I cant believe anyone is still listening to this guy after he recommended a 215 tire in the rear. I guess if all you do is highway racing in a straight line, thats fine, but any of you who plan on turning are listening to the wrong guy (unless of course he's also recommending running a 175 in the front lol ). Please do more searching before trying this "tire mod" of his... the safety of you and your car depends on it.

 

[QUOTE=TB,Nov 2 2007, 05:35 PM] I cant believe anyone is still listening to this guy after he recommended a 215 tire in the rear.

 

I have 4.77's and a SC and I like mine.

As for your top end speed, exactly how often are you going to have go over 135 MPH anyway?

 

[QUOTE=s2000Junky,Nov 2 2007, 03:49 PM]You think so? I think your missing the whole point noob. Did you find the page? One of the main reasons was it alows me to explore some higher gear ratio's without changing the stock rear end set. 225/45/16

 

It has nothing to do with you being a nice guy, and everything to do with safety on a car already prone to oversteer when driven by the unwary.

And as for your e-thugging comment about schooling me, you know as little about me as I know about you (nothing), so any comment you make regarding how much more you know than me sounds a bit silly. Congrats.

Stop spreading dangerous information like it's gospel. Go into the Racing and Competition forum and tell those guys that the 215 wide rear tire is better for performance on a track with turns

 

I dont know if Im not reading everything, although I have been watching this thread since Im debating on the gears....

S2000junky only said that HIS results from HIS exp with tire size gave him positive results...he gave his information and said if someone else wanted to try to go ahead. He never said to do it and it's going to be great for everyday all day use...

So far his information and findings have been accurate as I have discussed his facts on the 4.44 and 4.77 with some Honda techs here in miami and they agree that his information is just. So I think if your not going to give any facts or relative info on GEARS I dont think you sould continue "arguing" with s200 junky. I would like to learn about the gears, not arguing about tire sizes.

My 2 cents....

 

as some of you have seen in my thread, i ran simulations where the initial conditions were speed = 0 mph, and distance = 0. the results that i got, although not claimed to be completely accurate, do show the relative behavior that FD gears will have on the car. all other conditions being equal, and with a shift speed of .35 seconds, i found that 4.77 > 4.56 > 4.44 > 4.10 in a 1/4 race. i don't think i would agree with s2000Junky that the 4.44 would be quicker than the 4.77; at least not in a quarter mile. as for being in the meat of the power band as you cross the quarter mile mark...you might have a higher trap speed, but that doesn't translate into a better time.

i did however want to see just how things might turn out on the street, at say...a 20 mph roll, as s2000Junky had suggested. i suspected that the 4.77 car would lose at least some of its advantage, and as my results have shown, that is in fact the case. i will show a simulation from 20 mph to 120 mph. and since that takes around 18 seconds, i will show the corresponding distance over time graph for 18 seconds. since the distance graph represents who is in front, that's the one i'm most interested in. and as you will see, it is a wash. i tried to zoom in to 3 second intervals but it's still a wash really. pm me if you want to see those, because i'm not going to take up space to post all 6 of those graphs. it really is a driver's race imo.

for 4.44 and 4.77, you want to compare the blue to the cyan.




one last note...although it's close between 4.44 and 4.77 (and even 4.56 for that matter), it is pretty clear that whatever you choose will be quicker than the stock 4.1.
one last note:

 

thats what I'm here for....

and thanks for showing graphs....very informative

at the same time.....all we've gotten on this thread are ppl to disagree about junky's facts.....
.....with that being stated, I'll also add that those who have disagreed haven't really provided much facts themselves


it's like me saying that blueberry is the best berry b/c blah blah blah....and u saying its not and not giving a reasonable debate.....besides the guy that auto X's and 1/4 miles it

lets keep in mind guys that we're all here to sponge this shyt in,,,,,at least i AM

I've enjoyed this thread so far.....

as for the graphs, it just sucks if you're running a 1/4 mile and your launch causes you to jack-knife to the side and lose a few seconds due to RWD..but i do understand that these are based on hypothetical "perfect" runs

 

of course. it's impossible to take into account every variable, and yes, every run will be different. the computer is good at making every run the same, given a set of parameters and initial conditions though

 

I have not participated in the discussion about FD gears themselves on purpose, only about this "tire mod". If you are suggesting I need to provide facts about why this "tire mod" is silly, you need to read this forum more because it's absolutely littered with evidence and experience against this idea. Inform yourselves, or not.