Automatic Ecoboost Has More Acceleration Than Manual GT???

[Ardy]

Peak Acceleration always occurs at peak power. End of story.

No. Not when your gear ratio is constant.

All cars’ peak acceleration happen at peak engine torque in first gear which is what I calculated.

Sponsored

 

[Ardy]

No, nope, no sir. Peak acceleration occurs at peak engine torque in a given gear

Thank you.

 

[WildHorse]

Where are your numbers to back up your claim that peak acceleration occurs at peak hp, rather than peak torque?

Cause horsepower is how quickly you can accomplish work over a distance. Torque is force over a distance. How quickly you can accelerate of your top speed is determined by how quickly you can accomplish work over a distance, ie peak horsepower.

 

[Idaho2018GTPremium]

From what I'm seeing here, an automatic Mustang Ecoboost has more MAX wheel torque than a manual GT. Not even considering that the ecoboost is lighter, it has greater peak acceleration.

Max acceleration (aka max wheel torque) for a car happens at peak torque in first gear.

This can't be right?

Automatic Ecoboost: 350 x 4.696 x 3.15 = 5177 ft*lbs of torque at the wheels.

That's engine torque times first gear times rear axle.

Manual GT: 420 x 3.237 x 3.73 = 5071 ft*lbs of torque at the wheels.

WHAT? The ecoboost can put you back in your seat more than a GT?

I didn't even account for torque multiplication from the torque converter in the ecoboost.

Help me sleep!!!

Explain

____________________________________
Here's where I got the gear ratios from. Published by ford

I think you're right that, theoretically, there is a very brief moment in time where the Ecoboost has higher instantaneous acceleration potential than the M6 GT by a tiny margin. But think about how fast that engine speed is changing, and where that occurs in the rpm band. Peak torque occurs at 3000 rpm, and beyond that engine starts to fall off fast. So it is such a short, discrete amount of time, that it is inconsequential in the grand scheme of acceleration. I am pretty surprised, still, though.

 

[WildHorse]

and with 3.31's it's 4500.0774 lbs/ft @ peak torque. Even with 3.31's in the MT82 GT, who's accelerating quicker at the moment of peak torque if the peak occured at the same RPM? I'll wait for the math.

 

[EFI]

But if you're talking just talking about which car can put you back in your seat more, the auto ecoboost has higher MAX acceleration.

My tuned big turbo 2500HD truck throws me back in my seat more than the Mustang on initial hit...but the Mustang would smoke it in a race further than 20 feet.

If that's your thing eg. being thrown back in your seat then sure the ecoboost A10 will do a better job. If you're looking for the faster car overall, the GT is still it.

 

[RalphK]

Easy read

https://danielmiessler.com/study/horsepower/

 

[shogun32]

If that's your thing eg. being thrown back in your seat

pushaw. Drive down to your local USAF base with a C130 detachment and ask for some JATO packs and bolt a few to your roof.

 

[Ardy]

Cause horsepower is how quickly you can accomplish work over a distance. Torque is force over a distance. How quickly you can accelerate of your top speed is determined by how quickly you can accomplish work over a distance, ie peak horsepower.

Acceleration is Force/Mass

Not Power/Mass

And Torque/Wheel radius is Force

 

[Ardy]

over a 2% difference based on theoretical number

The difference is quite small (107 ft*lbs is merely 2% of the total torque), so it's most probably impossible to feel.

I gave the GT performance pack gears and the ecoboost standard gears.

If the GT had standard gears, it would be more than %2

I also didn’t account for less weight in the ecoboost

I also didn’t account for torque multiplication happening at the torque converter for the ecoboost either.

 

[WildHorse]

ecoboost A10 will do a better job

Then there's the A10 GT

Easy read

https://danielmiessler.com/study/horsepower/

Nobodies disputing that hp/torque are unrelated.

I also didn’t account for less weight in the ecoboost

I also didn’t account for torque multiplication happening at the torque converter for the ecoboost either.

Well then shit.. that explains why ecoboosts A10 are the quickest accelerating machines on the planet. Thanks for the education. Case closed.

 

[Ardy]

The difference is quite small (107 ft*lbs is merely 2% of the total torque), so it's most probably impossible to feel.

Well then shit.. that explains why ecoboosts A10 are the quickest accelerating machines on the planet. Thanks for the education. Case closed.

If I did account for those 3 things each and everyone would be in favour of the ecoboost. Not accounting them currently is going against the ecoboost’s numbers and it still has greater wheel torque

 

[Elp_jc]

Well I mean, the MT-82 is a Getrag design, just with some in house changes.

If it's not made under Getrag's license, then it's NOT a Getrag, period . Ram makes the transmissions for their trucks in house, BUT that's under ZF's license, so they're actually ZF-8s. Ford prefers to save money on trannies, so even if they're similar to Getrags and ZFs, you can't conveniently call them that.

 

[Idaho2018GTPremium]

Then there's the A10 GT


Nobodies disputing that hp/torque are unrelated.

Well then shit.. that explains why ecoboosts A10 are the quickest accelerating machines on the planet. Thanks for the education. Case closed.

I don't think he was saying the Ecoboost accelerates faster overall than the M6 GT. I take it he was surprised that the A10 Ecoboost was momentarily capable of applying more peak torque to the rear wheels (due to gearing) than the M6 GT can under a very specific set of circumstances. Albeit, for only a split second.

 

[Ardy]

I don't think he was saying the Ecoboost accelerates faster overall than the M6 GT. I take it he was surprised that the A10 Ecoboost was momentarily capable of applying more peak torque to the rear wheels (due to gearing) than the M6 GT can under a very specific set of circumstances. Albeit, for only a split second.

Exactly my point

Sponsored