Given all else being equal and taking into account no other variable, will increasing the length/depth of the lugs or cleats on a tracked vehicle such as a snowmobile cause a definable change in the vehicles final drive ratio. For the purpose of this question final drive ratio is to be defined as the distance the vehicle moves with one full rotation of the drive system input and not accounting for any variation in the drivetrain such as CVT etc. 

 

I am open to suggestions but I think the above about covers it.

Taking in account no other variable?

WTF...

Neal

What happens if you cut off every OTHER lug? Make it interesting, eh?

I hope this thread was started "For entertainment purposes only"

Dude you already won. I’ve emailed back and forth with an engineer from Camoplast. He flat out said lug height had zero barring?? 

2 minutes ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

Taking in account no other variable?

WTF...

Neal

Yes......Neal.......taking into account no other variable aside from the one being clearly laid out as a change. You know....like having to mention flat hard surface or any other bullshit

Come on man.....you're better than this

Just now, jtssrx said:

Dude you already won. I’ve emailed back and forth with an engineer from Camoplast. He flat out said lug height had zero barring?? 

Get the fuck out of my thread......this is my money. Do not wreck this

1 minute ago, Legend said:

I hope this thread was started "For entertainment purposes only"

No....first we'll lock down the question....then we will submit our answers. Then we will work out the details of an Engineering firm and how the money is to be held and transferred 

Notice I included the word "definable" Neal? So as to exclude your fanciful little theoretical bullshit ....  

10 minutes ago, f7ben said:

Yes......Neal.......taking into account no other variable aside from the one being clearly laid out as a change. You know....like having to mention flat hard surface or any other bullshit

Come on man.....you're better than this

No, it's weasly language.

Neal

5 minutes ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

No, it's weasly language.

Neal

Bullshit it is.......the question is to take into consideration one variable. The change in lug height. What in the fuck would be weasly about stating as much.

Good god your insufferable some times  

8 minutes ago, f7ben said:

Notice I included the word "definable" Neal? So as to exclude your fanciful little theoretical bullshit ....  

It's defined just fine.  Perhaps disctete, practically measurable change?

Also, I think the "one revolution" qualifier is BS.  Computing all the variables can give an instant ratio, which changes inside of one revolution.

Neither is critical for your wager against those two, as neither are correct in their argument.

Neal

1 minute ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

It's defined just fine.  Perhaps disctete, practically measurable change?

Also, I think the "one revolution" qualifier is BS.  Computing all the variables can give an instant ratio, which changes inside of one revolution.

Neither is critical for your wager against those two, as neither are correct in their argument.

Neal

Put up $20k and make the bet

1 minute ago, f7ben said:

Bullshit it is.......the question is to take into consideration one variable. The change in lug height. What in the fuck would be weasly about stating as much.

Good god your insufferable some times  

The change in lug height can introduce new variables into the calculation.  We have previously discussed them, chain strech, shaft twist, blah, blah.

To discount those is a mistake, in an all encompassing assessment, IMO.

Neal

1 minute ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

It's defined just fine.  Perhaps disctete, practically measurable change?

Also, I think the "one revolution" qualifier is BS.  Computing all the variables can give an instant ratio, which changes inside of one revolution.

Neither is critical for your wager against those two, as neither are correct in their argument.

Neal

You were asked 1000x by the Gnome to provide an equation to prove your claim. You cant because its bullshit. Kill yourself

19 minutes ago, f7ben said:

Get the fuck out of my thread......this is my money. Do not wreck this

First I’m supporting you!! Second I don’t want anything from you. 

Just now, NaturallyAspirated said:

The change in lug height can introduce new variables into the calculation.  We have previously discussed them, chain strech, shaft twist, blah, blah.

To discount those is a mistake, in an all encompassing assessment, IMO.

Neal

Just shut the fuck up retard.....that has nothing to do with a practical definition of whats being discussed. Youre a fucking moron  

Just now, jtssrx said:

First I’m supporting you!! Second I don’t want anything from you. 

I dont need support.....I need znutties 20k  

1 minute ago, Anler said:

Put up $20k and make the bet

No, I don't care for his terms.  I'm simply giving my assessment on their ability to describe the system.

Neal

Shaft twist, lug flick, and chain stretch...  

Just now, NaturallyAspirated said:

No, I don't care for his terms.  I'm simply giving my assessment on their ability to describe the system.

Neal

Your assessment is garbage and essentially what you are stating is that there is no such thing as a definable drive ration because the entire system exists in a perpetual state of theoretical flux. 

 

Just now, BOHICA said:

Shaft twist, lug flick, and chain stretch...  

So dumb its almost like he's trolling

2 minutes ago, f7ben said:

You were asked 1000x by the Gnome to provide an equation to prove your claim. You cant because its bullshit. Kill yourself

And I gave it.  All he had to do was fill in the variables. 

No thanks, I enjoy life!

Neal

1 minute ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

And I gave it.  All he had to do was fill in the variables. 

No thanks, I enjoy life!

Neal

Well kill yourself for the rest of us because we do not enjoy your life !!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Just now, f7ben said:

Your assessment is garbage and essentially what you are stating is that there is no such thing as a definable drive ration because the entire system exists in a perpetual state of theoretical flux. 

 

It isn't garbage, but yes it does describe the ratio being in flux, which it is, and which lug height plays a part (as described under the qualifications of the original thought problem).

I have stated that the flux is minute and not a practical concern when calculating the ratio.  It is merely a discussion point, or thought problem. 

Neal

2 minutes ago, f7ben said:

Well kill yourself for the rest of us because we do not enjoy your life !!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Too fuckin bad!!11

Neal