View Single Post
Old 02-21-2008, 11:59 AM   #39
bubba428
 
bubba428's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,623
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by WildBillyT View Post
Bubba,

I'm not basing this off of anything other than Physics. You can argue all you want but that's the way it is. You are confusing what factors are actually at work. I think you are confusing BTUs with BTUs/hr. This is a reason why people use Joules when talking about a unit of work instead of BTUs. They are easily confused. I'm not talking about heat. Or pressure. I'm talking about work done in a given unit time. In an engine that's the amount of force generated from combustion converted into rotational motion.

Like I said- It's been a while since I took my Physics courses. That fuel you are talking about can probably never exist, because it's BTU/h number would be based off of the amount of work it can do in a given time during combustion, which would be high due to the force of the explosion (50x as you said). So it wouldn't have a low BTU/hr number because it generates such force during combustion, and can do a lot of work.
Right...BUT what I'm saying is BTU/h is calculated by using the amount of heat created, anybody remember the burning peanut in HS science. what I'm saying is, it would be more accurate to describe the power output in the same term that you would a stick of TNT.
__________________
2000 Tahoe Z71 5.7
1982 Z28 Pacecar 305
1999 S10

Last edited by bubba428; 02-21-2008 at 12:00 PM.
bubba428 is offline   Reply With Quote