![]() |
#21 |
![]() Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,884
|
![]()
Interesting!
I measured my BFG G-force some time ago (years) doing a single rotation for circumference of the tire and I really don't recall the answer BUT a good while ago I was told to use this for "rolling radius" and it's usually been very close. Advertised diameter less 1/2 of the tread depth x .96/2 but I've never passed that on anywhere. I can't presently measure mine but it seems like it's actually a good tool. Your F1 315/35R17 25.7 - .16 (1/2 - 10/32) X .96 = 24.52/2 = 12.26 It seems a match or very close! Air pressure! Last edited by WVZR-1; 01-24-2012 at 12:16 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 | |
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicagoland, IL
Posts: 9,685
|
![]() Quote:
I missed this last part. First of all, Kathy is my sister-in-law and she teaches at a top girls' Catholic High School in Chicago, Trinity. Its run by the Dominican nuns. She teaches the math honors classes and Kathy has her math major and physics minor degree from UIC. Not too shabby, wouldn't you say? If Kathy was incorrect, its because of how I set up the problem. And honestly, the snark on teachers in public schools is unnecessary. I have a good friend who taught math and physics in public school. Pretty good guy who knows his stuff. Now that that's cleared up, turns out I was completely blind and the Oracle of Addison ![]() ![]() Now all I need is $$$$. ![]() ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 | |
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicagoland, IL
Posts: 9,685
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 |
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Lone Pine, CA
Posts: 580
|
![]()
dominic .not sure if you are still interested in the 392s that came out of the callaway car .if you are i gave them to bill boudreau. he will sell them to you for the price we talked about .if you arent they are for sale and are in great shape just contact bill boudreau .
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 | |
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicagoland, IL
Posts: 9,685
|
![]() Quote:
I'll contact Bill on this. Thx |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 | |
![]() Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Squires (near Ava MO in the Mark Twain N'tl Forest) - Missouri
Posts: 6,466
|
![]()
Dom,
Yes, you did (miss it)...AGAIN! Well, Let me apologize, Dom. I got tickled when you threw your sister in law (I stand corrected) onto your funeral pire. I was tying to inject my sick sense of humor into the conversation, and ... well ... that's the problem with these boards: without facial expressions etc, things can be misunderstood. Actually, I was poking fun AT YOU, Dom, or (more precisely) your damned Italian stubbornness!! ![]() Quote:
![]() Truth is where you find it. So, wheter it was Marc or Cliff, or me, or some others too that shone the light, in the end it's all good. I believe my math was correct - provided mulitple proofs - but I'm willing to be proven otherwise. That said, in (one) example you gave, I too arrive at the same "3.28:1" ratio you (or was it Marc?) finally derived. Regardless of how you get there, as long as the wheel change ratio matches the gear change ratio, you're golden. Sorry if you thought I was taking a shot at your sister in law. I wasn't. But, I was messing with you, Dom! ![]() P. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Tags |
4.10s, acceleration, rear end gear, speedo accuracy |
|
|