Re: Drive shafts. Very weird.

From: Tim Berry (coolva1@home.com)
Date: Thu Feb 03 2000 - 18:49:37 EST


I was under my brother-in-laws Trans Am (99) changing the rear fluid, and
lemme tell ya,,, if you want some ideas on how to strengthen up some crap,
look under one of these babys... Standard Real Traction Bars (From axle, to
frame) What appeared to be something to keep the transmission and rear rock
solid (big long metal thing goin from tranny to rear) 2 bars in a sideways V
shape from the rear tires.... There is wayyyy to much crap on the T/A... If
you are lookin for strength, or what ever on anything... get under one...
you will be quite amazed =-)
__________________________________________________________
Tim Berry -- Chesapeake, VA
`97 SLT 318 auto CC 2x4 LSD:
Dual Exaust w/Flowmaster, Homemade K&N GEN II, 16" Electric Fan
180 T-stat, Accel 8.5's, Lakewood Traction Bars, F&B Stage 1 TB
ASP Pullies (Crank/Alt), Trans Go Shift Kit, BFG 275/60's, Hypertech PTM
BEST 1/4 15.836 @ 84.93 MPH (exaust, 180 stat, and wires only...)
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stlaurent Mr Steven" <STLAURENTS@mctssa.usmc.mil>
To: <dakota-truck@buffnet.net>
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2000 3:55 PM
Subject: RE: DML: Drive shafts. Very weird.

> Less inertia means less HP lost. There seems to be a 10-22 percent lost
to
> the rear wheel due to the transmission, drive shaft and rear gearing.
>
> Another thought is the shorter the drive shaft less flexing on the shaft
to
> produce rear wheel HP.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Steven St.Laurent
> Test Engineer
> Test Branch, GSD,MCTSSA
> MARCORSYSCOM, US Marine Corps
> mailto:stlaurents@mctssa.usmc.mil (work)
> mailto:Saint1958@home.com (home)
> Office: (760) 725-2296
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Schwall [mailto:mschwall@flash.net]
> Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2000 12:06 PM
> To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
> Subject: Re: DML: Drive shafts. Very weird.
>
> At 11:01 AM 2/3/2000 -0600, you wrote:
> >Hey Dester,
> >
> >Do you have a steel 2-PIECE driveshaft, with a CV boot type thing at the
> >joint? If so, lookout! The boot has been known to grenade at speeds
> >over 90 mph, and the one piece, NASCAR approved aluminum shaft is DC's
> >fix. Anybody's head hurt yet? Here we go...
> >
> >The aluminum shaft may not provide any gain over the steel one - it's
> >all about second moment or inertia, or how much energy it takes to "spin
> >up" something. A shaft with a larger OD will take more energy to spin
> >up to a certain RPM than a smaller one, given they are the same material
> >and wall thickness. The larger shaft, if made of a light enough
> >material may have an second moment equal to the smaller shaft of heavier
> >material.
> >
> >So what I'm saying is that the larger diameter aluminum log may not free
> >up horsies compared to the smaller diameter steel unit.
> >
> >Yah?
> >Cale
> >98cc318sporty
>
>
> Wheels are turning.... I see your angle, but even if the aluminum is
> thicker, it is still lighter than the stock steel. So the rotational mass
> of the aluminum is still less than the smaller steel, so the force
required
> to overcome the inertia is still less, thus allowing more horses to go to
> the rear end. Ever seen carbon fiber driveshafts. They have a large OD,
> but they are extremely light and strong. Less rotational mass (weight),
> less affect by inertia, less power wasted turning the driveshaft.
>
> Mike
>
> __________________________
> mschwall@flash.net



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 11:47:52 EDT