Subject	small flaw in that logic...
Posted by	PhoenixZx on January 06, 2004 at 2:31 PM
	This message has been viewed 34 times.
In Reply To	but... posted by MaTT (90TT) on January 06, 2004 at 01:50 PM
Message	Yes, the weight of the car does not change is a correct statement. However, the force applied to the tire changes as you apply more power. If it takes X amount of power to overcome the friction applied to a given surface area, an increase in area would provide an increase in resistance. The force applied to the tire that causes a loss of traction is lateral (for the most part, let`s keep this as simple as it can be. I know it is affected by vehicle weight), not vertical. THink in terms of vector dynamics and it makes more sense. The X vector is force, the Y vector is resistance. The longer the Y vector, the higher the Y/X ratio. If X(power) can`t overcome Y(resistance), you have no loss of traction.
Follow Ups	Quiz of the day (for the physics guys) - MaTT (90TT) 13:26:36 01/06/04 I'd SO love it if you could make your Sig bigger. (sarcasm) (n/m) - nixit 13:32:02 01/06/04 If you single-handedly answer the question I will. (n/m) - MaTT (90TT) 13:34:14 01/06/04 Surface area doesn't increase applied frictional force? (n/m) - Kenny 14 psi 13:35:49 01/06/04 Nope. - MaTT (90TT) 13:38:22 01/06/04 ff= asdfw x sad0f9 - Kenny 14 psi 13:41:42 01/06/04 um, no - MaTT (90TT) 13:43:36 01/06/04 In a two dimensional world, yes (n/m) - BigTDogg (MA) 13:46:30 01/06/04 explain... (n/m) - MaTT (90TT) 13:48:00 01/06/04 think of it this way bro - THAyz1 13:54:03 01/06/04 wrong. read technomancer's post, he puts us to shame. (n/m) - MaTT (90TT) 14:01:36 01/06/04 That's what left me scratching my head too. (n/m) - FlawleZ 13:38:44 01/06/04 It does, but is a far less significant factor than: - therinL 14:02:00 01/06/04 See, that was the problem. - MaTT (90TT) 14:05:30 01/06/04 It does, see my post below. (n/m) - PA_Z 16:57:30 01/06/04 Look - it's simple. - Kenny 14 psi 13:38:36 01/06/04 It doesn't work that way. (n/m) - MaTT (90TT) 13:39:35 01/06/04 Then how does it work? - Kenny 14 psi 13:50:58 01/06/04 I never said that, you need to stop replying. - MaTT (90TT) 13:53:59 01/06/04 You can't adhere strictly to text book physics... - The Sixth 13:52:50 01/06/04 So basically it's over my head >>> - MaTT (90TT) 13:56:40 01/06/04 Not to understand...no... - The Sixth 14:06:03 01/06/04 Re: Quiz of the day (for the physics guys) - nixit 13:44:50 01/06/04 but... - MaTT (90TT) 13:50:08 01/06/04 small flaw in that logic... - PhoenixZx 14:31:16 01/06/04 What about gravatational pull? - ZMEGOBY® 18:13:39 01/06/04 negligible (n/m) - MaTT (90TT) 22:27:23 01/06/04 try this - THAyz1 13:46:58 01/06/04 prove it though. - MaTT (90TT) 13:51:46 01/06/04 look at my other post (n/m) - THAyz1 13:54:49 01/06/04 Mu is dependent on the tire and surface you're on... - BigTDogg (MA) 13:52:24 01/06/04 I think it probably has something to do with the - RSR 13:52:44 01/06/04 agreed, sounds good to me. (n/m) - MaTT (90TT) 14:00:24 01/06/04 It is not trivial - Technomancer 13:52:55 01/06/04 Thank you!! Kenny 14 psi, please read this ^^ (n/m) - MaTT (90TT) 13:58:57 01/06/04 You're the one that assumed tires were solid objects. - Kenny 14 psi 14:07:02 01/06/04 correction - SactoTodd 14:17:48 01/06/04 People who live in glass houses should not throw stones. - Kenny 14 psi 14:50:01 01/06/04 lol (n/m) - colocomp (Denver) 14:59:33 01/06/04 your funny (n/m) - the3z 18:01:25 01/06/04 :raises hand: (n/m) - MaTT (90TT) 22:29:03 01/06/04 bingo (n/m) - BryZ32TT 14:11:10 01/06/04 agreed (n/m) - aliaZ 14:12:17 01/06/04 No offense, but that logic, as with 99% of what highschool - SAHTT 14:05:12 01/06/04 Yeah, high school physics sucks ;) too many absolutes. (n/m) - MaTT (90TT) 14:06:47 01/06/04 YES!!! What he said :) (n/m) - The Sixth 14:07:52 01/06/04 ....design of experiments....understand interactions... (n/m) - RSR 14:33:34 01/06/04 All good points. You also have wear and heat to worry about. - Marshall 14:16:48 01/06/04 ...good point about heat dissipation... (n/m) - RSR 14:35:29 01/06/04 Absolutely right. That's why bigger brake kits do NOT, - PA_Z 15:52:50 01/06/04 Not going to touch the tire one... - 90Z-NA ( ATL ) 14:20:30 01/06/04 Yeah - Marshall 14:29:50 01/06/04 wider tires provide an advantage in acceleration, because - JC_NS 14:39:36 01/06/04 I mean braking. (n/m) - JC_NS 14:47:24 01/06/04 not true - Technomancer 14:55:00 01/06/04 Correct - ZBlacktt 15:01:16 01/06/04 I thought they did tire ratings based on actual performance. (n/m) - Kenny 14 psi 15:14:44 01/06/04 Overall characteristics and classification, yes. - ZBlacktt 15:24:50 01/06/04 They why the hell don't these guys use bicycle tires? - Kenny 14 psi 15:09:32 01/06/04 I think we are all getting a little ridiculous here. (n/m) - T0M 15:18:28 01/06/04 very small contact patch - Technomancer 16:01:23 01/06/04 So smaller tires are better for drag racing? You're a tard. (n/m) - Kenny 14 psi 08:39:57 01/07/04 2nd.....BUT drag racing is boring (n/m) - NR98 (soon) 08:45:15 01/07/04 be careful whom you follow - Technomancer 11:31:49 01/07/04 Ok. Bicycle tires are the best. Gotcha. (n/m) - Kenny 14 psi 16:52:23 01/07/04 Tires are not solid objects. That law does not apply. - Kenny 14 psi 08:46:30 01/07/04 You simply don't read very well. - Technomancer 10:32:47 01/07/04 Wrong. (n/m) - Kenny 14 psi 16:51:50 01/07/04 hahaha (n/m) - MaTT (90TT) 19:03:45 01/07/04 Look at Clutches,6 pucks owns full disc,4 puck owns 6 puck - ZBlacktt 14:57:51 01/06/04 Does your question take friction material into consideration - Dave N 15:11:44 01/06/04 Coeff. of Fric. is not the same between different compounds. (n/m) - Kenny 14 psi 15:13:22 01/06/04 Yes, but 6 pads same materiel better than 8? - ZBlacktt 15:21:37 01/06/04 Don't forget, Fn = Pressure * Area, and... - PA_Z 16:00:12 01/06/04 I though it had to do with application and use. - ZBlacktt 16:18:21 01/06/04 Same weight, larger surface area, more traction. - AshsZ 18:36:01 01/06/04 hm... - MaTT (90TT) 22:39:03 01/06/04 Tech argued smaller tires are better for dragracing. - Kenny 14 psi 08:41:04 01/07/04 Never said that once. - Technomancer 10:34:30 01/07/04 Here's the quote: - Kenny 14 psi 16:50:46 01/07/04 "narrower" does not equal "smaller area" - Technomancer 09:10:09 01/08/04 Tech's posts use a formula for solid (non-elastic) objects. - Kenny 14 psi 08:48:22 01/07/04 My post *specifically* says that F=mu*N does not apply - Technomancer 10:33:53 01/07/04 Nope. - Kenny 14 psi 16:54:14 01/07/04 Curious... - MaTT (90TT) 19:06:32 01/07/04 I didn't take the ACT. I did take the SAT however. - Kenny 14 psi 23:11:24 01/07/04 Congratulations. I have a Ph.D. in physics... - Technomancer 09:27:00 01/08/04 Okay. - Kenny 14 psi 10:47:01 01/08/04 ok - Technomancer 11:40:05 01/08/04 I will. - Kenny 14 psi 11:46:09 01/08/04
Post a Followup	You cannot reply to this message because you are not logged in.