weight and top speed, expert opinion
http://youtu.be/7mDMGZ94uFc
Saying that ONLY aerodynamics impacts topspeed is overly simplistic and is ignoring the other physical variables that are present in real life.
For a car where the mass does not exceed the Work ability of the engine, yes, the topspeed will be governed mostly by aerodynamics as well as friction of mechanical components, gearing, etc.
there are, however, an awful load of knowalls and so called experts on hear who will sware blind that lightening their cars will make them have a faster top speed, and attack you if you doubt it.
Aside from that, I merely want to point out the fact that physics doesn't lie: by saying ONLY aerodynamics has an impact, you're oversimplifying and ignoring the other variables. That is just patently false. If you have to say "Yes, but" you're not telling the whole story.
All I said is that realistically, there are other variables that you can't just write off, weight being one of them. Is it a major concern when you have an engine that can perform large amounts of Work? No, not really. Re-read my post and take careful note of the example I lead with. That explains the point I'm making.
However, as with the last 5 times or so you fought this battle, you'll be deaf to anyone's voice that doesn't agree with your own and you'll argue down to others. I honestly could give a ****, but the laws of Physics needed representation here.
Anything you say, can and will be used against you in the courtyard of MBworld.
Ok, check this out, if,
F=.5 M V^2
Which is spelled as <Half the mass times the velocity squared equals the force>
So, my algebra would say, <Velocity is equal to the square root of force divided by half the mass>
It is scary to be wrong.
Plug in your numbers, I dare you, I double dare you, I triple dog dare you.
Trending Topics
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
in the video, the narrative also says
‘I’ve taken everything off, dashboard, wings, roof, side panels ...'
And the reply is, from a formula one chief no less
‘well done but you should also remove the battery and reduce the fluids, but it won’t affect the top speed, that is purely aerodynamics...'
And
using simple formula to 'prove a formula one chief is also wrong' won’t work either, because all the Newtonian methods of calculating work, or speed, or acceleration assume no other losses, i.e. only hold true IN A VACUUM, last time I knew, the earth has AIR which causes massive drag which is why aerodynamics is the king of speed.
p.s spellinck misakes dunt make wot ur saying incorct
What you're arguing is terminal velocity in free fall situation, buoyant force. Which yes it is a part of the problem as air resistance grows bigger and bigger, BUT the magnitude of everything else factors in significantly as well.
Show me numbers, its not intuitive.



