• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: beatle
Weight makes less of a difference at higher speeds. It's the poor aerodynamics of the truck that hurt it at high speeds.

False.

From a car point of view a[net] = (F[engine] - F[drag]) / m. So mass is equally important at all speeds but as you increase speeds F[drag] becomes increasingly close to F[engine]

(yes, I realize this is a very simple model of what is happening).
 
Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle
Originally posted by: beatle
Weight makes less of a difference at higher speeds. It's the poor aerodynamics of the truck that hurt it at high speeds.

False.

From a car point of view a[net] = (F[engine] - F[drag]) / m. So mass is equally important at all speeds but as you increase speeds F[drag] becomes increasingly close to F[engine]

(yes, I realize this is a very simple model of what is happening).

Actually the Lightning sucks from a roll, as verified by Nebor who owns one and from anyone who posts on F150online.com. Fvck physics, it's common sense. 🙂
 
Originally posted by: RagingBITCH
Actually the Lightning sucks from a roll, as verified by Nebor who owns one and from anyone who posts on F150online.com. Fvck physics, it's common sense. 🙂

I agree, I was just pointing out that it's a misconception to say that weight (technically, it should be mass) has less effect at higher speeds 🙂
 
Back
Top