Cant resist my calcs.

Wanted to see the effect on acceleration times if I;
...a) upped the torque (65mm pulley) and
...b) changed to a 3.27 diff.
I've gone simple here and assumed a constant torque curve...this is a little bit of a stretch in 1st, but probably ok for the others given the small power band they operate within.

This uses kerb weight plus driver and
SLK32 rear wheel dimensions 17/245/40 = 1972mm circumference and 636mm diameter
....For the SRT6 19/255/35 = 2077mm circumference and 661mm diameter.
Interestingly enough - these larger wheels extend the SRT6 times out by 0.33 seconds over the SLK32 due to the 4% torque reduction at the wheels....

If I've made an y errors or you think this is absolute crap - I'm sure you'll let me know.....


oh...BTW the other reason I was doing this was to work out how a 790Nm SLK55 Kleemann (1650kg - 3650lb) monster could actually get power to the road....

L8tr - slight change to the calc sheets and added SRT6 v SLK32 for the different wheel diameters.

 

updated sheets for SLK32 and SRT6 wheel diamters
I've used a couple of fudge factors (1.0s and 2.4s) to try and best match the times observed in real life. This would be for reaction times and gear changes etc.

 

I am pretty good at this finding fault thingy, I spotted typo, spelling and capitals missing errors. As to the calculations I haven't a clue.

 

He he he he he he he

 

Good basic thinking and ok for an automagc but with a stick shift you have to consider things like wheel spin caused by excessive torque at the wheel.

Any time you have a light car with a big engine this becomes a factor.particularly if a traction control is dialing back on power.

 

I think that Einstein wasn't good at grammar as well. But I don't think he was O.C.D. either.