I never said it was perfect, nor to "bet" on it.schwinn said:Ahh... now I get to play some math!......Sounds to me that Gtech is simply not perfect, as I stated before... so I stand by my original statement - don't bet on Gtech numbers.
Keep in mind, as you get higher in the gear, you don't necessarily have a faster acceleration rate. The KL03's performance is known to drop off around 6200 or so...Because of this, it's going to get better acceleration in some parts of third gear than others. I'm sure it is possible to gain 2-3 mph if you're right in the heart of your powerband over a half second interval. Afterall, it takes ~7 seconds to get to 60, giving you 8-9 per second. Obviously, first gear will have a little better acceleration than third, but it's still very possible to gain 6 mph in a second.schwinn said:
The division I used was for average rate of speed without acceleration because, as the numbers showed, the acceleration was minimal relative to the speed at the first 60-foot mark. Besides which, this is counter to your argument, as any addition of acceleration during those 60-feet would decrease the time to travel it, and therefore the actual speed increase would be slightly less. I didn't want to get that deep into the numbers, so I simplified and made the calculation conservative.
As for betting on the GTech, at least you realize it's not that accurate. But that is the point I am making... it's not accurate, and so it should not be used for presenting time-slip quality data. I was simply trying to explain away the "2-3 mph" difference as an error in GTech's device, rather than "better accuracy".
Normally I would agree with you, Mavric, but our redline is at 7k, and I know that after 6250, the last VRIS point clicks over and I certainly see improvement in my acceleration immediately thereafter.Mavric03 said:Keep in mind, as you get higher in the gear, you don't necessarily have a faster acceleration rate. The KL03's performance is known to drop off around 6200 or so...Because of this, it's going to get better acceleration in some parts of third gear than others. I'm sure it is possible to gain 2-3 mph if you're right in the heart of your powerband over a half second interval. Afterall, it takes ~7 seconds to get to 60, giving you 8-9 per second. Obviously, first gear will have a little better acceleration than third, but it's still very possible to gain 6 mph in a second.
I know Gtech times are off, but being an engineering student also, I had to think about the math and some other factors involved I don't think my logic is off anywhere, but point it out if I am.
No sh!t Sherlock, as I've already pointed that out AND explained why...schwinn said:The GTech is useful for comparing performance from one run to another, but it cannot be used to compare directly with a true 1/4-mile track run.
I fail to see where you explained why. I said it's not possible to show 2-3 mph increase over 60 feet at or near redline. You have said nothing to "explain" it otherwise.drvITlîkUstôlIT said:No sh!t Sherlock, as I've already pointed that out AND explained why...
I don't see where I was "arguing"... I was simply discussing, and hoping that you, or someone else, would have an explanation.yet you continue to argue.
You're right, I have nothing better to do than to ask for reasons for statements which don't make sense. If you can't explain your reasons, then don't complain when someone can refute your unsupported statements.Some people have nothing better to do with their time :shrug:
Though it may seem like an easy task, building a perfect accelerometer (sp?). is a pain in the ass. I helped some friends design one as a senior project. They spent WAY too much money. Used parts that are far more advanced then you'd ever find in a GTech. (Wish I'd had a near neverending bankroll for my senior project.) And they were smart guys on top of it. And all said and done their results were very similar to a GTech, with a mere 800 bucks in parts. In the end, a perfect accelerometer is no easy task. To think there's an easy solution to keep the thing level during acceleration is far fetched. Piss poor engineering. :shrug: I don't think so. It has a great market. If it were more accurate but cost 10 times as much who would buy it? That's where engineering meets marketting. Maybe it's not as good as it COULD be, but it's good enough for people to buy it, and still cheap enough for people to afford it.schwinn said:Understood... and thanks for your input.
I like to analyze things deeply, being the engineer that I am. Sometimes that gets me in trouble
The concept behind the Gtech is a good one, however if you ask me, it's not well implemented. Leveling the device is critical to its accuracy, but when you jump off the line, the car tips back, hence changing the leveling and adding to the inaccuracy. It just bugs me that they don't see this problem and don't seem to want to resolve it. Instead, they'll just "fudge factor" it out. To me, that's piss poor engineering.
Anyway, I am off the box now....