T-Bonehead, the math whiz

Max, I beleive this to be incorrect. The horse power has been reconfigured, by decreasing the RPM, and increasing the torque. Clay

you really do want another ass-kicking, don't you

please, tell us how a simple lever, with no outside influences, can 'create torque'

go ahead, Braniac, impress us

message

Jesus, Mary and Joseph, you are one dense f*ck

I said several posts ago 'the torque converter changes high-rpm /l ow torque horsepower (input) to low rpm / high torque horsepower (output)

and I never said that the transmission 'increases torque', that was your spin on it

you want me to do a google search and find out EXACTLY how many times you let your f*ck-up go uncorrected ?

WTF does this mean ?

other than that you are trying in vain to cover your stupid mistakes ?

Um, its a shaft? ok....

(Mech.) A rigid piece which is capable of turning about one point, or axis (the fulcrum), and in which are two or more other points where forces are applied; - used for transmitting and modifying force and motion. Specif., a bar of metal, wood, or other rigid substance, used to exert a pressure, or sustain a weight, at one point of its length, by receiving a force or power at a second, and turning at a third on a fixed point called a fulcrum. It is usually named as the first of the six mechanical powers, and is of three kinds, according as either the fulcrum F, the weight W, or the power P, respectively, is situated between the other two, as in the figures.

Show us the word "shaft" in that definition.

I never said a lever did not have a pivot point. In fact, the lever does have a pivot point, but that pivot point is not the lever, it is the pivot point. Don't confuse the two.

Notice how the drawing depicts the lever as attached to a shaft, sorta like I said it had to be.

Back to school with you.

Gary already explained it. I read it, you should have too.

This coming from the one that cannot figure out that a transmission doesn't produce anything, nor does it "come forth" with anything.

Keep digging.

Dammit Clay, I was busy running him around a tree just to see if he'd figure it out.

Seriously, thats exactly right. Unfortunately, he never figured it out. Hp is directly transmitted, and the T(ft lbs) and RPM numbers are inversely affected by the gearing, with one sacrificed for the other. He could have done exatly what you did, and come up with the right answer, but he didn't have the knowledge to do it.

Kudo's to you Clay.

The fallacy in MD's statements are the numbers he begin with. K&N's efficiencies are between 97-98% with some as high as 99%. He conveniently chose the low end for his math. Paper filters are all over the board. Even though you can't see any holes, some of them are as bad as 93%. I'm not sure where the 98% number for paper comes from unless it relates to a specific brand of paper filter that has been tested or one of the best paper filters that has been tested. You can't just buy any paper filter and feel that you are filtering better than a K&N.

You really need to relax Gary, this level of temper is not healthy. It is ok to admit that you might be wrong every now and then, you will feel much better.

So you are saying that it converts RPM to torque., Well, that sounds like it producing torque to me. Glad you could admit to your error here.

That is because it can and has nothing to do with spin. I'm just glad to be able to help you further your career with knowledge.

Sorry Max, but you are the true master od semantics. In order for the converter to even get it's name, it has to convert or produce something. That is one error for you. The transmission also both transmitts but also converts and changes which also has it producing something, that's two wrong for you.

And converting is just another way of producing something. Thanks for agreeing with me.

LOL, neither can an engine or anything else for that matter or you would have perpetual motion. While it can't put out more than it gets in, it can use one thing to produce something else and in this case, it consumes RPM to produce more torque.

IOW, you realise that you were wrong and are now trying to spin it into some silly contest. The problem is that I am way in the lead with Gary's constant name calling toward me like even in the header of this thread.

Actually, all you are doing is spinning this ridicules notion and have suckered someone else into believing it.

No, it isn't.

That might be because it is, well, W R O N G...

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha, that was a good one. First of all, the TC is a fluid coupling device so there is no direct transmission of anything. Sacond, unless your TC is a special unit, there are no gears in there at all so that kills point two. Third, if the brakes are applied, the TC takes that HP and converts it into or P R O D U C E S heat. Look at that, it can produce more than just torque.

No, the problem is that I do have the knowledge to know that you are wrong. Using the term reconfiguresd is nothing more than semantics and is just plain silly. Even an engine does nothing more than convert liquid fuel into mechanical energy so I guess it is just reconfiguring the fuel, right?!?!?!? Or even discounting that, the piston produces linear energe that is reconfigured by the union of the connecting rod and crankshaft so I guess that the engine cannot produce torque either. Damn, where does it come from then?

Yes he did. He basically said, no , he did say that a TC produces torque from RPM, thanks Max.

If the transmission could not produce anything, there would be no need for it to exist. Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

no, I said 'converts'

please, learn to read

you really need to go to the public library and find Chiltons # 7412 'Automatic Transmoission Repair Manual' and read the chapter on torque converter operation

this silly ritual of declaring yourself the winner of arguements, in the face of overwhelming evidence ot the contrary, is getting tiresome

you flunked 'percentages and fractions' in 4th grade, didn't you ?

The rigid piece could be a shaft but I see that you are probably referring to the shaft as the fulcrum.

Actually Max, a lever is a simple machine and the pivot point is what makes the rigid object a lever and it simply cannot exist without it.

Hahahahahaha, you just don't understand models. Notice that they call it a pivot point, not a shaft because it could be anything that allows the arm to rotate or pivot. The model is only concerned with the torque being created at the pivot point from a force or group of forces on a single moment arm. If you are using a lever, you would create another moment arm and calculate the torque there as well and then combine the values to get the net result.

Back to school with you.

wrong again:

a torque converter converts horsepower from high-rpm / low-torque to low-rpm / high-torque

CONVERTS

not 'produces'

(sigh) I guess I'm gonna have to do the entire HP - torque - rpm equation thing this evening..........not that it will help any