[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: braking distances and tyres
- To: "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: braking distances and tyres
- From: Dave Eaton <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 02 Apr 1998 15:21:59 +1200
- Autoforwarded: false
- Disclose-Recipients: prohibited
- Hop-Count: 1
- Importance: normal
- Mr-Received: by mta MOEMR0.MUAS; Relayed; Thu, 02 Apr 1998 15:21:59 +1200
- Mr-Received: by mta CSAV05; Relayed; Thu, 02 Apr 1998 15:22:00 +1200
- Sender: email@example.com
- Ua-Content-Id: 11C413D53500
- X400-Mts-Identifier: [;3759211502041998/A03430/CSAV05]
sorry scott, you're way off-base here. to say that the tyres are not
fundamental components to all manner of braking (and handling) characteristics,
is to fly in the face of the math.
so i have no difficulty concieving of a car test where the vechile is panned
because of tyres which are optimised for comfort (or even wet weather grip),
rather than dry circuit performance. michelins are notorious for providing
lousy wet grip and superlative dry grip (reference autocar's recent tyre
to illustrate this, read any comprehensive tyre test where the cars used are
the same to equalise all possible variables, and then try and explain the
*major* differences in wet and dry handling and braking that result from the
differeing tyre makes (same profile and size) that results.
i can quote you autocar's recent test if you'd like...
maybe i misunderstood you?
ps the rs2 has brembo (not porsche) brakes. similar in spec to the 968 porker.
at their performance is quite adequate thanks very much. better than most
competitive cars (even the odd diablo). the 993/996 has better brakes, but
then again, they're a tad more expensive than the car i'm driving.