Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments.













Reader Comments for
Subscribe to this thread(Page 1 of 1)
adam @ Dec 8th 2007 6:43PM
Why is drivetrain loss assumed to be a percentage rather than a set amount of torque/horsepower?
mastersmite @ Dec 8th 2007 6:57PM
Drivetrain loss is based on the internal friction of the driveline. The loss is a varying amount because friction is a function of the force applied and the coefficient of friction of the , thus more power is loss as the force applied increases.
MikeW @ Dec 8th 2007 10:37PM
When gears mesh in the transmission, the efficiency isn't 100%. Not even straight cut gears are there.
So in the TR-6060 power flows down toward the countershaft via the front gear pair, then back up toward the primary axis. Except for 4th, which is direct drive & reverse-with adds another gear mesh, so the parity is odd.
Then the ring/pinion of the axle isn't close to 100%. There is a helix angle, and then the shaft axes are offset (hypoid)
So for a higher drivetrain efficiency you want to keep the number of gear meshes down.
Bad Bugatti Veyron! 4 gear meshes to get power to the rear axle.
http://www.gizmag.com/go/4909/picture/17749/
If they could have sent power through the valley of the block, the could have two total for the rear, and three for the front.