Acceleration put into perspective

mustangII460 · 05-31-2005, 11:07 PM

Saw this today , WoW!

Acceleration, Put Into Perspective

* One Top Fuel dragster 500 cubic-inch Hemi engine makes more
horsepower than the first 4 rows at the Daytona 500.
* Under full throttle, a dragster engine consumes 11.2 gallons of
nitro methane per second; a fully loaded 747 consumes jet fuel at the
same rate with 25% less energy being produced.
* A stock Dodge Hemi V8 engine cannot produce enough power to merely
drive the dragster's supercharger.
* With 3000 CFM of air being rammed in by the supercharger on
overdrive, the fuel mixture is compressed into a near-solid form
before ignition. Cylinders run on the verge of hydraulic lock at full
throttle.
* At the stoichiometric 1.7:1 air/fuel mixture for nitro methane the
flame front temperature measures 7050 degrees F.
* Nitro methane burns yellow. The spectacular white flame seen
Above the stacks at night is raw burning hydrogen, dissociated from
atmospheric water vapor by the searing exhaust gases.
* Dual magnetos supply 44 amps to each spark plug. This is the
Output of an arc welder in each cylinder.
* Spark plug electrodes are totally consumed during a pass. After
½ way, the engine is dieseling from compression plus the glow of exhaust valves at 1400 degrees F. The engine can only be shut down by cutting the fuel flow.
* If spark momentarily fails early in the run, unburned nitro builds
up in the affected cylinders and then explodes with sufficient force
to blow cylinder heads off the block in pieces or split the block in
half.
* Dragsters reach over 300 MPH before you have completed reading
This sentence.
* In order to exceed 300 MPH in 4.5 seconds, dragsters must accelerate an average of over 4 G's. In order to reach 200 MPH well before half-track, the launch acceleration approaches 8 G's.
* Top Fuel engines turn approximately 540 revolutions from light to
light!
* Including the burnout, the engine must only survive 900
revolutions under load.
* The redline is actually quite high at 9500 RPM.
* THE BOTTOM LINE: Assuming all the equipment is paid off, the crew
worked for free, & for once, NOTHING BLOWS UP, each run costs an
estimated $1,000 per second.

* The current Top Fuel dragster elapsed time record is 4.441 seconds for the quarter-mile (10/05/03, Tony Schumacher).
The top speed record is 333.00 MPH (533 km/h) as measured over the last 66' of the run(09/28/03, Doug Kalitta).

Putting this all into perspective:
You are driving the average $140,000 Lingenfelter twin-turbo powered Corvette Z06. Over a mile up the road, a Top Fuel dragster is staged & ready to launch down a quarter-mile strip as you pass. You have the advantage of a flying start. You run the 'Vette hard up through the gears and blast across the starting line & pass the dragster at an honest 200 MPH. The 'tree' goes green for both of you at that moment. The dragster launches & starts after you. You keep your foot down hard, but you hear an incredibly brutal whine that sears your eardrums & within 3 seconds the dragster catches & passes you. He beats you to the finish line, a quarter-mile away from where you just passed him.
Think about it - from a standing start, the dragster had spotted you 200 MPH & not only caught, but nearly blasted you off the road when he passed you within a mere 1320 foot long race! That, is acceleration!

KiltedBanshees93GT · 06-01-2005, 09:45 AM

I'm pretty sure I've read (at least part of) that before, I remember the bit about the hydraulic lock, but I dont think I've seen the bit about the "race"

. All told, pretty impressive *shaking head in marvel of physics*.

Mr 5 0 · 06-01-2005, 03:49 PM

Interesting, and a testament to the awesome acceleration potential of a nitro-methane powered dragster. However, the reality is that a Top Fuel dragster has about as much relation to that Corvette Z06 used as an example in the article - or any other street car - as a kids bicycle has to a Honda CBR 600F crotch-rocket. It's strictly for 'show'. A 'serious' motorcycle doing the quarter-mile in 9 seconds (or less) @ 140 mph is quite a show and a dragster running 4 second quarter miles @ over 300 mph makes for quite a show, too. Just don't confuse it with an actual car.

Unit 5302 · 06-01-2005, 06:25 PM

I'm not entirely sure who came up with the comparison of the Boeing 747, but it's grossly inaccurate.

The Boeing 747 is powered by 4 engines capable of producing 55,000-60,000lbs of thrust each, but they use only 1/4 of their power while cruising at an altitude of 40,000ft at 0.9 mach (it's normal cruise speed). This number (using 55,145lbs) is still equivelent to approximately 87,325hp... or roughly 11 times more than a top fuel dragster. A 747 burns approximately 1 gallon of fuel per second in flight. A top fuel dragster produces 8,000hp and burns 11.2 gallons per second during its run. Obviously the 747 would use more fuel during take off than 1 gallon per second; however, it would also be producing 4 times more power. With 350,000hp on tap, it makes the top fuel dragster look like a marshmallow peep. The 747 is not only far more powerful, but also far more efficient.

mustangII460 · 06-01-2005, 08:01 PM

(It's for fun reading, not to be taken seriously)

Who really cares if it's even close?

Take a smoke break if it bothers anyone too much.

Rev · 06-01-2005, 08:13 PM

I'd be willing to race a 747 in the 1/4 mile from a standing start, and even bet money on it. As Mr. 50 stated, it's not even revelvant.

Rev

Unit 5302 · 06-01-2005, 10:00 PM

Regardless of it's relevance, it's inaccurate. I can't say whether or not you could out-accelerate a 747 in a quarter mile. I don't see how that means anything.

Mr 5 0 · 06-02-2005, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unit 5302

Regardless of it's relevance, it's inaccurate. I can't say whether or not you could out-accelerate a 747 in a quarter mile. I don't see how that means anything.

Neither does a one-off custom-built machine with 4 wheels and a parachute to stop it mean much in the real world of cars and driving. The whole comparison thing (Corvette, 747, whatever) is a bit pointless but some of the statistics are interesting even if somewhat inaccurate because they are based on incomplete information or false assumptions.

The point of the article is that dragsters go very fast, very quickly - just as they are intended to. Got it.

Unit 5302 · 06-02-2005, 06:23 PM

Forgive me for pointing out grossly inaccurate information.

mustangII460 · 06-02-2005, 06:51 PM

The internet = Grossly inccurate information.

RelaX people, this is entertainment in cyberspace. Does anyone believe anything on the net as true? LMAO!

grey88gt · 06-02-2005, 09:18 PM

Maybe we could compare piss ants and june bugs next. One can fly and one can run. One is bigger and has more power and and and well never mind. LMAO. Its all fun and its nice to see an off the wall post sometimes, gets the old brain thinking about the un ordinary stuff. Have fun ppl.

HotRoddin · 06-03-2005, 02:11 AM

WOW ... this may be one of the funnyest threads i've ever read ... somebody comes up with a way to try and describe the power of a AA/F dragster and everybody gets their shorts in a knot because its dissing corvettes and 747's lol

Of course those aren't very fair or very good comparisons, because they were never ment to be comparisons!! They were ment to be points of reference, to make it easier to grasp how much power and acceleration you can cram into a little package.

KiltedBanshees93GT · 06-03-2005, 08:31 AM

^ *Ditto*
Its all about *Obi Wan voice* perspective

mustangII460 · 06-03-2005, 02:19 PM

747's are RICE. Wonder how much horsepower those stickers all over them make?

Capri306 · 06-04-2005, 01:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mustangII460

747's are RICE.

Yep, the ORIGINAL park-bench wing and quad fart pipe-equipped machine...LoL

Fine, you want perspective, look at something called muons. Yes, I spelled that correctly, and you can see the wiki on it here. They're so fast that the effects of time dilation in special relativity and space-time are a factor in how long they exist. MWahahahahah!

Yes, I'm changing my major from EE to Mad Scientist.

grey88gt · 06-04-2005, 08:47 PM

Capri where in the heck did you come up with that? I got lost in the first paragraph LOL.

HotRoddin · 06-04-2005, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capri306

They're so fast that the effects of time dilation in special relativity and space-time are a factor in how long they exist. MWahahahahah!

Yeah, thats all well and good, but if a Corvette zoomed by one going 200 MPH, and just when it got to the edge of our galaxie, the muon side stepped the clutch could it .... oh never mind

Rod

Rev · 06-05-2005, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capri306

Yep, the ORIGINAL park-bench wing and quad fart pipe-equipped machine...LoL

Fine, you want perspective, look at something called muons. Yes, I spelled that correctly, and you can see the wiki on it here. They're so fast that the effects of time dilation in special relativity and space-time are a factor in how long they exist. MWahahahahah!

Yes, I'm changing my major from EE to Mad Scientist.

But is it relevant to top fuel dragsters and 747's and of course is it ACCURATE, lol ?

Rev

05-31-2005, 11:07 PM	#1
mustangII460 Factoy Five Roadster Join Date: May 2000 Location: Sevier Co,Tennessee Posts: 1,681	Acceleration put into perspective Saw this today , WoW! Acceleration, Put Into Perspective * One Top Fuel dragster 500 cubic-inch Hemi engine makes more horsepower than the first 4 rows at the Daytona 500. * Under full throttle, a dragster engine consumes 11.2 gallons of nitro methane per second; a fully loaded 747 consumes jet fuel at the same rate with 25% less energy being produced. * A stock Dodge Hemi V8 engine cannot produce enough power to merely drive the dragster's supercharger. * With 3000 CFM of air being rammed in by the supercharger on overdrive, the fuel mixture is compressed into a near-solid form before ignition. Cylinders run on the verge of hydraulic lock at full throttle. * At the stoichiometric 1.7:1 air/fuel mixture for nitro methane the flame front temperature measures 7050 degrees F. * Nitro methane burns yellow. The spectacular white flame seen Above the stacks at night is raw burning hydrogen, dissociated from atmospheric water vapor by the searing exhaust gases. * Dual magnetos supply 44 amps to each spark plug. This is the Output of an arc welder in each cylinder. * Spark plug electrodes are totally consumed during a pass. After ½ way, the engine is dieseling from compression plus the glow of exhaust valves at 1400 degrees F. The engine can only be shut down by cutting the fuel flow. * If spark momentarily fails early in the run, unburned nitro builds up in the affected cylinders and then explodes with sufficient force to blow cylinder heads off the block in pieces or split the block in half. * Dragsters reach over 300 MPH before you have completed reading This sentence. * In order to exceed 300 MPH in 4.5 seconds, dragsters must accelerate an average of over 4 G's. In order to reach 200 MPH well before half-track, the launch acceleration approaches 8 G's. * Top Fuel engines turn approximately 540 revolutions from light to light! * Including the burnout, the engine must only survive 900 revolutions under load. * The redline is actually quite high at 9500 RPM. * THE BOTTOM LINE: Assuming all the equipment is paid off, the crew worked for free, & for once, NOTHING BLOWS UP, each run costs an estimated $1,000 per second. * The current Top Fuel dragster elapsed time record is 4.441 seconds for the quarter-mile (10/05/03, Tony Schumacher). The top speed record is 333.00 MPH (533 km/h) as measured over the last 66' of the run(09/28/03, Doug Kalitta). Putting this all into perspective: You are driving the average $140,000 Lingenfelter twin-turbo powered Corvette Z06. Over a mile up the road, a Top Fuel dragster is staged & ready to launch down a quarter-mile strip as you pass. You have the advantage of a flying start. You run the 'Vette hard up through the gears and blast across the starting line & pass the dragster at an honest 200 MPH. The 'tree' goes green for both of you at that moment. The dragster launches & starts after you. You keep your foot down hard, but you hear an incredibly brutal whine that sears your eardrums & within 3 seconds the dragster catches & passes you. He beats you to the finish line, a quarter-mile away from where you just passed him. Think about it - from a standing start, the dragster had spotted you 200 MPH & not only caught, but nearly blasted you off the road when he passed you within a mere 1320 foot long race! That, is acceleration! __________________ Frank

06-01-2005, 09:45 AM	#2
KiltedBanshees93GT Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Pigeon Forge Tn Posts: 611	Re: Acceleration put into perspective I'm pretty sure I've read (at least part of) that before, I remember the bit about the hydraulic lock, but I dont think I've seen the bit about the "race" . All told, pretty impressive shaking head in marvel of physics. __________________ ____________ '66 Mustang Coupe- AKA "Lenore" on disability for a (long) bit '93 GT Mostly stock AKA "Fawkes" Rice Haters Club Member #239 "I find your lack of faith...disturbing." "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats." H. L. Mencken

06-01-2005, 03:49 PM	#3
Mr 5 0 Conservative Individualist Join Date: May 1997 Location: Wherever I need to be Posts: 7,487	Perspective and reality Interesting, and a testament to the awesome acceleration potential of a nitro-methane powered dragster. However, the reality is that a Top Fuel dragster has about as much relation to that Corvette Z06 used as an example in the article - or any other street car - as a kids bicycle has to a Honda CBR 600F crotch-rocket. It's strictly for 'show'. A 'serious' motorcycle doing the quarter-mile in 9 seconds (or less) @ 140 mph is quite a show and a dragster running 4 second quarter miles @ over 300 mph makes for quite a show, too. Just don't confuse it with an actual car. __________________ 5.0 Mustang Owner 1990 - 2005

06-01-2005, 06:25 PM	#4
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	Re: Acceleration put into perspective I'm not entirely sure who came up with the comparison of the Boeing 747, but it's grossly inaccurate. The Boeing 747 is powered by 4 engines capable of producing 55,000-60,000lbs of thrust each, but they use only 1/4 of their power while cruising at an altitude of 40,000ft at 0.9 mach (it's normal cruise speed). This number (using 55,145lbs) is still equivelent to approximately 87,325hp... or roughly 11 times more than a top fuel dragster. A 747 burns approximately 1 gallon of fuel per second in flight. A top fuel dragster produces 8,000hp and burns 11.2 gallons per second during its run. Obviously the 747 would use more fuel during take off than 1 gallon per second; however, it would also be producing 4 times more power. With 350,000hp on tap, it makes the top fuel dragster look like a marshmallow peep. The 747 is not only far more powerful, but also far more efficient.

06-01-2005, 08:01 PM	#5
mustangII460 Factoy Five Roadster Join Date: May 2000 Location: Sevier Co,Tennessee Posts: 1,681	Re: Acceleration put into perspective (It's for fun reading, not to be taken seriously) Who really cares if it's even close? Take a smoke break if it bothers anyone too much. __________________ Frank

06-01-2005, 08:13 PM	#6
Rev Registered Member Join Date: Nov 1998 Location: Houston, Tx. Posts: 3,887	Re: Acceleration put into perspective I'd be willing to race a 747 in the 1/4 mile from a standing start, and even bet money on it. As Mr. 50 stated, it's not even revelvant. Rev __________________ '66 Coupe, 306, 350-375 HP, C-4, 13.07 e.t., 104.8 mph, 1/4 mi. O.B.C. #2 '66 coupe

06-01-2005, 10:00 PM	#7
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	Re: Acceleration put into perspective Regardless of it's relevance, it's inaccurate. I can't say whether or not you could out-accelerate a 747 in a quarter mile. I don't see how that means anything.

06-02-2005, 06:23 PM	#9
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	Re: Acceleration put into perspective Forgive me for pointing out grossly inaccurate information.

06-02-2005, 06:51 PM	#10
mustangII460 Factoy Five Roadster Join Date: May 2000 Location: Sevier Co,Tennessee Posts: 1,681	Re: Acceleration put into perspective The internet = Grossly inccurate information. RelaX people, this is entertainment in cyberspace. Does anyone believe anything on the net as true? LMAO! __________________ Frank

06-02-2005, 09:18 PM	#11
grey88gt Registered Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Skiatook, Oklahoma Posts: 193	Re: Acceleration put into perspective Maybe we could compare piss ants and june bugs next. One can fly and one can run. One is bigger and has more power and and and well never mind. LMAO. Its all fun and its nice to see an off the wall post sometimes, gets the old brain thinking about the un ordinary stuff. Have fun ppl.

06-03-2005, 02:11 AM	#12
HotRoddin cranky old man Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Longview Texas Posts: 683	Re: Acceleration put into perspective WOW ... this may be one of the funnyest threads i've ever read ... somebody comes up with a way to try and describe the power of a AA/F dragster and everybody gets their shorts in a knot because its dissing corvettes and 747's lol Of course those aren't very fair or very good comparisons, because they were never ment to be comparisons!! They were ment to be points of reference, to make it easier to grasp how much power and acceleration you can cram into a little package. __________________ Under Construction: 64 Falcon 372 cu in. stroker 1:72 rod ratio 6.250" rods (long rod), Comp Cams XE274 230/236 520/526 @ .050, Scorpion Rollers, Roush 200 irons, 10:1 Keith Blacks, Hedman long tubes, 750 Holley DP, Edelbrock Victor Jr., C4 3500 stall, gears and tires to be anounced.

06-03-2005, 08:31 AM	#13
KiltedBanshees93GT Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Pigeon Forge Tn Posts: 611	Re: Acceleration put into perspective ^ Ditto Its all about Obi Wan voice perspective __________________ ____________ '66 Mustang Coupe- AKA "Lenore" on disability for a (long) bit '93 GT Mostly stock AKA "Fawkes" Rice Haters Club Member #239 "I find your lack of faith...disturbing." "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats." H. L. Mencken

06-03-2005, 02:19 PM	#14
mustangII460 Factoy Five Roadster Join Date: May 2000 Location: Sevier Co,Tennessee Posts: 1,681	Re: Acceleration put into perspective 747's are RICE. Wonder how much horsepower those stickers all over them make? __________________ Frank

06-04-2005, 08:47 PM	#16
grey88gt Registered Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Skiatook, Oklahoma Posts: 193	Re: Acceleration put into perspective Capri where in the heck did you come up with that? I got lost in the first paragraph LOL.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Strange Ticking During Hard Acceleration	Rollinastang	Small Ponies	0	05-23-2005 06:45 PM
Intermittent Start and Poor Acceleration	95_MUSTANG_95	Windsor Power	4	06-12-2004 02:15 PM
smoke under heavy acceleration	Rodoggx	Windsor Power	1	05-03-2004 05:20 PM
Pinggin on acceleration?	twilightcall	Windsor Power	5	07-21-2003 02:47 AM
strange noise during acceleration	82 GT	Windsor Power	1	11-09-2002 12:50 AM