Mr.Clutch?

Thanks for confirming once again you can't understand the simplest of English.

At least you've got that right. For those that me who understand such things.

We can now add in overall gearing to the vast amount of things you don't understand.

You do realise what a fool you are making of yourself?

No, you are by not answering the simple question.

Do you understand that an increase in a car's speed requires an increase in kinetic energy?

You made out the difference as if it mattered.

Next you'll be denying that gears make a difference and nothing to do with power.

That's why people in the know are most concerned with power to weight ratio, whereas all you seem to care about is torque to weight ratio.

Lets start with wikipedia:

Do you deny: P = F.v

Do you deny: P = F.v = ma . v

Rather than snipping this, please explain which bits you don't understand and I'll try and help.

You don't think gearing and weight make a difference to accelation?

Carry on making a fool of yourself.

Nice to see the only way you can understand what I'm saying is by attempting to put words in my mouth.

You don't get it, do you?

Why would I deny something you've found from Wiki?

If you don't understand it, take it up with them.

I can assure you I do fully understand it. If you did you would also agree that acceleration is dependent on power, weight and the car's speed.

If you don't then you will continue to look like a plonker, desperately trying to deflect your own deficiencies onto others.

Of course it does. It's used as a means to maximise power to the wheels.

You're the fool here, in denial Newton devised a number of laws you can't understand.

I'm trying to understand your denial that the acceleration of a car is dependent on power.

When you can answer Peter's very simple question...............

This was about the only valid thing you have said.

Loser! 0.16 G.

Sadly the BMW 530d hit the redline in 2nd gear at 50mph. The extra gear change costs it dear on 0-60mph time.

Winner! 0.33 G.

Car with highest instantaneous power/weight ratio has highest acceleration rate.

As car with lowest ENGINE toque is accelerating quickest, while car with highest ENGINE torque is accelerating slowest, it shows that ENGINE torque is not the critical factor for WOT acceleration. Gearing and Power are.

The lacklustre acceleration in the higher gear completely contradicts claim that gears are a "red herring". Changing up moves the engine operation point to a much lower power (but more torque).

Do you know, I find it so sad that someone who claims to have an engineering degree could think otherwise.

Many suggest the quality of degrees have been dumbed down, but in Dave's case quite the opposite has occurred.

This is all textbook O/A level Maths P&A in my day and a quick look says "mechanics ? forces, energy, motion" is in the AS and A level papers.

Without taking anything away, torque is to power as gears are to power. They are all necessary but as you say it is power that provides the acceleration at that instant in time.

Oddly, I've been trying to get you to see some of that for ages. You continually say 'power' is the only thing that matters.

Progress of a sort, I suppose.

Next find out what BHP actually is and how it relates to torque. We'll get there one day. If you can actually see basics through the wealth of red herring you use as a smoke screen.

You use weight to maximise power to the wheels? Novel.

Care to explain what you mean by 'instantaneous' power to weight ratio?

I mean the power to weight ratio at the vehicles speed in the gear selected. You need to know mph/1000rpm and have a dyno graph to read the actual power off.

Not the power to weight ratio you get by looking at info panels in car magazines or on Carfolio. Unless you have a properly programmed CVT or one with Williams F1 test car "R" mode, that only happens once in each gear as the engine passes though the peak power rpm. Most car makers that supply CVT have caved to the (press/journalists?) juvenile demands that cars go vroom vroom vroom like a conventional gearbox and not Vrrrrrrrr being held at max power rpm for best acceleration. A CVT that holds engine at peak engine torque would be utterly hopeless, making it a lame POS and a mobile obstruction. Though giving good mpg as part load at peak torque usually coincides with best bsfc.

Certainly, we seem to have made a lot of progress.

For someone who kept harping on about torque we've moved on a very long way.

You should now be able to understand and even see the answer to Peter's question, rather than finding excuses of why you can't.

You claim to have an engineering degree. This sort of concept should be trivial for you.

It may be novel to you, but as in Peter's example, the selected gear will determine how much power is available for acceleration.