jon@dakota-truck.net wrote:
> "Josh Battles" <josh@omg-stfu.com> wrote:
> [...]
> : Don't forget, Ron's truck is a 4x4 and thus has more rolling resistance.
> : That may account for some of the difference in time between his and Bernd's
> : 2wd.
>
>
> True. It would certainly add some weight which would show up
> in the 1/4mi, but the hp and torque numbers given were both
> rear wheel, so I would expect any additional resistance due
> to the 4wd would already have been accounted for. So, I'm
> assuming Ron's engine has a little more power than Bernd's
> (at the time of comparison anyway) since the power numbers
> were basically the same, but Ron's had to go through the
> transfer case.
Not necessarily, Dakotas don't have unlocking front hubs. Granted, most
of that extra drivetrain resistance is already accounted for, however
the rolling resistance of the front wheels turning the diff and
driveshaft are not, as the dyno only measures at the rear wheels.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when you're in 2wd, all it does is
disconnect the driveshaft at the t-case.
-- - Josh Lowered 2000 Dakota CC 3.9L Above Statement Not True ^^^^^ www.omg-stfu.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 01 2005 - 10:04:31 EST