Does new 75 amp alternator steal more horsepower?
CCIT X Terminal ccx10
was wondering if an auto electricican expert could tell me if it would draw
more horsepower from the engine. It is the same size, only with some special
modifications made by Kymco motorsports. Any input would be appreciated.
Johnny Schultz
Joshua Van Tol
<ccx10> wrote:
Most likely it would draw more power *WHEN* it was charging at full blast
than the stock unit at full tilt. At normal charging levels it should be
about the same. A 75 A alternator produces 1050 W, which assuming about
75% efficiency (might be optimistic, I dunno) equates to about 1.9 hp.
--
Joshua Van Tol - jjva...@cc.memphis.edu
Melissa Kepner
>I just read the article in DB& Hot VW's about the new 75 amp alternator and I
>was wondering if an auto electricican expert could tell me if it would draw
>more horsepower from the engine. It is the same size, only with some special
>modifications made by Kymco motorsports. Any input would be appreciated.
The alternator rating is nothing more than the MAXIMUM current that
the alternator can put out. If your old alternator doesn't put out
enough then you will find that your battery slowly goes dead. Of
course that may be because it is maxed out, or because there is
something wrong with the alternator, the regulator, the wiring, or the
battery, so it can be a bit difficult to decide.
On the other hand, it is most likely that your present system puts out
exactly what you need and the output of the HP system will be exactly
the same: load limited.
In either case, the power put out by your alternator must come from
the engine. There is still no free lunch at the energy table.
Jim
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Melissa Kepner Jim Adney
mgke...@facstaff.wisc.edu jim....@mpcug.com
Laura Kepner-Adney
Madison, Wisconsin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Douglas
>I just read the article in DB& Hot VW's about the new 75 amp alternator and I
>was wondering if an auto electricican expert could tell me if it would draw
>more horsepower from the engine. It is the same size, only with some special
>modifications made by Kymco motorsports. Any input would be appreciated.
>
> Johnny Schultz
It HAS to draw more HP. Its one of those silly laws of physics!
*** You can't get something from nothing.***
If the unit puts out more power, it draws more power.
Have fun.
Douglas
Respectfully,
Douglas
http://galaxymall.com/shops/douglas.html
Dinggus
Van Tol) wrote:
>> I just read the article in DB& Hot VW's about the new 75 amp alternator and I
>> was wondering if an auto electricican expert could tell me if it would draw
>> more horsepower from the engine. It is the same size, only with some special
>> modifications made by Kymco motorsports. Any input would be appreciated.
>>
>> Johnny Schultz
>
>Most likely it would draw more power *WHEN* it was charging at full blast
>than the stock unit at full tilt. At normal charging levels it should be
>about the same. A 75 A alternator produces 1050 W, which assuming about
>75% efficiency (might be optimistic, I dunno) equates to about 1.9 hp.
Whoa! 75% efficiency? No way, not even close. 1 hp=746 watts(I got
that from my electronics textbook, so I believe it to be true) So
lets see, the 1600cc vw engine puts out a around 50 hp,
50 x 746 = 37300 watts, but that would only be the case if the
alternator converted mechanical energy into electrical energy at 100%
efficiency.
So at 50% efficiency you would get 18650 watts, at 25%
efficiency you would get 9325 watts, and so on.......you get the
picture. The alternator gets about 3% efficiency, not too good.
As far as how much hp the alternator robs your engine of, I
dont know how to figure that one out, just dividing the alternator
output power by 746 watts says 1.4 hp, but more is done by the
alternator than just induce electron flow. i.e. heat is generated,
parts are worn, etc. That "lost" energy must be accounted for in the
equation you use.
Have fun!
--Dan Gustafson
1970 bus with big 'ole fiberglass "bubble top" roof, tire in front,
and savannah beige paint.
Jeffry Johnston
: >than the stock unit at full tilt. At normal charging levels it should be
: >about the same. A 75 A alternator produces 1050 W, which assuming about
: >75% efficiency (might be optimistic, I dunno) equates to about 1.9 hp.
I agree...and about your guess...
A 25 kw alternator is around 85% efficiancy, less for 1 kw. Then
you have diode and belt loss. My guess...50%, anybody know?
: Whoa! 75% efficiency? No way, not even close.
: The alternator gets about 3% efficiency, not too good.
: --Dan
Whoops.
Alvin Johnston <--Libertarian
Jeffry Johnston
: Whoa! 75% efficiency? No way, not even close. 1 hp=746 watts(I got
: that from my electronics textbook, so I believe it to be true) So
: lets see, the 1600cc vw engine puts out a around 50 hp,
: 50 x 746 = 37300 watts, but that would only be the case if the
: alternator converted mechanical energy into electrical energy at 100%
: efficiency.
: So at 50% efficiency you would get 18650 watts, at 25%
: efficiency you would get 9325 watts, and so on.......you get the
: As far as how much hp the alternator robs your engine of, I
: dont know how to figure that one out, just dividing the alternator
: output power by 746 watts says 1.4 hp, but more is done by the
: alternator than just induce electron flow. i.e. heat is generated,
: parts are worn, etc. That "lost" energy must be accounted for in the
: equation you use.
: Have fun!
: --Dan Gustafson
One time I screwed a post up like this, I'd had a migraine and taken Elvis
Prestley vitamins. (hydro codone, Lortab)
Do you suffer from migraines too?
Alvin Johnston <--Libertarian
NetSurfers
writes:
>CCIT X Terminal ccx10 <ccx10> wrote:
>
>>I just read the article in DB& Hot VW's about the new 75 amp alternator and I
>>was wondering if an auto electricican expert could tell me if it would draw
>>more horsepower from the engine. It is the same size, only with some special
>>modifications made by Kymco motorsports. Any input would be appreciated.
>
>the alternator can put out. If your old alternator doesn't put out
>enough then you will find that your battery slowly goes dead. Of
>course that may be because it is maxed out, or because there is
>something wrong with the alternator, the regulator, the wiring, or the
>battery, so it can be a bit difficult to decide.
>
>On the other hand, it is most likely that your present system puts out
>exactly what you need and the output of the HP system will be exactly
>the same: load limited.
>
>In either case, the power put out by your alternator must come from
>the engine. There is still no free lunch at the energy table.
>
>Jim
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Melissa Kepner Jim Adney
> mgke...@facstaff.wisc.edu jim....@mpcug.com
> Laura Kepner-Adney
> Madison, Wisconsin
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
Power Out = Power In - Loss
Efficiency = Power Out/Power In X 100
If you have a generator and an alternator, and (say) the alternator has twice the
output current rating of the generator then the power input to the alternator,
MUST, by the laws of physics, be MORE than the power supplied by the engines
rotation to the generator, UNLESS the efficiency of the alternator is TWICE that of
the generator, which I doubt.
I would think it a reasonable statement to say that a high output alternator WILL
take more power from the engine than a low output generator. Let's estimate HOW
much by an example.
If I remember correctly, I believe that 1 horsepower equals (roughly)
746 watts of electrical power. Assume an alternator is producing 13.6
volts and that (say) 55 amps is being drawn from it, by lots of
accessories and a nice sound system. Power = volts X current = 13.6 X
55 = 748 watts. Furthur, lets make the assumption (since we don't have
firm data from the alternator manufacturer), that the efficiency of the
alternator, in converting rotary energy to electrical energy, is 50%.
Then, if we are consuming 748 watts as in the calculations above, the
power taken from the engine is TWICE 748 watts, due to the 50%
efficiency figure we've assumed, and equals 1496 watts. Finally, if 1
horsepower = 746 watts, then the power taken from the engine is
1496/746 = 2.00 horsepower.
You do not get something for nothing. If you want LOTS of electrical
power, it has to come from the engine. If you're at a stop light, next
to a Porche, turn off your big stereo before you put the pedal to the
metal! :-}
JoAnne
'67 Bug Owner
M.S.E.E.
Michael Rutkaus
CCIT X Terminal ccx10 wrote:
>
> I just read the article in DB& Hot VW's about the new 75 amp alternator and I
> was wondering if an auto electricican expert could tell me if it would draw
more horsepower from the engine. It is the same size, only with some
special
modifications made by Kymco motorsports. Any input would be
appreciated.
It won't draw any more from the engine unless you draw more amps from the
alternator.
Mike
Melissa Kepner
CCIT X Terminal ccx10 <ccx10> wrote:
>I just read the article in DB& Hot VW's about the new 75 amp alternator and I
>was wondering if an auto electricican expert could tell me if it would draw
>more horsepower from the engine. It is the same size, only with some special
>modifications made by Kymco motorsports. Any input would be appreciated.
We've now had a slew of posts bringing up efficiency and I want to
make clear that I have no argument with most of that. The real
problem here is that most of the people don't realize how many amps
their existing charging system is putting out now.
If your 35 A alternator spends 95% of its time putting out 15 amps
(because that's all your car needs) then putting a 75 A alternator on
will only result in getting 15 A out of it about 95% of the time. It
will do this with slightly greater efficiency due to the fact that is
is built with heavier wire and beefier diodes. Running them at the
same old current output will result in reduced losses. But the
savings don't amount to a hill of beans and will never make up for the
price you paid for the HP alternator.
Before you invest in such a system, try measuring how much juice
you're actually using now. Turn your cherished sound system up as far
as you can stand (with you in the car) and see if it adds anything
close to 20% of the number of watts that the salesman told you.
Years ago, as a test, I measured the speaker current of my stereo at
various listening levels. This was done with low efficiency speakers
so my numbers may be a bit higher than yours.
quiet: 2W/channel
medium: 3W/channel
loud: 5W/channel
LOUD; 10W/channel
REALLY LOUD: 20W/channel
Now if you consider that 10 A (at 14V) of alternator output converted
to speaker power at 50% efficiency is gives me 35W/channel you can see
that there is really no point in this 75A alternator!
Yes, I know that you may have a 200 W amp and a kilowatt booster, with
all the accoutrements necessary to make the appropriate dude-type
impression, but I would still be willing to bet that you don't run
your sound system above 20 W total for more than a minute at time.
And for that you don't need a 75W alternator.
BTW, your _car_ will run just fine on less than 15A, unless it's
night and raining, then you can add another 15A for wipers and lights.
Sorry for the rant. I just see this misunderstood so often.
NoBusiness
mgke...@facstaff.wisc.edu (Melissa Kepner) wrote:
>We've now had a slew of posts bringing up efficiency and I want to
>make clear that I have no argument with most of that. The real
>problem here is that most of the people don't realize how many amps
>their existing charging system is putting out now.
I've got over a 1000w of REAL power! And yes, my system is at 95%
about 65% of the time, 100% for about 10% of the time, and about 60%
for the remaining 25% of the time, when I have a chick worth talking
to in the bug with me.
>If your 35 A alternator spends 95% of its time putting out 15 amps
>(because that's all your car needs) then putting a 75 A alternator on
>will only result in getting 15 A out of it about 95% of the time. It
>will do this with slightly greater efficiency due to the fact that is
>is built with heavier wire and beefier diodes. Running them at the
>same old current output will result in reduced losses. But the
>savings don't amount to a hill of beans and will never make up for the
>price you paid for the HP alternator.
You never answered the original question...Will the new alternator
draw more precious HP from the engine, making it run harder and
hotter?
>Before you invest in such a system,
See Above...
>Years ago, as a test, I measured the speaker current of my stereo at
>various listening levels. This was done with low efficiency speakers
>so my numbers may be a bit higher than yours.
>quiet: 2W/channel
>medium: 3W/channel
>loud: 5W/channel
>LOUD; 10W/channel
>REALLY LOUD: 20W/channel
Not by today's competition standards. Wanna play with the big dogs,
you have to get off the porch!
>Now if you consider that 10 A (at 14V) of alternator output converted
>to speaker power at 50% efficiency is gives me 35W/channel you can see
>that there is really no point in this 75A alternator!
>Yes, I know that you may have a 200 W amp and a kilowatt booster, with
>all the accoutrements necessary to make the appropriate dude-type
>impression, but I would still be willing to bet that you don't run
>your sound system above 20 W total for more than a minute at time.
>And for that you don't need a 75W alternator.
Two Amps rated at 1200w each (cut it in half for the hype crap) leaves
me with 1200w. If I don't put the car on a charger over night, then
both batteries are dead middle of the next day! And I already have
the 50A alternator!
>BTW, your _car_ will run just fine on less than 15A, unless it's
>night and raining, then you can add another 15A for wipers and lights.
BULL!! Sorry, I tend to disagree, but that's okay.
>Sorry for the rant. I just see this misunderstood so often.
Me too.
Peace.
MyVWsGotMe
In article <4qu9mn$p...@news.ccit.arizona.edu>, CCIT X Terminal ccx10
<ccx10> writes:
>I just read the article in DB& Hot VW's about the new 75 amp alternator
and I
>was wondering if an auto electricican expert could tell me if it would
draw
>more horsepower from the engine. It is the same size, only with some
special
>modifications made by Kymco motorsports. Any input would be appreciated.
>
> Johnny Schultz
All else being equal, and it seems to be in this case,
the new alternator will pull about 1.5 times what the
approx 50 amp stock alternators do. I doubt the
efficiency is significantly different between the original
Bosch or Motorola and the new Kymco. The difference
between 2 and 3 horsepower isn't going to be missed.
I have no data on the reliability of these units, so do
check their return policy first! The good thing about
them will be better recharging of the battery on those
cold days, as well as ability to run more accessories
or big stereo equipment without drawing from the
battery. It really is about time someone offered an
upgrade to the stock charging systems. Check
with the manufacturer regarding wire sizing for the
main wire from the alternator to the battery- the
approx 10 AWG wire VW used is barely adequate
for a sustained 50 amp draw. If they recommend
a bigger cable, and you intend to use the maximum
capacity of the alternator a lot, upgrade this cable.
Rob <--- 74 Sun Bug, 66 Sunroof Bug, 71 Notchback
Joshua Van Tol
In article <4r1ud4$1...@redwood.northcoast.com>, dan...@northcoast.com
(Dinggus) wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jun 1996 17:52:31 -0600, jjva...@cc.memphis.edu (Joshua
> Van Tol) wrote:
>
> >> I just read the article in DB& Hot VW's about the new 75 amp
alternator and I
> >> was wondering if an auto electricican expert could tell me if it would draw
> >> more horsepower from the engine. It is the same size, only with some
special
> >> modifications made by Kymco motorsports. Any input would be appreciated.
> >>
> >> Johnny Schultz
> >
> >Most likely it would draw more power *WHEN* it was charging at full blast
> >than the stock unit at full tilt. At normal charging levels it should be
> >about the same. A 75 A alternator produces 1050 W, which assuming about
> >75% efficiency (might be optimistic, I dunno) equates to about 1.9 hp.
> Whoa! 75% efficiency? No way, not even close. 1 hp=746 watts(I got
> that from my electronics textbook, so I believe it to be true) So
> lets see, the 1600cc vw engine puts out a around 50 hp,
> 50 x 746 = 37300 watts, but that would only be the case if the
> alternator converted mechanical energy into electrical energy at 100%
> efficiency.
> So at 50% efficiency you would get 18650 watts, at 25%
> efficiency you would get 9325 watts, and so on.......you get the
> picture. The alternator gets about 3% efficiency, not too good.
I was talking about the mechanical power input to electrical power output
efficiency. Known as shaft to wire efficiency. *NOT* the efficiency of the
engine as an electrical producer. I used this estimate of shaft to wire
efficiency to estimate the mechanical power used by the alternator when it
was producing full output.
> As far as how much hp the alternator robs your engine of, I
> dont know how to figure that one out, just dividing the alternator
> output power by 746 watts says 1.4 hp, but more is done by the
> alternator than just induce electron flow. i.e. heat is generated,
> parts are worn, etc. That "lost" energy must be accounted for in the
> equation you use.
Which was how I arrived at 1.9 hp. I took into account an assumed
efficiency of 75 percent.
In case you are wondering about my qualifications I should state that I
have a B.S. in electrical engineering, and am working on my masters
degree. My thesis topic relates to electrical power. So, I'd guess that I
know just a little bit about alternators. *NOT* to mention the fact that I
work part time as a Nissan and Toyota tech to help pay for school!
Next time you choose to flame someone, make sure you understand what
they were saying.
> Have fun!
> --Dan Gustafson
>
> 1970 bus with big 'ole fiberglass "bubble top" roof, tire in front,
> and savannah beige paint.
--
Bill Crick
NoBusiness wrote:
>
> mgke...@facstaff.wisc.edu (Melissa Kepner) wrote:
>
> >We've now had a slew of posts bringing up efficiency and I want to
> >make clear that I have no argument with most of that. The real
> >problem here is that most of the people don't realize how many amps
> >their existing charging system is putting out now.
>
> I've got over a 1000w of REAL power! And yes, my system is at 95%
> about 65% of the time, 100% for about 10% of the time, and about 60%
> for the remaining 25% of the time, when I have a chick worth talking
> to in the bug with me.
>
era. Not wanting to get into rec.audio.too.loud.land here but, I have
two areas of slight disbelief here.
First I can't comprehend you regularly running 950wRMS of audio in a
bug most of the time. 1000W will fill a large bar to painful levels.
Second I also can't comprehend you talking over 600WRMS of audio
in a bug. I doubt if you could scream blue murder over this much power.
Note however that you can expend huge amounts of subsonic power flexing car structure,
and rattling the seats around. A friend has about 400W in his truck. 100W sonic,
300W subsonic. If you turn off the <30hz amp, you don't notice the sound level change,
the seats just stop shaking like the engine is about to stall.
SNIP....
> >Years ago, as a test, I measured the speaker current of my stereo at
> >various listening levels. This was done with low efficiency speakers
> >so my numbers may be a bit higher than yours.
> >quiet: 2W/channel
> >medium: 3W/channel
> >loud: 5W/channel
> >LOUD; 10W/channel
> >REALLY LOUD: 20W/channel
Just for example using the power meters on my amp at home: Peak power here not average
.05W quiet music
0.5W moderate
5W I can hear over the vacuum cleaner
50W I don't know as my amp wouldn't have any headroom here.
SNIP....
Bill Crick
76 Type II/IV/VII
Gamer2000
This is probably a stupid question............ but here it goes,
In my new ( To me ) 76 beetle the engine seems to be almost at the point
where I feel i should shift at about 30-35, the engine sound like its
reving like it is in 1 at 10-15 MPH. My other bug seemed ok at this speed
in 3rd but it also had those monzas that made the engine sound wierd, I am
going to temporarily hook up a tach untill I get the cash to buy a
permenent Tach, but It will be a couple days untill I get the temporary
tach back. So what should I do until then? I am afraid i am over reving
it, and If i shift to 4 I am afraid i am under reving it. Its strange.
Mabey Im worried about my new baby a little to much?
thanks for Any advice!
michael Howell Game...@aol.com
76 Bug Made 12/10/75 76 Bug Made 6/9/76
j...@cats.ucsc.edu
In article <4rsrvj$a...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, game...@aol.com
(Gamer2000) wrote:
Most Bugs should be shifted from 3rd to 4th at around 45 mph
Danik Jerriko
Mike Lawless
At 30 -35 mph, the engine is turning approx. 2800-3000 rpm. All depending
on gear ratios, which are pretty close from year to year, and tire size.
You won't be over-revving till you hit better than 50-55 mph or so.
--
Mike Lawless
Lawless Designs
rac...@psnw.com
http://www.psnw.com/~raceart
Chris Allen
On Jul 09, 1996 01:50:43 in article <How fast in 3rd?>, 'game...@aol.com
(Gamer2000)' wrote:
>This is probably a stupid question............ but here it goes,
>In my new ( To me ) 76 beetle the engine seems to be almost at the point
>where I feel i should shift at about 30-35, the engine sound like its
>reving like it is in 1 at 10-15 MPH. My other bug seemed ok at this speed
>in 3rd but it also had those monzas that made the engine sound wierd, I am
>going to temporarily hook up a tach untill I get the cash to buy a
>permenent Tach, but It will be a couple days untill I get the temporary
>tach back. So what should I do until then? I am afraid i am over reving
>it, and If i shift to 4 I am afraid i am under reving it. Its strange.
>Mabey Im worried about my new baby a little to much?
>thanks for Any advice!
>michael Howell Game...@aol.com
>76 Bug Made 12/10/75 76 Bug Made 6/9/76
--
With stock diameter tires and a stock engine, a good rule of thumb for
shifting is 15-30-45. Increase these slightly for hills and accelerating.
On my '72 Beetle w/1679cc, progressive carb, and single QP muffler, I shift
at 20-40-50 under most conditions but my rear tires are 205-75s.
Chris Allen
MyVWsGotMe
In article <4r7o6p$i...@news.2sprint.net>, don't have one (NoBusiness)
writes:
>I've got over a 1000w of REAL power! And yes, my system is at 95%
>about 65% of the time, 100% for about 10% of the time, and about 60%
>for the remaining 25% of the time, when I have a chick worth talking
>to in the bug with me.
>
>>If your 35 A alternator spends 95% of its time putting out 15 amps
>>(because that's all your car needs) then putting a 75 A alternator on
>>will only result in getting 15 A out of it about 95% of the time. It
>>will do this with slightly greater efficiency due to the fact that is
>>is built with heavier wire and beefier diodes. Running them at the
>>same old current output will result in reduced losses. But the
>>savings don't amount to a hill of beans and will never make up for the
>>price you paid for the HP alternator.
>
>You never answered the original question...Will the new alternator
>draw more precious HP from the engine, making it run harder and
>hotter?
>
>>Before you invest in such a system,
>
>See Above...
>
>>Years ago, as a test, I measured the speaker current of my stereo at
>>various listening levels. This was done with low efficiency speakers
>>so my numbers may be a bit higher than yours.
>>quiet: 2W/channel
>>medium: 3W/channel
>>loud: 5W/channel
>>LOUD; 10W/channel
>>REALLY LOUD: 20W/channel
>
>Not by today's competition standards. Wanna play with the big dogs,
>you have to get off the porch!
>Two Amps rated at 1200w each (cut it in half for the hype crap) leaves
>me with 1200w. If I don't put the car on a charger over night, then
>both batteries are dead middle of the next day! And I already have
>the 50A alternator!
Well, figure it out. By your own assertion, you've got
to make concessions to get to the top prize in an
auto-sound contest. If that means another battery,
that's what you do. If that means charge the battery
overnight, that's what you do.
If you are really pulling 1200W out of your car's charging
system, at 12 V that's 100A. That's obviously twice
what the stock system can deliver (and THAT number
isn't supposed to be continuous, you can count on that),
or 25A more than the Kymco unit can. And that doesn't
count things like, oh, firing the sparkplugs.
I'd say, for the rather ridiculous situation you've put
forth, the 75A alternator is essential. As well as deep
cycle-capable RV type batteries for the sustained
drain you'll put on them. Another real important thing
to remember, is that the alternator is NOT going to
put out 75A at idle, EVER. Maybe at 2500 RPM, but
not at 1000. That is a MAXIMUM rating. You may
have to de-rate that by 25% or more due to heat,
such as sitting in place, idling, which is the worst
situation for a VW. You definitely have to de-rate that
by a lot if the car only sits and idles as you show off
the system. In addition to not keeping up with
what you're drawing off the system, operating at or
near max output is probably going to cut the life
expectancy of that alternator, stock or otherwise,
in half or worse. And since VW didn't design
their cars to be portable stereos, maybe you ought
to seek a more efficient system for rattling the
neighbors off the couch as you drive by.
You don't have purple fluorescent lights under
your running boards do ya?
jot...@aristotle.net
j...@cats.ucsc.edu wrote:
>In article <4rsrvj$a...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, game...@aol.com
>(Gamer2000) wrote:
>> This is probably a stupid question............ but here it goes,
>> In my new ( To me ) 76 beetle the engine seems to be almost at the point
Game...@aol.com
>> 76 Bug Made 12/10/75 76 Bug Made 6/9/76
>Most Bugs should be shifted from 3rd to 4th at around 45 mph
If the car has the stock speedometer, shift at the little red hash
marks. The speedo should have one little red line about the 15 mph
point, two at around 30, and three at 45ish. If the engine, trans,
and speedo are all stock, then these are the shift points for your
car.
Jotsix
Gamer2000
In article <4s3i1a$f...@socrates.aristotle.net>, jot...@aristotle.net
writes:
>
>If the car has the stock speedometer, shift at the little red hash
>marks. The speedo should have one little red line about the 15 mph
>point, two at around 30, and three at 45ish. If the engine, trans,
>and speedo are all stock, then these are the shift points for your
>car.
Ok, My 76 beetle has the stock speedometer, But in 76 they must not have
those marks. Instead the speedometer also shows KPH. Should I still shift
at these points?
thanks, Michael Howell
76 Beetle 97k 76 Beetle ?31k
MyVWsGotMe
In article <4sdfq6$m...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, game...@aol.com
(Gamer2000) writes:
>>If the car has the stock speedometer, shift at the little red hash
>>marks. The speedo should have one little red line about the 15 mph
>>point, two at around 30, and three at 45ish. If the engine, trans,
>>and speedo are all stock, then these are the shift points for your
>>car.
>
>Ok, My 76 beetle has the stock speedometer, But in 76 they must not have
>those marks. Instead the speedometer also shows KPH. Should I still shift
>at these points?
YES!!! For crying out loud doesn't anyone listen to
their engine ? It will be telling you to shift your stock
Bug if you go 20 in first, 40 in second, or 55 in third.
It will be screaming at you and begging you to stop.
Just as it will complain if you drop it into fourth at
28 mph. I'm convinced that all driving instructors
must be doing NOTHING AT ALL when they put
people on the road.
(I'm not yelling at you, Mike, just complaining about
the rash of questions along these lines we've been
getting here lately.)
Rob <--- Somewhere between idle and redline
Rich Infamous
On Jul 17, 1996 00:45:08 in article <Re: How fast in 3rd?>,
Rob: it's not just engine speed and road speed... the load on the engine is
relevant as well. 28 mph in 4th gear, for example, which would normally
constitute "lugging", would be acceptable (not to say necessarily
desirable) in two circumstances: 1) rapid deceleration or 2) downward
grade.
The ideal is to stay within a certain RPM range it is true, but the engine
load must be considered as well.
I do agree with your implication that people are over-revving their
flat-fours however. They are not OHC engines after all.
Gamer2000
In article <4shr4k$9...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, myvws...@aol.com
(MyVWsGotMe) writes:
>
>YES!!! For crying out loud doesn't anyone listen to
>their engine ? It will be telling you to shift your stock
>Bug if you go 20 in first, 40 in second, or 55 in third.
>It will be screaming at you and begging you to stop.
>Just as it will complain if you drop it into fourth at
>28 mph.
I Agree, Ive never taken my bugs over 15 in first, In this bug it sounds
like its reving about 2600-2900 in 1@15, I usually shift into 3 at
22-28 in second(Usually 24 But it depends on how fast I have to Reach
speed). And into 4th at 35 to 40, never over 40. At 35MPH I can stay in
3rd and the engine will sounds ok but I was worried if I was over reving.
I can also shift into 4th if I am on a flat road@ 35MPH And the engine
will not lug, It will rev slowly though. If i approach A hill @ 35 I
always stay in 3rd.
>I'm convinced that all driving instructors
>must be doing NOTHING AT ALL when they put
>people on the road.
I also Agree, In driving School there is no mention of a manual
transmission in the class. Its in the book but they never review this. In
a class of 35 Only i and one other kid knew how to drive a stick.
I never had a problem in my 1st 76 bug, i was always in the right gear at
the right speeds in the right conditions. Btw I am Getting much better at
driving the bug in the rain. very little lockup problems, New tires helped
90% though. the ones on there were worn and dry rotted.
>(I'm not yelling at you, Mike, just complaining about
>the rash of questions along these lines we've been
>getting here lately.)
Fair Enough :-)
>Rob <--- Somewhere between idle and redline
>
>Rob <--- 74 Sun Bug, 66 Sunroof Bug, 71 Notchback
michael Howell
>
SUVA 3
shift no earlier than the little marks on you speedometer theres a roman
numeral 1 2 3 depending on the speed of the car per your gear
suva3
Dana Dawes
In article <4sj3j9$a...@news2.h1.usa.pipeline.com>, re...@usa.pipeline.co
says...
>
>On Jul 17, 1996 00:45:08 in article <Re: How fast in 3rd?>,
>'myvws...@aol.com (MyVWsGotMe)' wrote:
>
>>In article <4sdfq6$m...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
>game...@aol.com>(Gamer2000) writes:
>>
>>>>If the car has the stock speedometer, shift at the little red hash
>>>>marks. The speedo should have one little red line about the 15 mph
>>>>point, two at around 30, and three at 45ish. If the engine,
>trans,>>>and speedo are all stock, then these are the shift points for
>your>>>car.
>>>
>>>Ok, My 76 beetle has the stock speedometer, But in 76 they must not
>have>>those marks. Instead the speedometer also shows KPH. Should I
still
>shift at these points?
>>
>>their engine ? It will be telling you to shift your stock
>>Bug if you go 20 in first, 40 in second, or 55 in third.
>>It will be screaming at you and begging you to stop.
>>Just as it will complain if you drop it into fourth at
>>people on the road.
>>the rash of questions along these lines we've been
>>getting here lately.)
>>
>>Rob <--- 74 Sun Bug, 66 Sunroof Bug, 71 Notchback
>
>
>Rob: it's not just engine speed and road speed... the load on the engine
is
>relevant as well. 28 mph in 4th gear, for example, which would normally
>constitute "lugging", would be acceptable (not to say necessarily
>desirable) in two circumstances: 1) rapid deceleration or 2) downward
>grade.
>
>The ideal is to stay within a certain RPM range it is true, but the
engine
>load must be considered as well.
>
>I do agree with your implication that people are over-revving their
>flat-fours however. They are not OHC engines after all.
listening; you can hear if a load is being put on the engine or not.
Just drive the car like you'd ride a bike. You know what it's like going
up a hill in 21st; the bug doesn't like it any more than you do.
Andy Dawes
Andrew Szafran
Old2Lt (old...@aol.com) wrote:
: Does anyone know how many RPMs a stock 72 SB (with 15" tires) turns at 55
: and 65 miles per hour?
Yes, the formula is (88s/C)*A*G where s is the speed in MPH, C is your
wheel circumference (C=2pi*r), A is your axle ratio, and G is your gear
ratio.
Andrew Szafran
MyVWsGotMe
In article <4slb11$l...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, game...@aol.com
(Gamer2000) writes:
> I also Agree, In driving School there is no mention of a manual
>transmission in the class. Its in the book but they never review this.
In
>a class of 35 Only i and one other kid knew how to drive a stick.
> I never had a problem in my 1st 76 bug, i was always in the right gear
at
>the right speeds in the right conditions. Btw I am Getting much better at
>driving the bug in the rain. very little lockup problems, New tires
helped
>90% though. the ones on there were worn and dry rotted.
We're in the same boat. I took my driving test in a
standard trans car (a Dodge Aspen station wagon, no less)
and I was VERY disappointed that the driving instruction
I got covered nothing but basics- I had to teach myself
how to drive that standard. They didn't cover anything-
I mean, automatics have other gears besides D right?
They never explained under what conditions that might
be useful. I wonder now if the guy we had for an instructor
even knew how to drive a standard.
In my opinion, unless you are physically unable to
operate it, you are handicapping yourself by NOT learning
the skill of driving a standard transmission. You aren't
DONE learning if you can ONLY drive an automatic.
It really burns me to ask someone to help drive a car
home, or take someone to the store, whatever, and
have them say " But I can't drive a stick." Waahhh!
LEARN! Millions of people do it: you can too.
Makes me yearn for the European approach to the
car, where standards are the rule-of-thumb and the
automatics are unusual enough to get a badge on the
rear saying "Automatic". Can't fix the lazy American
motoring public in a day, though. See ya later. Rob
jot...@aristotle.net
myvws...@aol.com (MyVWsGotMe) wrote:
>YES!!! For crying out loud doesn't anyone listen to
>their engine ? It will be telling you to shift your stock
>Bug if you go 20 in first, 40 in second, or 55 in third.
Beware the doppler effect! At higher speeds the engine doesn't
*sound* like it is turning as many RPM's as it really is.
>It will be screaming at you and begging you to stop.
>Just as it will complain if you drop it into fourth at
>28 mph. I'm convinced that all driving instructors
>must be doing NOTHING AT ALL when they put
>people on the road.
If you actually go to a drivers training course they only teach you
auto-shift cars....
Jotsix
Old2Lt
I am building a 72 SB 'Vert and am seraching for a reliable 2.0litre
powerplant. This will be my daily driver. So the question is, who is
better (for the money):
GEX or Bernie Bergmann.
Also, some other maker that I have not considered. If you have experience
with these engines, please let me know.
Many thanks for your help,
John Duncan (Old...@aol.com)
P.S. Does anyone have any experience with the trannies made by Strictly
Foreign?
Paul Chrostowski
jot...@aristotle.net wrote:
: myvws...@aol.com (MyVWsGotMe) wrote:
:
:
: >YES!!! For crying out loud doesn't anyone listen to
: >their engine ? It will be telling you to shift your stock
: >Bug if you go 20 in first, 40 in second, or 55 in third.
: Beware the doppler effect! At higher speeds the engine doesn't
: *sound* like it is turning as many RPM's as it really is.
I'm going to have to call you on this one. There's no doppler effect when
your at higher speeds. The doppler effect works when a sound source
approaches the listener making the sound higher pitched, then when it
recedes it has a lower pitch. Since you, your engine and the air
surrounding you both are all always travelling at the same speed there's
no doppler effect. An engine may sound relatively quieter at the same RPM
at higher speed than lower speed because of the wind and tire noise
becoming more of a factor, though.
Later,
Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Chrostowski Amiga A3000/030/25 and //
Rockledge, FL A2000HD/000/7.14 \\ //
E-Mail : pchr...@gate.net \X/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1963 VW Bug ?99,000+ miles
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dead Poet
pchr...@gate.net (Paul Chrostowski) wrote:
>jot...@aristotle.net wrote:
>: myvws...@aol.com (MyVWsGotMe) wrote:
>:
>:
>: >YES!!! For crying out loud doesn't anyone listen to
>: >their engine ? It will be telling you to shift your stock
>: >Bug if you go 20 in first, 40 in second, or 55 in third.
>: Beware the doppler effect! At higher speeds the engine doesn't
>: *sound* like it is turning as many RPM's as it really is.
>I'm going to have to call you on this one. There's no doppler effect when
>your at higher speeds. The doppler effect works when a sound source
>approaches the listener making the sound higher pitched, then when it
>recedes it has a lower pitch. Since you, your engine and the air
>surrounding you both are all always travelling at the same speed there's
>no doppler effect. An engine may sound relatively quieter at the same RPM
>at higher speed than lower speed because of the wind and tire noise
>becoming more of a factor, though.
I've found that John Muris recomendations are the best. Why people
want to race the hell out of an old VW is beyond me. I'm strictly a
stock person and drive my Ghia 1-10 in 1st, 10-20 in 2nd, 20 - about
35 in 3rd, and then anything over 35 in 4th.... sometimes I go a tad
higher in 3rd, but try not to.
--Brian
DAKOTASP
Saw your note and I had to reply, Stay away from MOFOCO. They sold me an
engine about 2 years ago with a cracked case and wouldn't make good for
it.After installing the engine I drove the car about 10 miles only to find
oil shooting into the fan shroud.I got a long distance runaround and wound
up rebuilding the engine with the help of a friend and a used case. For
the $2100.00 I spent all I got back from them was $140.00 for returning
their trash case!
Good Luck
Bob
Chip
The big question here is do you have a semi-local reliable
rebuilder available. IMO this tends to be the best way to go. If you have
problems the source is relativly close as opposed to being mail-order.
Also you should think about how these big manufacturers are
mass-producing the
engines and may not take as much care or be as careful as someone doing
one at a time.
As far as a 2.0 being reliable as a daily driver, my
understanding is that with ANY engine, the more it is hopped up the more
it will need constant attention and maintinence.
As usual I claim to be no expert it is just my 2 cents....Chip