Ford Ranger Forum - Forums for Ford Ranger enthusiasts!

Go Back   Ford Ranger Forum - Forums for Ford Ranger enthusiasts! > > >
Forgot Password? Join Us!

Welcome to Ford Ranger Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread

  #46  
Old 04-29-2011, 12:06 PM
FireRanger FireRanger is offline
Blinded by the light
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 7,674
Send a message via AIM to FireRanger
Default Re: I'm not looking for power...

I don't see how it is physically possible for the same amount of energy to do more work. Go push your cart of rocks and tell me the amount of energy is the same. Flat gound. Round wheels. It will take more energy to keep it moving. Friction, weight, gravity, all that cool stuff.
__________________
(Formerly)
FireRanger
2003 Edge 4.0 4wd

How to: Aux light wiring, relays, & fuses
Info: 300+ intake threads here on FRF
Info: HID Projectors
How To: NO HEAT Troubleshooting Guide
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 04-29-2011, 12:28 PM
Rango88 Rango88 is offline
N/A
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,031
Default Re: I'm not looking for power...

Quote:
Originally Posted by FireRanger View Post
I don't see how it is physically possible for the same amount of energy to do more work. Go push your cart of rocks and tell me the amount of energy is the same. Flat gound. Round wheels. It will take more energy to keep it moving. Friction, weight, gravity, all that cool stuff.
I just believe that once a low resistant moving object has a constant speed, it no long requires extra energy to move it forward (as long as their are no up hills or wind) if all the conditions are perfect (unlikely unless in a controlled environment like a wind tunnel) the same strength is used to move that object regardless of the extra or less weight it would have) I am no physicist however, so dont take my word for it
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 04-29-2011, 12:49 PM
FireRanger FireRanger is offline
Blinded by the light
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 7,674
Send a message via AIM to FireRanger
Default Re: I'm not looking for power...

If the energy required to keep a mass in motion was not effected by it's weight, then how would that amount of energy even be determined in the first place? If wind resistance was the only friction applied, I can see this working. But gravity and the tires on the ground increase friction. It will take more energy no matter how you slice it. The car companies do everything they can to reduce weight to increase fuel economy.
__________________
(Formerly)
FireRanger
2003 Edge 4.0 4wd

How to: Aux light wiring, relays, & fuses
Info: 300+ intake threads here on FRF
Info: HID Projectors
How To: NO HEAT Troubleshooting Guide
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 04-29-2011, 12:50 PM
Rango88 Rango88 is offline
N/A
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,031
Default Re: I'm not looking for power...

Quote:
Originally Posted by FireRanger View Post
If the energy required to keep a mass in motion was not effected by it's weight, then how would that amount of energy even be determined in the first place? If wind resistance was the only friction applied, I can see this working. But gravity and the tires on the ground increase friction. It will take more energy no matter how you slice it.
The weight on the tires adding more resistance is a valid point, We would have to test this on the moon then .
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 04-29-2011, 12:51 PM
FireRanger FireRanger is offline
Blinded by the light
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 7,674
Send a message via AIM to FireRanger
Default Re: I'm not looking for power...

The moon has gravity. You'd have to do it in space outside the gravitational force of earth, the moon, Michael Moore, and other heavenly large bodies.
__________________
(Formerly)
FireRanger
2003 Edge 4.0 4wd

How to: Aux light wiring, relays, & fuses
Info: 300+ intake threads here on FRF
Info: HID Projectors
How To: NO HEAT Troubleshooting Guide
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 04-29-2011, 12:55 PM
Rango88 Rango88 is offline
N/A
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,031
Default Re: I'm not looking for power...

[quote=FireRanger;407047]I think it would be hard to outrun the gravitational of micheal moore, Krisite Alley and Rosie O'donell, even in space
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 04-29-2011, 12:56 PM
FireRanger FireRanger is offline
Blinded by the light
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 7,674
Send a message via AIM to FireRanger
Default Re: I'm not looking for power...

That would be tough. Good thing Star Jones lost so much weight.
__________________
(Formerly)
FireRanger
2003 Edge 4.0 4wd

How to: Aux light wiring, relays, & fuses
Info: 300+ intake threads here on FRF
Info: HID Projectors
How To: NO HEAT Troubleshooting Guide
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 04-29-2011, 12:59 PM
Rango88 Rango88 is offline
N/A
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,031
Default Re: I'm not looking for power...

Quote:
Originally Posted by FireRanger View Post
That would be tough. Good thing Star Jones lost so much weight.
yeah at least we could stay in this solar system to run this test now
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 04-29-2011, 01:32 PM
knightmare1015 knightmare1015 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,010
Default Re: I'm not looking for power...

Quote:
Originally Posted by FireRanger View Post
If the energy required to keep a mass in motion was not effected by it's weight, then how would that amount of energy even be determined in the first place? If wind resistance was the only friction applied, I can see this working. But gravity and the tires on the ground increase friction. It will take more energy no matter how you slice it. The car companies do everything they can to reduce weight to increase fuel economy.
I don't agree with what you're saying about the car companies man. But other than that what you're saying makes sense. Car companies are required by law to have certain safety items installed in their vehicles which add alot of weight. And rather than help the engine be more efficient, the "tree huggers" mandate choking the engines very badly. All of the manufacturers hate the tree huggers and so do I. I would shoot them but it would be a waste of ammo. The last time we configured a car for drag racing, after stripping it down we virtually dropped well over 1,000 pounds. It was a Honda Civic converted to RWD and we used a 305 SBC. the only interior pieces we kept was the dash. Other than that all that it had was outer body sheet metal.
__________________
SOLD: 2004 Ford Ranger Edge 3.0 V6 5 speed



www.knightmare1015.blogspot.com

Last edited by knightmare1015; 04-29-2011 at 01:36 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 04-29-2011, 01:35 PM
Rango88 Rango88 is offline
N/A
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,031
Default Re: I'm not looking for power...

Quote:
Originally Posted by knightmare1015 View Post
I don't agree with what you're saying about the car companies man. But other than that what you're saying makes sense. Car companies are required by law to have certain safety items installed in their vehicles which add alot of weight. And rather than help the engine be more efficient, the "tree huggers" mandate choking the engines very badly. All of the manufacturers hate the tree huggers and so do I. I would shoot them but it would be a waste of ammo.
Shooting them, couldnt that be considered cruelty to animals?
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 04-29-2011, 01:36 PM
matt224 matt224 is offline
Ford Ranger Driver
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 591
Default Re: I'm not looking for power...

Choking how? Modern engines are very efficent and emission control devices like cats do not rob much, if any power and do provide cleaner air. If you want a "choked up" car, go back to the late 70's and buy a Camaro with a 350 and 170hp.
__________________
2006 Fx4 Level 2 with a 5spd, Superlifted on 33's.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 04-29-2011, 01:39 PM
Rango88 Rango88 is offline
N/A
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,031
Default Re: I'm not looking for power...

Quote:
Originally Posted by matt224 View Post
Choking how? Modern engines are very efficent and emission control devices like cats do not rob much, if any power and do provide cleaner air. If you want a "choked up" car, go back to the late 70's and buy a Camaro with a 350 and 170hp.
I love how some 440s were rated at like 200 HP at least the torque was still good
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 04-29-2011, 01:42 PM
matt224 matt224 is offline
Ford Ranger Driver
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 591
Default Re: I'm not looking for power...

Exactly, those were some bad times for cars and emissions. Emissions now, isn't so bad, hence why we have some 4 banger and v6's putting out 300hp stock..
__________________
2006 Fx4 Level 2 with a 5spd, Superlifted on 33's.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 04-29-2011, 01:44 PM
Rango88 Rango88 is offline
N/A
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,031
Default Re: I'm not looking for power...

Quote:
Originally Posted by matt224 View Post
Exactly, those were some bad times for cars and emissions. Emissions now, isn't so bad, hence why we have some 4 banger and v6's putting out 300hp stock..
I just miss the stock exhaust rumble those engines gave, man you could have a small car like dodge dart with a 340 or even a ford falcon with 289 and those things sounded mean.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 04-29-2011, 03:56 PM
knightmare1015 knightmare1015 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,010
Default Re: I'm not looking for power...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowd88 View Post
Shooting them, couldnt that be considered cruelty to animals?
Yeah, I'd better not. Don't want to get locked up.


Quote:
Originally Posted by matt224 View Post
Choking how? Modern engines are very efficent and emission control devices like cats do not rob much, if any power and do provide cleaner air. If you want a "choked up" car, go back to the late 70's and buy a Camaro with a 350 and 170hp.
Basicly they've gotten better with technology over the years is what I'm saying. Catalytic converters when they first came out in 1978 would choke the crap out of an engine. Plus you forget that fuel injection systems have changed over the years especially during the last couple of years. They've started to realize what most members in here have known for years and years. They borrowed direct fuel injection from diesel engine technology basicly. The DOHC setup that Ford uses on all of their production engines now, is also borrowed technology which they have improved, but if you ask them they'll swear they created it. That is what I was talking about mainly.
__________________
SOLD: 2004 Ford Ranger Edge 3.0 V6 5 speed



www.knightmare1015.blogspot.com
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
more power jaw42885 3.0 Vulcan Tech 13 03-30-2011 02:38 PM
94 2.3 has power, clicks, then no power no start rumpranger 4-Cylinder Tech 2 09-02-2010 09:27 AM
Replace passenger side power rear view mirror on 2005 Ranger with power windows Theodore Viera Interior Tech 2 06-21-2010 09:39 PM
need help for more power mazdadan 4.0 SOHC / 4.0 OHV Tech 0 01-20-2010 07:27 PM
No power :( coastiefx4 Audio / Video 4 01-15-2010 11:15 PM