yeah ive done that

11/28/2005 12:35:28 PM

+1 to ur rep points omg u are 2 kewl

11/28/2005 12:40:43 PM

i forgot the rest of the commercial.

it comes on TLC and disco channel.

some lady who is a pro dragster. someting like that

11/28/2005 12:45:20 PM

oh ok. i think ive seen it.

Shirley Muldowney

11/28/2005 12:46:54 PM

yeah. i think thats it

11/28/2005 12:47:47 PM

Cha-Cha

11/28/2005 12:56:05 PM

i cast magic missle for my escape i summon lesser minivan roll 1 of 25 little sister gets to come industrial gokart!!+

11/28/2005 1:26:53 PM

that's what the beater is for

11/28/2005 2:39:54 PM

My accord is too lame for burnouts.

11/28/2005 2:49:00 PM

fwd integra burnouts?

I do 50 mph rolling burnouts. My dick must be huge, right?

11/28/2005 4:19:27 PM

i burned out your mothers asshole...yeah

[Edited on November 28, 2005 at 5:37 PM. Reason : ]

11/28/2005 5:37:07 PM

I did a burn out on friday morning at 6am then again at 7.30am

Bet the neighbors loved that.

11/28/2005 6:59:55 PM

Quote :

"My accord is too lame for burnouts. "

no way


[Edited on November 28, 2005 at 9:10 PM. Reason : .]

11/28/2005 9:10:01 PM

11/28/2005 9:26:11 PM

I wouldn't normally do this, but:

Ahmet

11/28/2005 11:39:39 PM

you got a lot of luggage in the back y0

11/28/2005 11:45:25 PM

No luggage, just a lot of weight transfer.
Ahmet

11/29/2005 3:16:36 AM

Ahhhhhhhmet
-Ahmet

11/29/2005 3:34:31 AM

^^ yeah he doesn't get the rwd thing...

see weight continues to transfer rearward under hard acceleration because the drive tires get better traction... not lifted off the ground

11/29/2005 4:40:59 AM

If you were sitting still roasting the tires the rear end wouldn't drop so much.

Quote :

"see weight continues to transfer rearward under hard acceleration because the drive tires get better traction... not lifted off the ground "

WTF are you talking about. Weight transfers based on the direction you are trying to move. Try the same act in reverse and tell me your RWD drive wheels getting better traction is the reason the weight is being moved rearward.

[Edited on November 29, 2005 at 4:59 AM. Reason : .]

11/29/2005 4:54:25 AM

"If you were sitting still roasting the tires the rear end wouldn't drop so much." As you may or may not be aware, maximum traction is achieved when the wheels are spinning just above (or if you're trying to slow down, just below) road speed. I would say the car was moving forward at around 45mph, and the wheels were spinning at closer to 60mph.

It is my understanding that when sumfoo was commenting on the weight transfer, he was saying in forward acceleration rwd cars can continue to shift weight rearward, unlike fwd cars which are severely traction limited as acceleration/power is increased.
Ahmet

11/29/2005 3:29:28 PM

^^no, he's right, b/c with less traction, you're getting less weight transfer, and therefore less traction...and therefore less weight transfer.


oh, and...



[Edited on November 29, 2005 at 3:33 PM. Reason : asdfasdf]

11/29/2005 3:32:47 PM

Hey Duke, why don't we look at this as a sum of forces and moments acting about the drive axle as the axis of rotation and concentrated point of forces applied...


I thought about this yesterday when I was pulling my brother-in-law's stuck car out with the Teg.

I always pull stuff like this in reverse because I get so much better traction.

I had such good traction that I managed to stall out two or three times rather than spin my wheels...in loose wet sand.

Oh, I also forgot to mention the coefficient of static friction versus the coefficient of kinetic friction...remember that the tire's traction against the road produces yet another moment about the axis of rotation. You have a greater moment acting against this moment in one direction (the entire length of the car and its associated weight distributions) as opposed to a smaller one if you're in reverse or driving an FWD car (like doodly squat)

[Edited on November 29, 2005 at 3:46 PM. Reason : more brain-numbing shit...]

11/29/2005 3:43:57 PM

Quote :

"I always pull stuff like this in reverse because I get so much better traction"

I do the same, also b/c reverse is usually the lowest gear in the tranny.

11/29/2005 3:58:56 PM

shit at 50 i like to hit 3rd and throw the rear end sidways as fuck and carry it to the other side and hit forth just to hear the tires chirp

11/29/2005 6:23:41 PM

[Edited on November 29, 2005 at 7:29 PM. Reason : bc i can]

11/29/2005 7:27:12 PM

i like FWD's nose pulling and torque steer.

11/29/2005 8:22:31 PM

im tellin yah. thats luggage

11/29/2005 8:27:26 PM

11/29/2005 8:49:42 PM

http://www.we-todd-did-racing.com/wetoddimage.wtdr/wOTQ3ODcwNnM0MTNkZmQzMXk1NDE%3D

i got your milk, chris

[Edited on November 30, 2005 at 12:20 AM. Reason : .]

11/30/2005 12:20:05 AM

I never bought that reverse is the lowest gear in most cars, though I've heard it all my life.

I hit right around 50 in reverse in my old S10, shit got a little scary...

11/30/2005 4:09:45 AM

a classic

http://www.collegehumor.com/movies/1614396/

11/30/2005 4:26:57 PM

good movie

11/30/2005 4:41:00 PM

you can see the trays fly off when he goes into his first spin

11/30/2005 5:00:09 PM

This is me in my car, right before i was goin to get some new tires on, so i figured i would get my moneys worth out of my old ones....





and the rest of the gallery... http://gallery.thevboard.com/index.php?album=03%20Spec%20V%2Fburnout%20pics&dispsize=512&start=0

-ben

11/30/2005 5:04:13 PM

is that a road or a driveway or what?

11/30/2005 5:06:17 PM

road...but its never used, its like an alley thing, there is a pic of it in the gallery

11/30/2005 5:10:11 PM

yeah, i've done that, in the centenial campus parking deck

12/1/2005 11:28:04 AM

Winter Cruise Tour in Greenville, Sams club parking lot...I've got a vid of it too...

got a careless and reckless ticket for it though...so it ended my donut/burnout days(or did it?)

12/2/2005 11:10:49 AM

Ahmet

Quote :

""If you were sitting still roasting the tires the rear end wouldn't drop so much." As you may or may not be aware, maximum traction is achieved when the wheels are spinning just above (or if you're trying to slow down, just below) road speed. I would say the car was moving forward at around 45mph, and the wheels were spinning at closer to 60mph."

Uh, no. I would say maxium traction is achieved when the tires are at the exact speed of the ground. If you said maxium acceleration or maxium deacceleration then I would agree with you. your comment doesn't seem to pass the common sense test. I don't give a shit how fast you were going. This thread was started about smokey burnouts and in my mind that is sitting still roasting the tires down. Either way, I started off with the comment the rear end wouldn't drop so much if you were sitting still, which I still contend is true. So basically we are all agreeing that you were not sitting still.

Quote :

"It is my understanding that when sumfoo was commenting on the weight transfer, he was saying in forward acceleration rwd cars can continue to shift weight rearward, unlike fwd cars which are severely traction limited as acceleration/power is increased. Ahmet "

First, I think baonest's comment was in jest. Then you explain there is a lot of weight transfer. Then sumfoo1 chimes in. The problem is I know what he is trying to explain, but he points out how baonest just doesn't get it. Then he throws out his two cents, which sounds like a 6th grader spewing out the shit his daddy or some website taught him like he knows WTF he is talking about.
So he comments about how someone else just doesn't get it, yet he doesn't really either.

Now either car as long as it is still accelerating shift weight. If you start to say moving forward the RWD car will be able to shift more weight given everything else is equal then I would agree with you. Either car however can shift the weight rearward and move.

Quote :

"^^no, he's right, b/c with less traction, you're getting less weight transfer, and therefore less traction...and therefore less weight transfer. "

I would say he is still wrong then based on this argument. If you start still with FWD, transfer weight back and start to lose traction, then weight will stop being moved being moved back, giving you added traction again. Now in both cases the harder you try to accelerate (given enough power) the end result ends up being the same, you lose most all traction and forward momentum. Given everything is equal except the set of drive wheels, the RWD will be able to shift more weight and accelerate faster. Both cars however, will be able to drop the rear end moving forward, burnout, whatever... just the amounts either can do will be different. The whole problem was his description and the fact still remains it depends on the direction you are trying to move.

Quote :

"Hey Duke, why don't we look at this as a sum of forces and moments acting about the drive axle as the axis of rotation and concentrated point of forces applied... I thought about this yesterday when I was pulling my brother-in-law's stuck car out with the Teg. I always pull stuff like this in reverse because I get so much better traction."

Exactly, the FWD car going in reverse would have the advantage and the RWD car going forward would have the advantage. To imply that a FWD car moving forward can't shift weight rearward is absurd.

12/3/2005 7:23:18 PM

holy shit people i knew it was because its a RWD car. i was just kidding about the luggage.

man o man look what i started

12/3/2005 7:27:00 PM

damn, you niggers need a lesson on a track or something to really understand weight transfer.

jebus

[Edited on December 3, 2005 at 7:28 PM. Reason : im not saying i am a master about that topic though. ]

12/3/2005 7:28:05 PM

^ So far we were talking about simple acceleration as far as I know. A track introduces so many extra variables (turning, braking etc).

12/3/2005 8:27:00 PM

well by the looks of things people dont know how to accelerate.

12/3/2005 8:57:57 PM

gephelps, you're correct that the rear end would NOT drop much (in some cars, it wouldn't drop at all) if the car was at a stand still while spinning it's rear tires. I did not mean for my post to imply a contradiction to that, that was my mistake.

However, I will disagree with your statement regarding maximum traction. Maximum traction is NOT achieved when the tires are turning at road speed. I will try to quickly and neatly give an example of this by pointing out that a car can accelerate the quickest, when the tires are spinning at a speed that's slightly above road speed as you also just said. Traction is what enables engine power to be applied to the ground. If the car accelerates faster when the wheels spin faster than road speed (which they do) then there must be more traction available under these circumstances.

Maximum traction is not achieved when tires are turning at road speed (in accel or decel), similarly maxiumum cornering traction is not available at a zero slip angle. This isn't merely an opinion I happen to hold, it's fact.
Ahmet
Ahmet

12/4/2005 3:38:48 AM

Ahmet

12/4/2005 3:41:15 AM

Ahmet

12/4/2005 1:42:51 PM

Ahmet
Ahmet

12/4/2005 1:48:10 PM

^^^^ did this guy pass freshman physics?
static friction (ie. tires gripping) uS=1.02 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kinetic friction (ie tires spinning) uK=.17

12/4/2005 2:59:12 PM

You don't have to refer to me as "this guy", I'm right here, the name's Ahmet (as should be painfully obvious at this point).

Tire compound interlocks with the ground at the molecular level. The additional adhesion this phenomenon can produce can produce is not avilable if there is no difference between road speed and tire speed. I'm not talking about kinetic friction versus static, rather traction. There is more traction available to accelerate a car (in any axis) when there's a small difference between road speed and tire speed (or direction). This concept is somewhat more complex than that of kinetic vs. static friction.
Ahmet

PS:
Ahmet

12/4/2005 6:53:45 PM