Why? Because I'm defending those who are being discriminated against on the basis of not only something they can't control, but on things that have no basis in reality? Why be prejudice? It is true that it takes time to become more experienced but to say that a 23 year old is already more experienced than a 16 year old purely based upon their age and not on other factors is just wrong. Would you trust a bed ridden 45 year old man with downsyndrome to repair your car or a 10 year old child who has been working on cars with his dad since he was 4? Yes most people are mediocre but considering this forum is filled with people that aren't so mediocre, I would have figured that people here would be aware of those who are quite skilled despite their young age.Hah. Your replies do reek of a 16-year-old. Ahh, youth.
Why? Because I'm defending those who are being discriminated against on the basis of not only something they can't control, but on things that have no basis in reality? Why be prejudice? It is true that it takes time to become more experienced but to say that a 23 year old is already more experienced than a 16 year old purely based upon their age and not on other factors is just wrong. Would you trust a bed ridden 45 year old man with downsyndrome to repair your car or a 10 year old child who has been working on cars with his dad since he was 4? Yes most people are mediocre but considering this forum is filled with people that aren't so mediocre, I would have figured that people here would be aware of those who are quite skilled despite their young age.
wrongAt least a bed ridden 45 year old man with downs syndrome who has been deaf and blind his entire life knows more about tires than you.
Why? Because I'm defending those who are being discriminated against on the basis of not only something they can't control, but on things that have no basis in reality? Why be prejudice? It is true that it takes time to become more experienced but to say that a 23 year old is already more experienced than a 16 year old purely based upon their age and not on other factors is just wrong. Would you trust a bed ridden 45 year old man with downsyndrome to repair your car or a 10 year old child who has been working on cars with his dad since he was 4? Yes most people are mediocre but considering this forum is filled with people that aren't so mediocre, I would have figured that people here would be aware of those who are quite skilled despite their young age.
Blah blah blah. When you get older you'll see how much of a flying nitwit you are now. Hopefully.Blah blah blah. When you get older you'll see how much of a flying nitwit you are now. Hopefully.
And this is what middle aged people tell themselves when their intelligence, knowledge or experience has been challenged or even usurped by someone significantly younger than them. Just because you're older, doesn't mean you're more experienced. I'm pretty sure there are some kids who are 13 years old who've had more real life experience dealing with crack fiends, drug overdoses, gang violence and child rearing (children raising children) than your 80 year old auntie who was born sterile and grew up in a quiet, rural community.
Age doesn't equal experience. If this were true, then all people in their 80s should have no reason to be on welfare as they're all "seasoned" and should "know the ropes" by now. The fact that these people didn't save a dime as they lived their lives can be seen by how decrepit their livings conditions are.
Why? Because I'm defending those who are being discriminated against on the basis of not only something they can't control, but on things that have no basis in reality? Why be prejudice? It is true that it takes time to become more experienced but to say that a 23 year old is already more experienced than a 16 year old purely based upon their age and not on other factors is just wrong. Would you trust a bed ridden 45 year old man with downsyndrome to repair your car or a 10 year old child who has been working on cars with his dad since he was 4? Yes most people are mediocre but considering this forum is filled with people that aren't so mediocre, I would have figured that people here would be aware of those who are quite skilled despite their young age.
Why? Because I'm defending those who are being discriminated against on the basis of not only something they can't control, but on things that have no basis in reality? Why be prejudice? It is true that it takes time to become more experienced but to say that a 23 year old is already more experienced than a 16 year old purely based upon their age and not on other factors is just wrong. Would you trust a bed ridden 45 year old man with downsyndrome to repair your car or a 10 year old child who has been working on cars with his dad since he was 4? Yes most people are mediocre but considering this forum is filled with people that aren't so mediocre, I would have figured that people here would be aware of those who are quite skilled despite their young age.
the thing with fleabag is he's ignorant and he really doesn't know how ignorant he is. and since he's been banned(again), don't expect a reply any time soon.
the thing with fleabag is he's ignorant and he really doesn't know how ignorant he is. and since he's been banned(again), don't expect a reply any time soon.
Yeah. He may be banned but I know that he's still staying up to the early morning, reading these responses, and fuming about it.
yes. this would be better answered in THE GARAGE.Shouldnt this be in the garage?
A manufacturer's generic warning statement that is reprinted as a thoughtless, broad disclaimer I'm not going to believe especially when I can easily prove otherwise through my own testing and the testing of others. Most of the time manufacturers are correct in their warnings and they can indeed be proven to be useful in actual practice like the warning not to run such and such compressor for more than 10 minutes at a time to prevent overheating. Or don't smoke/make any sparks near a charging battery because the hydrogen could be ignited and explode. Or "high voltage", dangerous, etc etc. I can probably think of 100 things where the manufacturer's stern warning is valid and should be followed for every warning where it's just a load of crap and is for a limited circumstance. This whole bit about tire pressure thing is one of those, and in my experience and the experience of others has shown otherwise. What and how they come up with these warnings is perfectly logical, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with it especially if I can prove otherwise.
am I late to the party? never been in a fleabag thread before.
Wait why is nobody concerned that he says that he got a job as a tire expert at the corner garage? I mean I know he's probably making shit up but he just might be fucking with ppl's cars. I'd be worried if I lived on the same continent.
what the fuck? A vehicle's cornering ability and straight line stopping distances can be completely affected by mutually exclusive factors. I've never experienced worse handling or stopping distances due to adding tire pressure and if anything I've gotten better performance out of my tires, not worse. I've yet to notice a measurable difference in braking distance even in slick weather (sleet) so the notion that inflating to 51psi on my dad's truck is false. In a much older thread, I mentioned taking turns in a reversed banked corner where the vehicle felt a little more inclined to tip-over due to me taking that corner much too fast. You know on those Nascar tracks where they have banked corners? The corners are banked so that the drivers can take the corners more quickly? Right? Well the instance I refer to is one where the corner was banked so that instead of improving cornering ability, it was hurting it.
If you're still having a difficult time visualizing what I'm talking about, picture this. You're driving an SUV going straight down a steep road at a high rate of speed, you sharply turn the steering wheel to the right, what do you picture would happen to this vehicle? It's going to roll over... This is pretty much caused by overloading the front left tire (in this circumstance) and under-loading the right rear tire, causing the vehicle to flip. This exact same scenario happens on this "reverse banked turn" I take when I turn off the off-ramp. It's only in this type of scenario where I could measurably feel a negative impact on handling characteristics due to my inflation pressures. However since I'm not driving a sports car and if a police officer witnessed me taking that corner at that rate of speed (25mph), it's very possible that I could be cited. So the only adverse handling effect I could measurably feel is one that happens in a scenario where I'm already driving at an unsafe rate of speed.
I think I understand where you came to the conclusion that higher pressure = worse braking distance. I said that higher pressures made taking sharp corners too quickly uncomfortable and I guess you assume it was because I was getting tire scrub, that the tires weren't gripping the pavement anymore. So if my tires are not gripping the pavement as well as before, then my braking distance would be affected. This did not happen. Instead what happened is by adding more air to the tires it raised the vehicle's center of gravity ever so slightly.
I know you didn't because if you did, what you're saying is a fucking lie or you're just exaggerating. Characteristics WILL CHANGE but it's usually not a big fucking deal and I know that the only reason you took down the pressure is because you incorrectly believed that the tires were on the verge of popping. To further prove my point, you even make such an inane statement like "and yes i did raise it, not to 51, I'm not that stupid, but to about 45 and at that level it was bad, like driving on balloons.". What you don't get is, tire pressure difference between 35psi and 51psi will have no affect on the loading capacity of the vehicle.
Can you understand what the implication is of that fact? Here is a hint, if your tires don't wear unevenly at 35psi, they sure as hell won't get any worse at 51psi.
Sorry but it doesn't work that way.. That's pretty much as bad as saying that going from 175/70-14 to 205/50-15 tires will somehow improve your braking distance assuming the tire compounds, pressure and load ratings are the same. This is false. Even if there is a smaller contact patch with the road, that contact patch now has more force upon it so braking distance should be the same assuming the road is in good condition and there aren't things in the road.