What is SAE equivalent to mass? I never learned it if it exists, I always used metric measurements for everything, except lumber.
What is SAE equivalent to mass? I never learned it if it exists, I always used metric measurements for everything, except lumber.
Pounds (lbs)
Same for Suzuki Swift from the early 90's.
Isn't that just weight, not an actual measurement of matter in an object?
LFS needs a veyron like car and miles of road to get it upto 250+ mph
If you want to go straight and fast, get MS Flight Sim
This was only joke right?
I would have more fun in a carbureted muscle car than an veyron with a bunch of electronics.
Forces are not influenced by gravity; masses are.
Yes, Newtons and pounds are very common measures of force.
That's sort of (exactly) what I said. But wait, Kilogram (1000 grams) is a measure of mass and not the Gram (1 gram)? I'm going to have to get better at making decimal points as there are lots of masses smaller than 1kg.
Feel free to express your mass in pounds but your stoichiometry is going to go to hell if you ever visit the moon.
The pound has been standardized such that 1lbm is equal to 453 grams (Note the lack of decimal point... I'm not looking up the exact number.) and if you want to talk about mass expressed in pounds in a Physics class you will want to express it as lbm (Pounds Mass) Otherwise, at least in America where everyone grows up hearing how much they would weigh on Pluto or Jupiter in pounds, people might assume you are talking about pound force. When I hear "pound" I am thinking about the force as measured on the surface of the planet.
Ok its not that easy to find a production GTI with a 1300cc NA, but if peugeot could got 103bhp out of an 8valved carb engine there is nothing to prevent a 1.3 16V EFI to obtain 115 is just that they dont make that kind of engines anymore. anyone got any closer in the search of a modern production 1.3 NA with 115bhp?
Perhaps this car needs a version with a 1.4/1.6 and 125hp but more usable powerband.
The UF 1300 S: 1.3 carbed and about 72/76Bhp (you know so it look like certain legendary car)
Both of then could be part of S3 new content acompanied by a FR like the original miata/mx5 with less than 950kg and about 120Bhp.
Perhaps this car needs a version with a 1.4/1.6 and 125hp but more usable powerband.
The UF 1300 S: 1.3 carbed and about 72/76Bhp (you know so it look like certain legendary car)
Both of then could be part of S3 new content acompanied by a FR like the original miata/mx5 with less than 950kg and about 120Bhp.
People use pounds to express force, but that is technically wrong. Force is actually pound-force (or pounds-force, as Tristan put it) if you reckon it using pounds.
Same thing with kilograms. Kilogram is a measure of mass, but you can use it as a measure of force by using the unit, kilogram-force.
The SI base unit for mass is the Kilogram. You are obviously free to convert kilograms to grams if necessary, but make sure to modify any formulae that use kilograms for m.
I personally prefer SI units.
Fore more information on SI units and their definitions, see the official brochure of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures: http://www.bipm.org/en/si/si_brochure/
Seems like you discovered the solution to obesity...
So, My GobLox, if the pound isn't the standard imperial measurement for mass, then what is? And I don't want obscure units used in special cases, but the general term. What mass is my car in imperial units.
Yes, that's right. Pounds. Pounds = Mass. Pound(s)-Force = Force.
It's very simple. Imperial is no more complex or difficult to understand than SI, and in most cases is actually less arbitrary. But don't think I don't like or use the metric system too - I am fluent in both, and can swap between them at will.
Yes, that's right. Pounds. Pounds = Mass. Pound(s)-Force = Force.
It's very simple. Imperial is no more complex or difficult to understand than SI, and in most cases is actually less arbitrary. But don't think I don't like or use the metric system too - I am fluent in both, and can swap between them at will.
Lol - okay, well I say Pounds = Force and Pounds-Mass = Mass. I'm just as correct as you are in that it's not wrong exactly so much as it is vague. Like telling someone to go get a Drink from the bar. Are you getting Milk Coffee or a Beer? If engineers used "lb" on a schematic people might die. Weren't you the one complaining about the use of Dietary calories as apposed to Kcal on food? You'd think you'd be the first to support my argument.
Agreed, I have a 1988 (yep, 20 years old now) CR-X with a D16a9 engine in it and at last dyno run (completely stock, but with a new bottom end) it was still pushing 141bhp (originally quote 135bhp)
Actually, it's the mass that isn't affected by gravity, weight(force) is a result of gravity
Mass is the volume of the unit multipled by its density... for instance 1g = 1cc x 1cc/g
For instance 1g of water is 1g of water whether here, in space or on jupiter.
However lbs (weight) being the result of gravity are partial to changes in global variations. (So ladies, always weigh yourselves around midday on a new moon).
The imperial measurement for mass is called a slug, and in stadard conditions (gravity being 9.8N/kg or 9.8m/s^2) is 32lbs. Alternately you can use lbM (pound-mass) which is a 1/32 of a slug (making it a lb on earth)
EDIT: And stones are a measure of force....
Modern newer cars are coming with more assists, automatic trasmission and more power...
that is soo much boring...
here where i live, its said you have skill if you can keep up a good speed in an uphill with a 1000cc car =D
(i must have alot of skill, i drive a 100cc motorbike )
that is soo much boring...
here where i live, its said you have skill if you can keep up a good speed in an uphill with a 1000cc car =D
(i must have alot of skill, i drive a 100cc motorbike )
this is a bit of non-subject, if you want more power choose a faster can on the list..
Why increase the power of the XFG? Just drive the FXO?
But also know that these 1980s based cars will be lighter than their modern equivalent. Seeing as they will have much smaller crumple zones, aribags, aircon, abs and such like, the cars (apart from maybe the FXO, but I still reckon thats just the fastest TBO down to ease of driving, myself) are fairly well balanced and have their own strengths and weaknesses in different places.
Upping the power of any of the cars will cause issues somewhere else, either an inbalance of classes or a new class to be created.
Daihatsu Charade GTti got 101pk out of a 993 cm3 3cilinder-engine.
GTti? As in forced induction? The 100hp/litre figure 'ideal' applies to normally aspirated engines, not turbocharged (150hp/litre would be more like it).
randomly mixing between base 12 base 3 and base whatever the hell some deranged brit thought might be best this time round isnt difficult and arbitrary?
No, I don't think it is. They are generally based on real life values. Whilst some of the metric system might ultimately be based on a real life value, it's not one most people will ever see or be able to relate to.
But don't start this old argument. I can work in both quite happily, and I believe than any engineer of any ability should be happy working in both, and understand the pluses and minuses of each system...
But don't start this old argument. I can work in both quite happily, and I believe than any engineer of any ability should be happy working in both, and understand the pluses and minuses of each system...
did you know that von braun refused to work with imperial units?
There are exceptions to every rule. But an exception does not a new rule make.
i cant think of any other great engineers that had to put up with the imperial system after moving to the us but i know plenty of good engineers that cringe every time they have to put up with imperial units and the first thing theyll do is convert them to something useful
road cars HP
(171 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG