azca Posted July 29, 2006 Author Share Posted July 29, 2006 anything to keep you happy You were tailgating admit it:icon_bigg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STi Boy Posted July 29, 2006 Share Posted July 29, 2006 u must slammed the brakes pretty hard to come to a complete stop... i wish my LGT can do the same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.T.Subie Posted July 29, 2006 Share Posted July 29, 2006 anything to keep you happy:wub:AWWW thanks:icon_bigg Denial is your best friend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilh Posted July 29, 2006 Share Posted July 29, 2006 Braking distance goes up with the square of speed. Is that what was meant by "quadruples"? BTW, 75-0 in 1s is 3.4Gs and would take only 55ft. Unlikely! Let's see, if an LGT does 60-0 in say 125ft, it should take about 195ft for 75-0. That would take about 3.5s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIKEBRAVO Posted July 29, 2006 Share Posted July 29, 2006 Uh, maybe he brake checked you because you were tailgating him. I would if someone was 2 feet from me. :lol: rofl:lol: :lol: If you can afford College, you probably don't need to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2fst4u Posted July 29, 2006 Share Posted July 29, 2006 he lives in NJ. Home of the worse drivers on the planet earth +1 the majority of NJ drivers outright suck i live in philly right over the bridge from cherry hill nd i seriously dont know how they make it over the bridge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f1anatic Posted July 29, 2006 Share Posted July 29, 2006 I guess you can't read what you write yourself 0 - 100 - 0 mph in 6.5 seconds ? um ok, must be the same as 70-75mph to 0 btw for your knowledge braking distance quadruples with speed. Um...you are on a different planet. Here, we hold F1 cars as the ultimate road racing machines. The times, acceleration and braking data I quoted you...are for race cars. And NO 100 mph to 0 is NOT the same as 70-75 mph to 0. And for my knowledge braking distance and speed do not have a linear relationship. You are extrapolating from a portion of the obtained experimental data for which this relationship holds. LGT does 60-0 in say 125ft let's see 125 ft is something like 40 meters. The square of speed (according to ILH's statement) is 60 x 60 = 3600 mph are you nuts ? Maybe you mean...doubling the speed quadruples the braking distance. In which case 120 mph (roughly 200 kph) should yield a braking distance of 400 ft. or rather 130 meters. well lets see...an F1 car loses 240 kph in 140 meters It takes a Formula One car considerably less distance to stop from 160 km/h than a road car uses to stop from 100 km/h. The Official Formula 1 Website Braking distance : 300 km /h to 60 km/h in 140 meters (in 3.5 seconds) Racerchicks.com: Shopping - Want to Buy a Formula One Car? Or maybe you need to read this (from th Williams F1 sponsors) 55 meters Fifty-five metres is the braking distance a Formula 1 car travels when performing a full stop from a speed of 200 km/h. The process takes 1.9 seconds and creates deceleration forces of up to 5 G. A driver weighing 75 kilograms would thus be pushed against the seat belts with a weight of 375 kilograms. By way of comparison: when performing a full stop from 200 km/h, a standard-production BMW takes 4.1 seconds and covers 118 metres before coming to a standstill. Formula 1 Bajaj Allianz Whatever source you may look at, your statement is false. It may well hold for regular production cars for a certain range of speeds. Certainly NOT for all cars. Read again. An F1 car travelling twice the speed of a regular production car will outbrake it. From the same speed, it will stop in less than half the distance required by the production vehicle. Your statements are simply put: false. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 29, 2006 Share Posted July 29, 2006 +1 the majority of NJ drivers outright suck i live in philly right over the bridge from cherry hill nd i seriously dont know how they make it over the bridge Of course NJ suck, but Philly area drivers are not a jot better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.T.Subie Posted July 29, 2006 Share Posted July 29, 2006 Why don't we all agree that the surrounding states have sh*tty drivers except for us. Denial is your best friend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolarDog Posted July 29, 2006 Share Posted July 29, 2006 lol, oh man, what a thread. So here are my takeaways thus far: 1) Don't rubberneck 2) Don'tfollowtooclosely 3) People from NJ can somehow defy laws of physics... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SBT Posted July 29, 2006 Share Posted July 29, 2006 lol, oh man, what a thread. So here are my takeaways thus far: 1) Don't rubberneck 2) Don'tfollowtooclosely 3) People from NJ can somehow defy laws of physics... That about sums it up... and thanks to f1anatics for the links and cliff notes tutorial. SBT - Pro amore Dei et patriam et populum - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenonk Posted July 30, 2006 Share Posted July 30, 2006 i'm sure it felt quick, but 75mph to complete stop in one second would be a great feat of deceleration even with race slicks on, and would involve some serious G-forces. correct, I would know if there was such a feat, I would have posted that by now Keefe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azca Posted July 30, 2006 Author Share Posted July 30, 2006 you must be very proud of yourself your conclusion: lgt brakes suck because F1 can do it better and F1 racing is much more important than real get-to-work drive in traffic/pothole/crazy drivers conditions Um...you are on a different planet. Here, we hold F1 cars as the ultimate road racing machines. The times, acceleration and braking data I quoted you...are for race cars. And NO 100 mph to 0 is NOT the same as 70-75 mph to 0. And for my knowledge braking distance and speed do not have a linear relationship. You are extrapolating from a portion of the obtained experimental data for which this relationship holds. let's see 125 ft is something like 40 meters. The square of speed (according to ILH's statement) is 60 x 60 = 3600 mph are you nuts ? Maybe you mean...doubling the speed quadruples the braking distance. In which case 120 mph (roughly 200 kph) should yield a braking distance of 400 ft. or rather 130 meters. well lets see...an F1 car loses 240 kph in 140 meters The Official Formula 1 Website Racerchicks.com: Shopping - Want to Buy a Formula One Car? Or maybe you need to read this (from th Williams F1 sponsors) Formula 1 Bajaj Allianz Whatever source you may look at, your statement is false. It may well hold for regular production cars for a certain range of speeds. Certainly NOT for all cars. Read again. An F1 car travelling twice the speed of a regular production car will outbrake it. From the same speed, it will stop in less than half the distance required by the production vehicle. Your statements are simply put: false. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wukindada Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 Have to say...... this is one a the VERY few praise threads for our stockers.... Toyota 6EATS .........SUCK!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
direavenger Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 3) People from NJ can somehow defy laws of physics... It's true. For every Porsche that I see weaving in and out of traffic on Rt. 80, I see at least 10 '91 Plymouth Voyagers doing the same. The Dude - Two inches and counting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.T.Subie Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 It's true. For every Porsche that I see weaving in and out of traffic on Rt. 80, I see at least 10 '91 Plymouth Voyagers doing the same. Denial is your best friend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
direavenger Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 The best part is that they are invariably loaded with more people than they can seat, so I'm watching the heads of 8 children flopping around as daddy flies through traffic. The Dude - Two inches and counting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedzola Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 Have to say...... this is one a the VERY few praise threads for our stockers.... I'll take this opportunity to trash our stock brakes. THEY SUCK. Sqeaky, wobbly, mushy, slow, and just generally bad in every way. Also, I'm not comparing to an F1 car. I'm comparing to my '03 Honda Civic Si. The stock brakes on that car were wayyyy better. Hello consumer. And I say unto you, please use exact change. This is my shark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wukindada Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 There..... thats what I am used to hearing;) Toyota 6EATS .........SUCK!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenonk Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 you must be very proud of yourself your conclusion: lgt brakes suck because F1 can do it better and F1 racing is much more important than real get-to-work drive in traffic/pothole/crazy drivers conditions no, he's saying your conclusion is false because you didnt come to a complete stop in a matter of 1 second at 75mph. no one said that LGT brakes suck, we are just pointing out that your story is extremely exaggerated and holds no real value. I track the GT, even with race-level equipment of tires, rotors, brake pads and fluids.. I still retain the stock caliper for race reasons. In my car doing 120 mph, and it takes WAY long time and distance to slow down from 120 mph down to 0, it takes longer than 1 second.. Even at 75mph, it takes longer than 1 second to come to a complete stop. Again, we are picking on you because your story is exaggerated and that what you typed are not facts, it is just a matter of your experience told through your eyes which is all over-blown in proportions compared to the facts. Keefe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azca Posted July 31, 2006 Author Share Posted July 31, 2006 don't want to argue but stopping speed depends on many factors including your speed, gear you are in, surface, tire temperature, rotor/brakepad temperature, weight and size of wheels, how quickly abs kicked in, condition of your rotors/pads and your reaction time. no, he's saying your conclusion is false because you didnt come to a complete stop in a matter of 1 second at 75mph. no one said that LGT brakes suck, we are just pointing out that your story is extremely exaggerated and holds no real value. I track the GT, even with race-level equipment of tires, rotors, brake pads and fluids.. I still retain the stock caliper for race reasons. In my car doing 120 mph, and it takes WAY long time and distance to slow down from 120 mph down to 0, it takes longer than 1 second.. Even at 75mph, it takes longer than 1 second to come to a complete stop. Again, we are picking on you because your story is exaggerated and that what you typed are not facts, it is just a matter of your experience told through your eyes which is all over-blown in proportions compared to the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
direavenger Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 don't want to argue but stopping speed depends on many factors... ...none of which will make your story even remotely plausable. Relax, your perception of things can get distorted when stuff like that happens so fast (supposedly ). The Dude - Two inches and counting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azca Posted July 31, 2006 Author Share Posted July 31, 2006 have you ever tried slamming your brakes in lgt or you just assume this is all bs? ...none of which will make your story even remotely plausable. Relax, your perception of things can get distorted when stuff like that happens so fast (supposedly ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
direavenger Posted August 1, 2006 Share Posted August 1, 2006 ^^^Nope, but Keefe (Xenonk) has. That man knows the performance dynamics of the LGT better than most everyone else. If he says its BS, I believe him. EDIT: I was going to do the calculations, but brother ilh (post #29) has already done it for me. Logically, mathematically, and practically your account holds no weight. The Dude - Two inches and counting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatChips107 Posted August 1, 2006 Share Posted August 1, 2006 LGT brakes are so badddd hahhaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.