Another internet tough guy who gets all butthurt if you don't worship the almighty fox body.
Please do not try and educate as you don't know what you're talking about. Another moron on the Internet with no real experience.
Another internet tough guy who gets all butthurt if you don't worship the almighty fox body.
That's what I thought.
Impossible on a street car today too.
At our country fair/carnival we have a ride called the gravitron, it looks like a flying saucer, you lean against a padded board that can slide up and down on the angled surface.
It spins, you get stuck to the padded board. You can still lift your arms, albeit it is very difficult, but it is enough force to hold you to the padded board. When I was a teen, I saw a guy, with permission, hold onto the center railing, and put his feet against the padded board on the side, and was able to stand perpendicular to the side of the ride once it spun up.
Basically, this thread sounds like a bunch of people trying to take a guy's "good ol times" exaggeration story and shit all over it with math, and physics, instead of just taking it for what it is, a tall tail of nostalgia.
That's what the OP asked.
To specifically answer the question: a 3,000lb car would need about 1600hp to accelerate at 5gs from 40mph. Now, 1600hp is a doable number, but it would need tires with a coefficient of friction of well over 5 (only 2 driven wheels) which do not exist as far as I know.
Quote:
Carroll Shelby at the wheel of a new Cobra production car-- Venice, California, 1963. He loved to stick $100 bills to the inside of the windscreen and challenge the potential customer, sitting in the passenger seat, to grab the bill before the Cobra hit 100 mph.
http://theselvedgeyard.wordpress.co...l-shelby-ford-cobra-that-kicked-ferraris-ass/
Now everyone calm down, I wasn't trying to belittle you. It is just a ridiculous notion that a car could be so fast that you can't raise your arms under the acceleration.
And I follow F1. The drivers do take their hands off the wheel to adjust brake bias etc. Modern F1 cars are not as powerful as they were during the turbo era which is why I mentioned that.
I think most people on the first page have completely misunderstood (even OPie). This is true. The "coin" is imaginary and its not the "arms" that cant come up, but rather the body out of the seat. If you have long enough arms to reach the dash without leaning forward out of your seat, you are some kind of freak.
My apologies. I was just kind of playing 'devil's advocate' and saying 'well maybe someone could make the argument...' and then I took your response as undue condescension.
Even when I'm not trying to, I can be quite a dick (...though sometimes I'm trying). So it was a bit hypocritical of my to assume you were trying to 'put me in my place' or whatever.
On a more on-topic note, I do not follow F1, and was unaware they manipulated other controls. Obviously they didn't have the crazy shift mechanisms back in 'the day,' but I honestly thought the modern cars were the fastest, as far as acceleration goes...I thought it was just the top speeds that have come down- am I correct there?
Hard to imagine all those controls on the wheel (and I've seen busier ones, for sure) and still having to have other controls. I know if I was driving one of those cars, I'd probably grip nine and three until I left blood on the wheel.
(and also there would be shit in the seat.)
They're getting much closer now though.
Veyron can do low 2s, I've seen cars like the Aventador TT that can do it in real low 2s, I bet the right car with a 60 mph first gear and AWD with 4 DOT race slicks could at least break into the 1s. I thought I saw a Skyline once that claimed to be < 2 s
Basically, this thread sounds like a bunch of people trying to take a guy's "good ol times" exaggeration story and shit all over it with math, and physics, instead of just taking it for what it is, a tall tail of nostalgia.
Top Gear recreated the old "$20 bill on the windshield" sales tactic thing and the passenger couldn't reach it.