Thinking about this, makes me wonder about other things for you.....such as, is there lighter chains available, that would hold the power?? Same with sprockets?? You, at the same time, might look into making/buying some lighter hubs, as they would have the similar impact as the axle would.

I agree with ^^^^ that is what I was thinking of, but couldn't bring it to the front of my head. I guess its been too long since my last physics class.


Also, you might want to edit the thread title, to help anyone who might ever search this topic.....axle.

 

hey guys,
Physics states that:
Torque = Force x Distance from center
Thus, being that the axle is such a small diameter , it won't have near the effect that taking such a percentage of weight out of the flywheel would. Also you have to realize that the axle is part of a whole, which includes both rear tires. Now, if i assume that tires each weigh...say...15 lbs, the axle wieght becomes less significant. IE, instead of taking away 73% your only taking away 24% of the total rotating mass. Once you figure that it becomes less significant. Also, when you take in to consideration what i said about torque, the tires each impart 12.5ftlbs of torque because of the large distance. The heavy axle will impart roughly .9375 foot lbs (assuming 1.5inch diameter) and the light axle will impart only .25 foot lbs. Thus if you add two tires plus the heavy axle and tow tires plus the light axle you get, 25.94ftlbs and 25.25ftlbs respectively. Overall you'll only see about the equivelent of taking off 2.65% of rotating mass. bear in mind that all these calculations wer based on rough estimates, and friction was totall neglected which would further reduce the effect. Hope that helps, but essentially i think this means that an Aluminum axle would not gain anything substancial as far as performance goes.

 

DIDO [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img][img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img] I would comment but how can you beat that. LOL

 

I still border on the line of thinking it is angluar momentum....rather than torque. It just makes more sense to me. But hey, atleast we are pretty much all in agreement that its not like a flywheel, but the sheer weight will be nice to loose. Maybe it is angular torque.....heck I don't know......I can't remember my classes right now for some reason.

 

i imagine it's one for while the axle is accelerating, while the other is for the momentum once it has got up to speed... dunno which is which, but i'm sure doing it as angular momentum you'd still get very similar numbers...

 

hey guys thanks 4 ur input.

were going to try and get out duks in a row 2 get this project on the ball.

i have a liter swing chromemoly arm, solid aluminum suspension, chrome moly rear subframe. and alot of other metal and plastic cut. im guessing ive saved between 75-100lbs since the bike was stock. MAYBE!! im prety much computer illerate but im going to try to make a page this weekend with some pics. maybe even become a member.

thanx again for all your replies

ross