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 7:50 PM > To: First Generation Firebird-L > Subject: Re: physics 160 book v.s. common sense > > > First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List > = ......................................................................... > That was another typical "theoretical" response from some egghead book worm > who has never ventured outside his test lab. What he says is true if no > other factors are used. But, let's look at the history of drag racing. = The > first "slicks" were truck tires that had the grooved tread shaved off. They > used these for a number of reasons. Two of the reasons were: one, the taller > tires added gearing to final drive ratio and; two, they were wider and > spread the load over a large area to -- gain traction. > > "Huh?" you say, "How did number two work?" . > > Well, let's look at the road surface. It's not perfectly smooth like the > laboratory table, as a mater of fact, it's rather rough and porous. A = thin > tire will spin and the road surface will fill with rubber from the = melting > tire, when the pores are full of hot melted rubber, the surface tension > (i.e., friction) is reduced and grip is lost. However, if you spread = that > over a larger area (i.e., reduce the surface tension per square inch by > spreading the pressure), it takes longer to fill and the surface tension is > maintained longer. The longer you can maintain the surface tension, the > faster you'll launch. Theories are for perfect worlds... not = practicality. > > Roy > > >
(back) Subject: Re: physics 160 book v.s. common sense From: "ROY D LUMSDEN" <rlumsden@tampabay.rr.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:17:45 -0500 Hummm, I think it's a matter of semantics. How about: "A taller tire allow for more top end speed" Roy ----- Original Message ----- From: <Paddy68@aol.com> To: <Firebird-L@oakmediacreations.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 2:08 AM Subject: Re: physics 160 book v.s. common sense > First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List > = ......................................................................... > rlumsden wrote: > <snip>Two of the reasons were: one, the taller > tires added gearing to final drive ratio > > Actually, the taller the tire, the less the final gear ratio. > >
(back) Subject: Re: physics 160 book v.s. common sense From: "ROY D LUMSDEN" <rlumsden@tampabay.rr.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:20:54 -0500 What your saying is true. But, Have you ever noticed the profile of drag racing slicks? The grow taller and more narrow at higher RPMs. I'm not = sure if the foot print changes at high speed (i.e., at the end of the run). = Maybe some of there veteran drag racers on the list can tell me. Roy ----- Original Message ----- From: <Paddy68@aol.com> To: <Firebird-L@oakmediacreations.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 2:25 AM Subject: Re: physics 160 book v.s. common sense > First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List > = ......................................................................... > Here's a thought to ponder, > > All the theory brought forth in this discussion has been about launching = a > car from a stand still. What I am about to introduce is a whole = different > question. What happens to surface area and friction laws once the car = has > been launched and is on it's way down that 1320? Once the suspension = has > done it's job and the car is off and on it's way, the larger the tire, = the > more friction. To me that means more friction...less speed. A smaller tire > will create less friction and thus more MPH. Take a look at the NMCA Super > Street cars. These cars are running in the seven's all day long on = 10.5" > tires at 3000 lbs. The Pro Street Cars are running in the six's with = 16" + > treads. These Pro Street cars are also 2800 lbs and less; with 200 more CI > than the SS cars. Bottom line...If you have the suspension figured out, the > car will go fast. Faster on smaller tires at the big end I think. I = have a > Marketing degree though. I just call 'em like I see 'em. BTW...The = Earth > isn't flat? LOL >
(back) Subject: Re: clock repair From: "Bob Trimpe" <trimpe@fuse.net> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:50:37 -0500 Check with Peter Serio at: http://www.precisionpontiac.com/ He did my rally gauges. Bob Trimpe Chris Porter wrote: > First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List > = ......................................................................... > O.K. all, I remember talking about factory clock's a while > ago. I just searched the FAQ's, could find the answer I > need. Where can I have my clock serviced ? I cleaned the > point's, no help. If I manuely start the wheel that > control's the second hand ( with the tensioner tensioned > <<<(yikes ) ), it will tick off 5-10 second's, thats it. > Anybody point me in the correct direction ? Can an ordinary > clock shop work on these ? 2- I remember somebody in this > list saying they "refaced" some rally guages, can it be done > on the clock's ? Thanks. > > Chris >
(back) Subject: Re: what is the odds From: "Brian Sargent" <bjsbird1@yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 18:47:00 -0800 (PST) Daniel, My front discs were sticking on my 69 conv. last year. It turned out to be the seal boot between the power brake booster and the master cylinder had split and wasbinding up the push rod which was not allowing the front brakes to release fully. Just a thought. Brian --- Daniel <poncho40@sga.quik.com> wrote: > First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List > .......................................................................... > my 79 trans am has been pulling to the left for a > few days now on the > way to town this morning i pulled over and the brake > caliper was > sticking on the passenger side or my car on the way > home the left side > did it brakes really stink when they are hot!!! > what do you think > the odds are of both front calipers going bad that > close together????? > thanks Daniel Ray > > __________________________________________________ Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
(back) Subject: Re: Firebird-L Digest #1726 From: "Brian Sargent" <bjsbird1@yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 19:01:05 -0800 (PST) Brett, Welcome aboard! Although this is not the place to push the WWF Club, it's a great support group to those of us with 1st gen birds. Like on this board, we in the Pacific NW try to be there for our fellow Bird owners. I live in Kirkland, would love to see your Bird if you drive it to work. Brian 69 conv. Check us out at www.firebirdclub.com --- JGeigel@aol.com wrote: > First Generation Firebird-L Mailing List > .......................................................................... > Brett, > > I'm also here in the Seattle area. Brian, Chris and > I are all part of the > Western Washington Firebird Club. Over 150+ > families involved with many > people having two or more birds. My bet is that we > have more 1st gen birds > than any local club in the country. Need parts??? > Most of mine come from > within the club . > > See ya > Joe Geigel > > __________________________________________________ Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
(back) Subject: Re: Hey Joe (was: Is it spring yet ?) From: "Joe Brown" <jb.pb@gte.net> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 22:33:15 -0800 Roy : It is not finished yet , I will find a way to send you a picture , I do not have an digital camera . Plus I want to show them on this site . Joe
(back) Subject: Re: Sub frame connectors From: "Joe Brown" <jb.pb@gte.net> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 22:49:28 -0800 John : I bought my headers from Jet Hot , they look great and keep under hood temp down at least 20 degrees , plus after they are hot you can touch them after ten minutes of cooling . I do not know if they have equal = length headers round port but worth a try . www.jethot.com Joe
(back) Subject: RE: physics 160 book v.s. common sense From: "Mark Wurtzel" <mwurtzel@flash.net> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:47:20 -0800 Roy wrote: > What your saying is true. But, Have you ever noticed the profile of drag > racing slicks? The grow taller and more narrow at higher RPMs. > I'm not sure > if the foot print changes at high speed (i.e., at the end of the > run). Maybe > some of there veteran drag racers on the list can tell me. I'm certainly not a veteran drag racer but I can tell you from discussing this issue with crew members for a funny car team that is exactly what happens. Tire construction and pressure are _very _ important as, basically, they want the tire to have a smaller OD (hence a lower "final" final drive ratio!) with a large contact patch initially. As the car accelerates, the tire OD grows (effectively increasing the final drive ratio) as the motor can "pull" a higher gear ratio. Also as less traction is needed to prevent wheel spin as the cars speed increases, the tire can have a smaller contact patch. This is accomplished by the tire getting narrower at the same time it is getting. The narrower tire has less friction allowing more of the engines power to accelerate the car vs. overcoming the "drag" or frictional losses of pulling the wider tires down the road. Another reason for using this sort of tire is so that they can get by with only a 2 speed gear box. Shifting gears takes valuable time so they want = to make as few gear changes as possible. Having the tires grow, which effectively changes the final drive ratio, sort of replaces the need for = an extra gear and resulting gear change. Clutch slippage is yet another factor that needs to be factored into this equation as well as it has a significant effect on how fast the tires = spin, and thus "grow". Please note that I am not an engineer and the terms used above are merely colloquial descriptions, but I hope this makes the general concept clear!! An interesting side note is that these guys told me that traction on the launch is by far their biggest concern. Since they have from 6,000-7,000 horsepower(!) out of their motors, clutch set up and tire selection and pressures are what typically wins and loses races for them. This varies = not only from track to track but also with environmental changes through out = the day at the same tracks. This is one of the primary reasons they went to a data acquisition system, so as to have more concrete date to base these choices on. FWIW, Mark
(back) Subject: Rear end options From: "Mark Wurtzel" <mwurtzel@flash.net> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:11:48 -0800 Is there a site some where that list what rear end options were available for what cars? I tried searching the FAQ's but could not find anything. It may be in my manual but I do not have it hand so was hoping maybe = someone knew of a site with this information. Specifically, I am interested in what rear end options were offered for a 1968 convertible with a 350 2 bbl carb, non-ac. Any help would be most appreciated! thanks, Mark