Us professional trade mechanics were taught early on that extension added to drive (such as our 1/2" air wrench) was a pretty dramatic torque loss at the nut or bolt we were trying to remove. The elasticity (and energy absorption) of steel is pretty amazing.
There could be an argument that some elasticity in driveline might help traction (on the salt surface) but I believe that would be offset by loss of "torque spacing events" which can allow tires to "hook up" between power events. Those of us who watched "Star Spangled Banger" run at El Mirage will remember the purpose of that engine/drive system.
Honda certainly learned the lesson well, when they had to design their flat-track engine with similar firing pattern to Harley-Davidson. Spacing the firing events was the best way to get improved drive off of the corners.
And now, here we are all these years later, and my son just bought a Corolla GR Turbo that uses just 3 cylinders because we can now make so much power (per cylinder) that closed course lap times are better with fewer cylinders.
Electric cars will have to learn this lesson well. When I was working on the Turbo Highlander Hybrid project, many years ago, we discovered that the electric boost added to the turbocharged V6 resulted in "nearly silent" boiling of the front tires on a hard launch. If you listened carefully you might hear a slight hissing sound... but the real giveaway was the white smoke boiling through the A/C vents in the dash!
Physics is weird.
P.S. I got to thinking about this thought....I shouldn't imply that the torque result would be very significant, but "if'n" we are looking for every ounce of power, perhaps...who knows?!
P.P.S. Boy, you guys have really got my creaky old mind going.... thinking about torsional elasticity, and traction and all, I remember when the Ohio folks asked me to look at their rear tires on the streamliner. I asked for a tape measure and measured the spacing of the blisters. I then looked at the final drive ratio and told them they were spinning the electric motor in "square wave" RPM.
When we use computer generated sine waves (3 phase) we will hit an RPM where the computer is no longer fast enough to generate a clean wave. During prep of the 2004 Bonneville Prius project, I noticed that Toyota had geared the electric final drive to switch from sine wave to square wave at about 63 MPH. The initial transition to square wave shows a significant torque boost that does fade back to "normal" available output as speed increases. This makes highway passing more effective than the small engine and e-power would appear to provide (good driver feel).
I regeared the Prius final drive to put the "square wave" boost at 92 MPH which was the fastest speed my Tundra V8 could push the Prius. This gave the Prius extra "boost" to jump off the push bar.
We knew that the limited duration of full electric power (to help top speed in the 3rd mile) might result in significant speed loss during that mile (the computers will start taking engine power for recharging and not maintaining top speed). The 92 MPH option was a "just in case" we couldn't have enough "range at full draw" from the battery pack. As it turned out, we didn't need to push that hard to get the best "top speed arc graph" from the Prius. Our best runs had top speed dead in the middle of the measured mile, with entry and exit speeds nearly equal (but of course slower).
Extra battery capacity could have improved it, but we were all (SCTA included) trying to figure out a base line for "Production class" hybrids without allowing mods that could be hazardous or possibly break parts and drop sharp stuff on the course.
I realize I seem to have rambled off subject here (I'm getting old, folks) but paying attention to small details can sometimes guide us into a good plan. None of us can outsmart physics, and the sooner we accept that, the sooner we can succeed. OK...time to stop ramblingl.
