View Single Post
Old 07-11-2017, 01:10 PM   #18 (permalink)
redpoint5
Human Environmentalist
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,431

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 24.19 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - CBR600 - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - Dodge/Cummins - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Mazda CX-5 - '17 Mazda CX-5 Touring
90 day: 26.68 mpg (US)

Chevy ZR-2 - '03 Chevrolet S10 ZR2
90 day: 17.14 mpg (US)

Model Y - '24 Tesla Y LR AWD
Thanks: 4,206
Thanked 4,387 Times in 3,361 Posts
That all makes sense, but the confusing part is that the engine uses energy to exert a force that changes the velocity.

If the engine consumes a constant amount of energy and exerts a constant force, it produces a linear acceleration.

In other words, Daox was not wrong in stating that it takes the same amount of energy to accelerate from 10-20 MPH, as it does to go from 40-50 MPH.

How does a constant chemical energy conversion into kinetic energy result in exponentially growing kinetic energy?
__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
  Reply With Quote