Faster than a speeding bullet
- Thread starter danmand
- Start date
LOL wanna bet? I saw a special on the Thrust project and one of their main engineering problems was preventing it from taking off. They can't have too much downward pressure else it would get forced into the ground. Not enough and it will hit the space station lol...danmand said:
I bet the airfoils/spoilers etc are computer controlled to just give it enough downward pressure to keep the wheels touching the ground. I bet rub knows the formula for calculating the amount of angle needed to provide x amount of downward force at x miles per hour. (I bet it is in the mm).
Probably the Bonneville Salt Flats... the same place they do all the land-speed record attempts.Esco! said:
http://www.utah.com/playgrounds/bonneville_salt.htm
Bonneville is so 60's.
They go to Black Rock, Nevada now.
http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9710/15/brits.land.speed/
They go to Black Rock, Nevada now.
http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9710/15/brits.land.speed/
Seen about this a few days ago...whats they say, like zero to 1,000 mph in 40 seconds, lol...think it goes 4 1/2 miles in that 40 seconds too...WOW.
Now stupid I'm not so sure. Back in the 1930's they were able to get a car to go 300 mph, today thats "easy"..the dragsters can do the quarter mile in under 5 seconds and at over 300 mph--all the time. So maybe in like 70 years time, the dragsters will be going 1,000 mph all the time.
I think its "cool"....now if we could just get some quicker mid price new cars, SUV's but sadly the tide is shifting to MPG, not MPH.
Now stupid I'm not so sure. Back in the 1930's they were able to get a car to go 300 mph, today thats "easy"..the dragsters can do the quarter mile in under 5 seconds and at over 300 mph--all the time. So maybe in like 70 years time, the dragsters will be going 1,000 mph all the time.
I think its "cool"....now if we could just get some quicker mid price new cars, SUV's but sadly the tide is shifting to MPG, not MPH.
I don't know what you consider "mid" priced but to me, that's in the 50 to 60K range and there are a LOT of vehicles in their that can double the speed limit. I think the Mitsubishi Lancer and Evo are up there in acceleration too and they can be had for around 20K.S.C. Joe said:
Well they are fast but not quick.....not like they could be. Look at the new Buicks--yeah but it has a bench front seat, is not a harsh ride...only can get it with a V6...if you want the V8, the bench seat is gone, have to get 18 inch wheels and it cost about $15,000 US more than the base model.
The old days you could just get the biggier motor--and the was many to pick from..now theres 2 motors.
Oh, you be sick how good we got new cars here...before 6% sales tax, a brand new Buick Lucerne after rebates is $19,600....with tax and a trade in on a 2006 Lacross, we are going for it.
I'm not paying $33,000 for the V8 model that doesn't even have the bench seat I like. Both of those cars will go fast but the V8 is quicker getting there..and you need less speed to go as far in a short amount of time..thats why I like quick cars.
The old days you could just get the biggier motor--and the was many to pick from..now theres 2 motors.
Oh, you be sick how good we got new cars here...before 6% sales tax, a brand new Buick Lucerne after rebates is $19,600....with tax and a trade in on a 2006 Lacross, we are going for it.
I'm not paying $33,000 for the V8 model that doesn't even have the bench seat I like. Both of those cars will go fast but the V8 is quicker getting there..and you need less speed to go as far in a short amount of time..thats why I like quick cars.
You're talking "quick" cars and then you come up with a a BUICK? "chortle".
Sorry, the Evo and Lancer are pretty fuckin quick cars. I'm not going to bother trying to find the specs but I heard somewhere that the Evo beat a porsche in the 0 - 60 test and there are many imports that are damned fast for $30K
I am wondering, what do you consider "quick"? 0 - 60 in what, 5 secs? 4? 2? and what are you willing to pay in dollars and fuel economy to get that performance? and are you willing to sacrifice cornering ability to achieve that?
For every gain you make in one area, you have to sacrifice in another. A car setup for acceleration won't have that great a top speed and won't be that comfortable because you sacrifice weight to gain acceleration (it takes HP to get a mass moving).
You see, that thrust 3 (or whatever it's called) probably burns through 100 gallons of fuel per minute at 1,000 mph.
Oh, if you want quick, nothing beats a bike in dollars. Heck, my 1988 600R ninja would hit 48 mph by the time I hit the opposite side of a 4 way intersection....if I remember correctly it did 0 - 60 in about 4 seconds.
Sorry, the Evo and Lancer are pretty fuckin quick cars. I'm not going to bother trying to find the specs but I heard somewhere that the Evo beat a porsche in the 0 - 60 test and there are many imports that are damned fast for $30K
I am wondering, what do you consider "quick"? 0 - 60 in what, 5 secs? 4? 2? and what are you willing to pay in dollars and fuel economy to get that performance? and are you willing to sacrifice cornering ability to achieve that?
For every gain you make in one area, you have to sacrifice in another. A car setup for acceleration won't have that great a top speed and won't be that comfortable because you sacrifice weight to gain acceleration (it takes HP to get a mass moving).
You see, that thrust 3 (or whatever it's called) probably burns through 100 gallons of fuel per minute at 1,000 mph.
Oh, if you want quick, nothing beats a bike in dollars. Heck, my 1988 600R ninja would hit 48 mph by the time I hit the opposite side of a 4 way intersection....if I remember correctly it did 0 - 60 in about 4 seconds.
