Quote:

---

What's the matter? The 3 Billy Goats been trampling on your bridge a bit much??

Having known Hugh for the past 9 years, and having to have gone through University with him, there is no one more than me who enjoys to take the piss out of daft comments he comes out with....

However, I always ensure that if I do, then my argument is well structured and backed up by susbtantial evidence. If not, then the outcome is that I look like a twat, which is exactly what you've done here....

Now before you come back with some rant, I acknowledge there is the possibility you're right. If so, get some evidence and post it on here. The decent bloke that Hugh is, I know for a fact that in the face of evidence to prove he is wrong, he will admit the fact and 'stand corrected'..

What I suggest is you do the maths, post it on here and then we can discuss the matter amongst all of us. One of you is right and one of you is wrong, but for the time being, only one of you have produced something to back up your claim...

Oh and for the record, both Hugh and I have an honours degree in Engineering of which, I am sure you are aware, Maths is an integral part.....

Now run along now and be a nice chap and let those goats graze in the nice meadow..... [image]http://fiesta.mediahoard.com/chimage.php?image=829118102004337563.gif[/image]

---

Quote:

---

then you won't mind explaining how you would achieve the linear relationship between Speed and RPM's?

---

Excellent, that's what I was hoping you would say. Rather than answering your question, I would like to hear you explain how the relationshipship of the output from an engine through a fixed ratio gearbox can be anything but linear?

Let me answer it for you, it can't be (unless the clutch is slipping! ). Using a fixed ratio'd gearbox the RPM of an engine has a direct ratio'd effect on the speed of the wheels therefore the speed of the vehicle.

So this leaves me wondering what you are all about. If you had said one single thing of use then I would say that you were perhaps mistaking what was being said and that you were trying to add extra mechanics to the theoretical statement, such as weight, acceleration, drag or resistance.

But you haven't, you've been rude, evasive and haven't offered a single solitary piece of relevant information so you must just be a troll. In which case, good bye.

Quote:

---

Note how I used the phrase "real life". This means in the outdoors in the sunshine, with gravity and all that stuff.
What is the use of a graph that does not take into account the mechanics of the real world?

How is it theoretical? Theories are models that attempt to replicate real life. What is theoretical about something that knowingly neglects major forces?

This is like saying, "In theory My Nan can see clearly" But forgetting to mention that she dropped her glasses and both her eyes just fell out. Doesn't really work in reality does it?

So, in summary, what was the use of your initial post if you knew it bore no relation to the real world?

---

Quote:

---

Note how I used the phrase "real life". This means in the outdoors in the sunshine, with gravity and all that stuff.

---

So gravity 'and all that stuff' now has an effect on the relationship between an engine output and the drive it provides through to the wheels??? Stop it you're killing me!

Quote:

---

So, in summary, what was the use of your initial post if you knew it bore no relation to the real world?

---

It bears every relationship to the real world in in theory and practice. I don't however know many Fiesta ST's that will rev to 12 thousand or go at 220mph. That's the theoretical bit just incase you can't spot it.

BTW, to quote you earlier:

Quote:

---

The car will go at 220 mph at 10.5k revs in 5th? don't think so!
The car will go at 20 mph at 1k revs in 5th? Don't think so!

---

That's exactly what it would do.

Quote:

---

This means in the outdoors in the sunshine, with gravity and all that stuff.

---

Eheheheheh, you get gravity indoors as well mate! Even your Nan should know that one!

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

What's the matter? The 3 Billy Goats been trampling on your bridge a bit much??

Having known Hugh for the past 9 years, and having to have gone through University with him, there is no one more than me who enjoys to take the piss out of daft comments he comes out with....

However, I always ensure that if I do, then my argument is well structured and backed up by substantial evidence. If not, then the outcome is that I look like a twat, which is exactly what you've done here....

Now before you come back with some rant, I acknowledge there is the possibility you're right. If so, get some evidence and post it on here. The decent bloke that Hugh is, I know for a fact that in the face of evidence to prove he is wrong, he will admit the fact and 'stand corrected'..

What I suggest is you do the maths, post it on here and then we can discuss the matter amongst all of us. One of you is right and one of you is wrong, but for the time being, only one of you has produced something to back up your claim...

Oh and for the record, both Hugh and I have an honours degree in Engineering of which, I am sure you are aware, Maths is an integral part.....

Now run along now and be a nice chap and let those goats graze in the nice meadow.....

---

You posted it, you justify it, I believe is the scientific precedent?

If you have an honours degree in Engineering (I have one in Physics if you want to flex intellectual muscle), then you won't mind explaining how you would achieve the linear relationship between Speed and RPM's?

I respectfully await your answer.

---

Quote:

---

It bears every relationship to the real world in in theory and practice. I don't however know many Fiesta ST's that will rev to 12 thousand or go at 220mph. That's the theoretical bit just incase you can't spot it.

---