Mini gears

[flattop1]

When i look at it i see the opposite .
The torque is being inputed at the center of the sprocket not the outer diameter .
The breaker bar the force is inputed at the handle and the resulting torque at the square drive . Try turning the square drive and getting 15 ft lbs at the handle ..

 

["J'-remy]

When i look at it i see the opposite .
The torque is being inputed at the center of the sprocket not the outer diameter .
The breaker bar the force is inputed at the handle and the resulting torque at the square drive . Try turning the square drive and getting 15 ft lbs at the handle ..

you are correct the torque is the same from the engine (your engine develops x amount of torque) however the force on the chain is less for the larger sprocket. the 12T has 60% more force than the 20T

 

[95 shaw]

please explain how i'm wrong? you can make a diagram if you want I'll have a engineer from the Department of Energy with a masters in engineering mechanics look over your work. he's already looked at mine

First, some simple geometry.

We will agree, the length of the lever is from the center of the crankshaft to the center of the pin of the chain on the sprocket.

Changing the drive sprocket tooth count changes the circumference of the sprocket at the center of the pin of the chain. This is called pitch diameter.
The change in pitch diameter does not directly correlate to the change in the circumference.
Circumference equals 2 times radius (lever) times pi.

 

["J'-remy]

the ratio of radii is the same as ratio of diameters is the the same as the ratio of circumferences. the circumference is perportional to the number of teeth.

 

[flattop1]

For me it's simple .
a 12 tooth is going to have more pull or low end then a 20 tooth with the same ratio .

 

[95 shaw]

the ratio of radii is the same as ratio of diameters is the the same as the ratio of circumferences. the circumference is perportional to the number of teeth.

Do the math and show me.

I did all this in the other thread.

 

["J'-remy]

For me it's simple .
a 12 tooth is going to have more pull or low end then a 20 tooth with the same ratio .

sorry you are not correct. the exact opposite.

 

[gcashwell]

You also have to think about moving less weight. A smaller driver weighs less as does a smaller rear sprocket. A smaller driver and smaller rear driver allows you to remove links from your chain, again reducing weight.

 

[flattop1]

The torque is multiplied in the ratio .

 

["J'-remy]

running a larger driver for the same ratio is better. I will run a 20/59 over a 19/56. this advice comes from an engineer with over 45 years of engineering analysis experience who loves racing. come up with your own math that works the way you want it to. you can think whatever you want I do not care. in fact GOOD do not use my speed secrets. it is to my advantage you think I'm wrong. Why am I telling the competition anyway?

 

[flattop1]

Now thats a different argument .
A bigger driver may be more efficient .
It's not going to provide more torque .

 

[racing promotor]

You can engineer all you want, If we would take a predator here on say a 20/62 go out and run 10 laps, come in wash same tires and re prep same, same air, go right back out with a with a 17/51 run 10 laps, I'll guarantee you our 10 lap avg lap times will be quicker on the mini gears

 

[SoCo Tire Treatments]

how in the world would it be able to do any of that? In fact it would be worse as the leverage aspect would be completely opposite. no way science would be able to back any of that. complete nonsense.

Im not racing science books. Its been proven out on the race track many times. Its why some of the best in the sport use them, consistently.
Go to any of the biggest races in the country and you will see this as well.
The nonsense is always spread by those who cant see reality.

 

["J'-remy]

The nonsense is always spread by those who cant see reality. couldn't agree more

 

[flattop1]

ratio's and gears alway bring up some funy discussion .
A 20/62 =3.1
A 51/17 =3.0
At 5000 RPM
With a 34" tire the 3.1 travels 54,838.6 inches
With a 34" tire the 3.0 travels 56,666.6 Inches
Or my Math sucks .

 

[95 shaw]

ratio's and gears alway bring up some funy discussion .
A 20/62 =3.1
A 51/17 =3.0
At 5000 RPM
With a 34" tire the 3.1 travels 54,838.6 inches
With a 34" tire the 3.0 travels 56,666.6 Inches
Or my Math sucks .

Post in thread 'Mini gears' https://4cycle.com/karting/threads/mini-gears.122349/post-873512

Both of these posts apply for the reason to use the mini gear setup.

Nothing is a one size fits all solution.

 

[Bretto22]

sorry you are not correct. the exact opposite.

You trying to steer this man in the wrong direction. I’m from Texas nothing but bull rings here and the lower the front the more pull u have leaving. That’s engineered straight from the bullrings in Texas!

 

[flattop1]

You trying to steer this man in the wrong direction. I’m from Texas nothing but bull rings here and the lower the front the more pull u have leaving. That’s engineered straight from the bullrings in Texas!

Lots more convincing to do before my mind is changed .
400 ft black river dirt Dyno . Says different .
How do you get smaller then an 11 ?

 

[Bretto22]

U can’t that’s what most are on here. With that being said u gonna run a 20/79 or some ****?

 

[msquiers]

Im not racing science books. Its been proven out on the race track many times. Its why some of the best in the sport use them, consistently.
Go to any of the biggest races in the country and you will see this as well.
The nonsense is always spread by those who cant see reality.

I thought ya were a tire guy. lol