Re: Big Bang Bumkum?
Some interesting replies above.
I see the analogy between the theory and ABS but the opposite of ABS in this case is traction control. This cuts the power in the same way as ABS cuts the breaking until a sensor tells it it's save to feed it back in again.
But this isn't as I see the Big Bang theory.
Going back to my earlier posts, the higher torque per unit power means that the engine is spinning at a lower RPM for any given torque. It also means that a straight four producing a certain level of torque is a lot more "committed" to producing that torque than the equivalent Big Bang or V twin which is running a lower RPM for the same amount of torque..
If traction does break, because the straight four engine is more committed, it's harder to reign it in in the fraction of a second required before losing it. The Big bang/V twin is producing the same drive at a less committed, lower RPM and hence is easier to reign in should it break traction. It's easier to catch a slide on a Straight four at 8000 rpm than it is at 14,500 rpm due to the lesser commitment of the engine.
Explaining this lesser commitment with Power Pulses might just be looking for the sexier explanation rather than the more obvious one. I deal with this on a daily basis in my trade. It's far easier to use the sexy explanation than the one that actually describes what is going on. Two things are different in a V twin/Big bang engine and until they are tested in isolation, I suppose we will never know which is actually the hero and which is the hanger on.
But in the mean time, I'll go for higher torque per RPM
Carl
|