FR-S vs Lexus RC-F

[continuecrushing]

Originally Posted by raven1231

Unless you were to drop both of the cars out of a plane and see which would land (crash) faster. This is why you need the parachute

Originally Posted by Shutter

ah, gotcha. So lets plan on keeping the parachute

wait. Does that mean the RCF would technically beat us? Even in its destruction, the RCF is faster than us.

We're screwed.

[raven1231]

Originally Posted by Shutter

wait. Does that mean the RCF would technically beat us? Even in its destruction, the RCF is faster than us.

We're screwed.

I know its the sad reality of owning an 86

[swarb]

.29 cd vs .33 for the rcf, so we cut the air better, so technically we would crash first. Dunno who wins though, die first or stay alive longer?

[qqqqball]

The 86 has the looks - it confuses people. The Lexus has the amenities that the 86 doesnt...uhh sound dampening being the most notable.. Our cars are so freaking loud, especially with aftermarket tires and a firm suspension.

[Pat.Thornton]

I got to test drive the rcf at a dealer about a month ago and holy sh**. The thing rips through the gears and with eight speeds it seems never ending. Very fast but still not worth that kind of money... I got to drive the m4 that day as well and If I was gonna be spending that kind of money on a car I would pick that... I feel that the frs is better than both of them though due to it's lightweight and balance, and for the price it's unbeatable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ScoobsMcGee]

Originally Posted by swarb

.29 cd vs .33 for the rcf, so we cut the air better, so technically we would crash first. Dunno who wins though, die first or stay alive longer?

Wouldn't that mean the car would have to fall nose-first the entire time? Now we need to consider weight distribution and counter-balancing to ensure optimal cd while falling to a splattery demise.

[babydriver]

Originally Posted by Shutter

wait. Does that mean the RCF would technically beat us? Even in its destruction, the RCF is faster than us.

We're screwed.

All objects fall at the same rate of acceleration (assuming equal air resistance), 32 ft./sec/sec. Galileo proved this about 400 years ago. This is due to the fact that the Earth is massively larger than any object that we could drop from any height, even something like a mountain (if that could be done somehow).
The exception is an object with high air resistance (such as a feather). The slowing of the fall is exclusively due to the air resistance. On the moon, if you dropped a Lexus and a feather from the same height, they would land simultaneously. I doubt that the difference in air resistance would matter in the case of the two cars.

So the FR-S and Lexus would tie.

[swarb]

[Twin4Life]

Originally Posted by Pat.Thornton

I got to test drive the rcf at a dealer about a month ago and holy sh**. The thing rips through the gears and with eight speeds it seems never ending. Very fast but still not worth that kind of money... I got to drive the m4 that day as well and If I was gonna be spending that kind of money on a car I would pick that... I feel that the frs is better than both of them though due to it's lightweight and balance, and for the price it's unbeatable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did you really type that with a straight face?

[richardM]

Originally Posted by babydriver

All objects fall at the same rate of acceleration (assuming equal air resistance), 32 ft./sec/sec. Galileo proved this about 400 years ago. This is due to the fact that the Earth is massively larger than any object that we could drop from any height, even something like a mountain (if that could be done somehow).
The exception is an object with high air resistance (such as a feather). The slowing of the fall is exclusively due to the air resistance. On the moon, if you dropped a Lexus and a feather from the same height, they would land simultaneously. I doubt that the difference in air resistance would matter in the case of the two cars.

So the FR-S and Lexus would tie.

Sorry.. force= mass times acceleration
The heavier car has more force, so if both have equal resistance, the heavier car will fall faster.

Think of it this way.. the heavier car took more energy to pull it high in to the sky, and that energy is used to overcome the air resistance on the way back down hill.

When in doubt, try an experiment: get two toy balloons. Fill one with air and the other with water. Make them the same size so they have the same air resistance. Drop them both at the same time and see which hits the ground first.

A piece of paper and book have the same cross sectional area. Drop them side by side. CLEARLY the book falls faster.

So.. theory and experiment confirm.. Newton's laws work.

[pushrod]

Originally Posted by richardM

A piece of paper and book have the same cross sectional area. Drop them side by side. CLEARLY the book falls faster.

This is not because of the masses; it's because of aerodynamics. The piece of paper is easily deformed by the pressure from the air and changes shape. Also, air has a much greater ability to have a meaningful effect on a lighter object than on a heaver object, and so will be able to add or remove more kinetic energy from it.

Force = Pressure x Area
Accel = Force / Mass

therefore
Accel = Pressure x Area / Mass

therefore
a lighter object passing through a fluid will accelerate or decelerate more readily.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by richardM

Sorry.. force= mass times acceleration
The heavier car has more force, so if both have equal resistance, the heavier car will fall faster.

Think of it this way.. the heavier car took more energy to pull it high in to the sky, and that energy is used to overcome the air resistance on the way back down hill.

When in doubt, try an experiment: get two toy balloons. Fill one with air and the other with water. Make them the same size so they have the same air resistance. Drop them both at the same time and see which hits the ground first.

A piece of paper and book have the same cross sectional area. Drop them side by side. CLEARLY the book falls faster.

So.. theory and experiment confirm.. Newton's laws work.

Dude, really?

[pushrod]

Originally Posted by swarb

.29 cd vs .33 for the rcf, so we cut the air better, so technically we would crash first. Dunno who wins though, die first or stay alive longer?

Total drag comes from the products of the Cd and the frontal area. A small brick has less drag than an F18. That said, the 86 is also smaller, so it's even more in our favour.

[Pat.Thornton]

Originally Posted by Twin4Life

Did you really type that with a straight face?

Tried to lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk