[techun]

well my friend had a 00 cavalier and now a 01 civic dx with a 1.6 liter engine..100 hp

he thinks its a fast car first off

secondly, ive never driven a manual car, but he claims shifting from 1>2>3>4>3>4>5 makes him go faster than from 1>2>3>4>5


thirdly, on cars.com, on 6 speed cars, the ratio of the 5th gear is higher than the 4th

isnt that the opposite of what they want to happen..

[veryhumid]

Originally Posted by techun

secondly, ive never driven a manual car, but he claims shifting from 1>2>3>4>3>4>5 makes him go faster than from 1>2>3>4>5

That is insane.

Originally Posted by techun

thirdly, on cars.com, on 6 speed cars, the ratio of the 5th gear is higher than the 4th

for every upshift, the gear ratio gets higher. another way of saying is that the gears get "taller".

[techun]

he says he does it to give himself more torque..because that's what you need when you're already moving along..

[veryhumid]

Originally Posted by techun

he says he does it to give himself more torque..because that's what you need when you're already moving along..

think about the time he wastes downshifting, when he should be pushing each gear all the way to redline, then shifting.

[techun]

oh, i always thought he was full of it, but i feel better arguing when im positive im correct, as ive never driven manual before

[FudgeNuggets]

He's an idiot. Almost as big of idiots say that shifting at the redline makes you accel faster. The truth is EVERY car has a torque curve, you shift right as or after the torque begins to drop off depending on how flat it is near the bottom of the torque curve.

In other words if you're torque is highest between 2500rpms and 7000rpms you want to shift at or after the 7000rpm mark as long as you don't drop below 2500rpms after the shift. If it is then you shift at 7200,7500 or whatever it takes to get you above the 2500 at the beginning of the next gear.

[techun]

also, which is faster

a 140hp/165tq station wagon
or his 100/100 civic?

[Slayer2003]

How heavy is the station wagon?

With his shifting, you should win lol. I have never heard of this.....is he using it like from a dead stop to get to 5th, or does he mean, 1, 2, 3, 4, back down to 3 to pass, then 4, 5?

Or, 1, 2, 3, 4, 3, 5 like in a race? Let him keep going. He will fry his motor.

Nissan 1.
honda 0.

[techun]

taurus gl wagon, probably pretty heavy..i mean it is a station wagon

yeah he means from a dead stop..1 2 3 4 3 4 5

[benbaked]

my 105 horsepower kia rio would beat his honda in a race...

...because i know how to properly shift.

i bet he thinks his "powered by honda" windshield decal, carbon fiber shift knob, and supra wing adds horsepower too. lol, not that his car has all that flashy crap but i wouldn't be surprised.

[techun]

no, he doesnt have anything like that, its like a silver color, everything stock

he paid 8k for it, and it doesnt even have a/c

[perfectturmoil]

You couldn't possibly go faster shifting that way, because you would have to slow down to get BACK into 3rd gear.

My car: 1st to bout 30, 2nd to 60, 3rd to like 85? 4th who knows..

You use the powerband at the speed you're at. So, if you're going 45 miles per hour, you want to be in second gear for the most power. You shouldn't be 'maxxing out' each gear, but pretty close in most cases.

Never a case where you should downshift, unless you're doing REAL racing, which involves turns :- ]

[FudgeNuggets]

With a driver who knows what he's doing behind the wheel of each car, my money would be on the Civic.

[RoadWarrior]

Well only way I can see that happening is if there's a huge dent in the top of the torque curve. Although some modern engine controllers only allow wide open throttle for a few seconds, so if it's a short time on that car, then I suppose it's possible that doing that could seem to make it quicker.... blipping it into 4th to drop the revs and make the EC give you another few seconds of WOT. Only other scenario I can think of where that would be any good is maybe if you've stuck a twin barrel sequential carby on that isn't set up right or is sized wrong and the second choke plate isn't opening soon enough. Also I think I've heard of coil packs going bad that give you a dead spot at certain RPMs.

When to change is car and engine specific, depends how broad the peak of the torque curve is, how quickly it drops off and how close or wide your ratios are. If you've got a real broad torque curve that's fairly flat, you might find changing up at 4000 is as good as changing up at 5000. If your torque curve is sharp and you've got nothing at the bottom end (short stroke screamers are like this) then you might have to take it close to redline before you change. Long stroke motors have more bottom end and changing around 4000 often works pretty good. If you're driving by the seat of your pants, you can pretty much feel the torque dropping off, so a few minutes practice in the car will have you changing around the right area. Very few vehicles are still really pulling close to the redline, most you need to be changing up when you hit within 1000 RPM of it. Also, while if you've done induction mods maybe some porting, and it IS still pulling to the redline, well, remember what that red line is there for. You don't want to run over the stock red line unless you've done internal engine work, balanced and blueprinted everything, nitrided cranks etc, then maybe you can go 1000 over without it getting very expensive very quickly.

[SuperFarStucker]

it makes absolutely no ****ing sense. if you shift out of 3rd in the middle of the powerband you've just squandered a lot of power because you will be outside the power band when you enter 4th gear and then when you go back to 3rd you will be at the top of the power band or even past it, i.e. you should have stayed in 4th, and then when you shift to fifth you will be outside the powerband again! It is just a ****ing ridiculous idea. That being said, racing cars with 130 hp that weigh 3200 lbs is a disgrace to humanity.

[ajrettke]

123435? What in the F is he on. I would laugh in his face and never talk to him again. That is seriously dumb as hell. That comment falls in the class of this dude on the BMW forums who posted something along the lines...."I really like my new car, but when I'm completely stopped my tach still doesn't read 0...and I mean it says like 1k when I'm completely stopped."

People like that should be shot...yeah it's fine if you just don't know how to shift or how an engine works, but how do you learn about shifting/racing or tachometers and engines but still say stuff like that?

Tell your friend to make sure to stick a Vtec sicker on and CF wing to add 25 hp, you gotta keep those rear tires down on those FF civics.

[techun]

lol, yeah

i want more opinions on which car would win the "race" because we are both smart enough not to actually race

my engine is 2x the size, but so is the car
more opinions on this?

[ajrettke]

a wagon doesn't mean it's really heavier, the "avant" is the wagon version of my sedan which is only 100lbs more. I'd say most likely your wagon would win if it's 140hp and 165tq. Check online for the weight of the 2 vehicles...and if possible, hp/tq curves

[techun]

civic 2,395 lbs 106 hp, 103tq
wagon ~3500 lbs 140 hp 165 tq

i cant find the a 93 taurus's weight, but that figure is from a 96? sable wagon (same thing)

[Cyrix_2k]

It's not just the power-to-weight ratio, it's also how the two vehicles are geared. I can, however, say that my 1989 Caprice w/ 5.0L V8 is a good deal faster than any Honda I've come across. It matches my neighbor's 1992 Firebird w/ 3.1L V6 and lower gears.