Brand new at this please help !

[jl222]

OK  i have another question now, and you can choose to answer it or not but i was just curious I know how important power to weight ratio is when it comes to accelerating , but what about top speed.

I know there was a bike that hit 312 mph ( bill warner) tradition motorcycle, had a bike that weighed 586 lbs with 1000 bhp.
if it was an inclosed bike like the rest of the streamliners

Would it beat a car that had a weaker power to weight ratio but more power, lets say weighed 2000 lbs with 3000 bhp? for a max speed

   Hell no

  Alcohol funny cars and dragsters are about that weight and hp and have times of 270 mph + in 1/4 of a mile.

  Now guess how many sec it takes

  Your full of BS as far as being a student unless its an online course.

          JL222

[Glen]

JL222 ya think the propster has a son??

[manta22]

Glen;

Who is going to be the last person to wise up about this?

[taper41]

I'll since I bother you guys so much I give you my word if you answer this question honestly And give me reasoning supporting your answer I will no longer post a single thing on this forum.   

I just want to know the relation of power to weight ratio to topspeed barring the same aerodynamics would a vehicle that weighs 500 lbs and has a 1000 bph or a vehicle that weighs 3000 lbs with 3000bhp have a higher top speed with no set distance

[Freud]

Most community colleges have open enrollment for the summer session.

Knowledge can come from books.

Give it try.  Then you will know who is pulling your leg.

You may also find out more than you are asking.

FREUD

[tortoise]

I'll since I bother you guys so much I give you my word if you answer this question honestly And give me reasoning supporting your answer I will no longer post a single thing on this forum.

It's not a matter of verbal reasoning, but calculation. You don't understand the simplest math so there's no point. Can't you see that?

I just want to know the relation of power to weight ratio to topspeed barring the same aerodynamics would a vehicle that weighs 500 lbs and has a 1000 bph or a vehicle that weighs 3000 lbs with 3000bhp have a higher top speed with no set distance

This would be a very simple question for you to answer for yourself if you had absorbed what you've already been told.

Complete your homework and I'll continue helping you, unless the moderator decides to ban you, which would be justified.

[rgn]

I think I just heard the bell for recess.FREUD

Thank you Freud to you and your crew for sharing the artesian intricacies of your liner build.  Highly inspirational… Thanks!

.....did someone say RUMBLE! 

Heavens no!  A discussion pertaining to the physics of the absorption of kinetic energy perhaps.

Every one who replied-participated in this thread has brought something positive into it, bar one individual (the author) who has contributed nothing in the way of opinion, insight or constructive view.   

Rightly or wrongly I have taken it upon myself to comment regarding the condescending nature of the author’s posts.  His reply to my last observation was nothing more than a vexed and feigned apology consistent with prior behavior; it and its contained insult were to be expected.

To think that he may contribute to the sport in the future is fraught, as up to this point he has given nothing of himself, nor expressed an insight or an original thought. 

He is know on the AFI Aprilia forum, under the same name, where he is always asking people to go to the trouble of posting information for him (bike comparisons for example) that he is to lazy to source for himself.

I believe rx7tt95 has the right idea in relation to this fellow:  (this is a quote from a member on the Aprilia forum)     

Put Taper41 on your ignore list...it makes life much more enjoyable.

[taper41]

Ignore away .... I'm not begging anyone to listen to me

Im not asking anyone to do research, just if they know the answer, to tell me , and if your one that doesn't want to then thats fine.

[taper41]

View Profile Email Personal Message (Online)
   


This was my test that I used

drag and frontal area stayed constant throughout the whole test . drag was .34 and front area was 12 ft/squared

vehicle a     

drag = .34
frontal area = 12 ft/2
weight= 586 lbs
horsepower= 1000 bhp
power to weight= .586 lbs per 1bhp

TOP SPEED = 330.81

vehicle b

drag= .34
frontal area= 12 ft/2
weight= 3000 lbs
horsepower= 3000 bhp
power to weight ratio= 1 lbs per 1bhp

TOP SPEED = 459.31

vehicle A has much better power to weight ratio than vehicle B
vehicle B has much higher top speed than vehicle A

conclusion:
although vehicle a has a better power to weight ratio than vehicle b , vehicle b has a much higher top speed.
therefore showing that the power to weight ratio has a very little affect on top speed performance and that having more power is of much more importance to top speed performance

Now that I did my own work , can someone check it over and tell me if I'm right or wrong.

[tortoise]

conclusion:
although vehicle a has a better power to weight ratio than vehicle b , vehicle b has a much higher top speed.
therefore showing that the power to weight ratio has a very little affect on top speed performance and that having more power is of much more importance to top speed performance

What online calculator did you use?
I wouldn't pay too much attention to the specific numbers, but the general conclusion is OK, as far as it goes. The course of unlimited length, however, does not exist.

[taper41]

so, the answer to my question which was which vehicle would have the higher top end, vehicle a that weighs 500 lbs and has 1000bhp, or vehicle b that weighs 3000 lbs and has 3000 bhp, is
 
vehicle b ?

[tortoise]

so, the answer to my question which was which vehicle would have the higher top end, vehicle a that weighs 500 lbs and has 1000bhp, or vehicle b that weighs 3000 lbs and has 3000 bhp, is
 
vehicle b ?

I said you had it right.  But a real vehicle has just a few more details than power, weight, CdA and frontal area. When you say vehicle b would be faster, you're making a lot of unwarranted assumptions.

[taper41]

I understand, which is why I stated that all other variables would remain constant and equal between the two.

Ok I'm done asking questions now .

[Freud]

Me thinks you have made many people happy now.

FREUD

[Rex Schimmer]

Interesting how he can add 2+2 and get peanut butter.

Rex