|
Thanks for the write up.
Theoretically, if your on level ground, with predictable losses, starting from 55mph, with a 100%efficient engine and drive train; you should see no difference. The question then becomes: what is the engine doing. This is what could favor one weight over the other.
First off; the frequency of starting and killing the engine will slightly favor the lower frequency of the car with greater mass.
Second, the need for greater power to accelerate the higher mass car may effect eff of engine. Though, by expecting slower response and doing everything the same (gear/throttle position) this should be almost identical for both.
Third; aerodynamics, The higher mass car will sit lower to the ground. This may or may not be a good thing, but I would give the high mass car better odds on this one.
But in life; you must start from a stop, and there are hills, and people driving behind you. Acceleration is clearly bad with the high mass car, which will balance out gains that may have been possible.
As for the bullet comparison: I think people are missing some rather important points on this. If you have a identical lead bullet and a solid copper bullet with the same power behind them (in a theoretical "perfect gun") then they will both have the same power at the muzzle. The copper bullet will be going much faster. Does anyone here know anything about aerodynamics and speed? Really? So the faster bullet will have far more drag on it, taking away more energy, until it reaches the same speed as the lead one. But at that point it will have less energy because it has less mass, so it will continue to slow at a greater rate.
With the metro you have the same speeds, and different masses. So less powder is needed to get the copper bullet up to the same speed as the lead one. But the lead one will go further, as it has more energy. In a perfect world: It would take exactly the same amount of powder to send the lead or copper bullet one yard in this experiment.
|