Page 5 of 5

Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 9:37 pm
by -Scott-
Working VERY roughly, we can look at the numbers of "centre blocks" and "side blocks" in each print.

40psi: 4 centres, 3 sides
30psi: 4.5 centres, maybe 3.5 sides?
20psi: 6 centres, maybe 5 sides.
13psi: 7.5 centres, about 7 sides.

So, from 40 psi to 13 psi, whichever way you look at it, contact patch roughly doubles - where the pressure has reduced by a factor of 3.

It's definitely not a directly linear relationship, which is what I would have expected.

Cheers,

Scott

Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 9:54 pm
by Beastmavster
Each block is 2 1/4" wide and 2 1/2" long.


However there is some overlap sideways, and each new block starts about 1 7/8" sidewards from the previous one's left edge.

North south the staggering is about 1/4" per block.


An A4 page is about 11 1/2" long and 8 1/2" wide

Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:52 am
by Bundy_Harry
4WD Stuff wrote::idea: Dragsters use wider tyres for the large contact area to the ground. :cool:
A very interesting point this one, one that could change a lot of "opinions" here.

the dragster tyres underwent a massive change in the 70's, the wider larger tyres here were designed to de-form but not in the traditional sense of "wider" for more traction.

have you observed the change when "dragsters" warm their tyres, all noise and smoke yes by the tyres themselves change. They change from shorter, wider tyres to taller, thinner tyres.

Now the gain-sayers amongst us will argue that the warm-up is different from the main drag run, and you may be right. On the main timed run (drag) the taller thinner tyre performs one crucial task. It performs the work of a slingshot, the elasticity in the now longer (re: taller, thinner) tyre assists to propel the car forward faster during acceleration.

Think of the tyre as bagging in the forward direction rather than bagging in the sidewards direction. This single development is what allowed dragsters to move forward with faster times and higher top speeds.

This may or may not be relevant to the argument but I hope this gets more people thinking about the issue of 'fat vs thin'

this is a good argument, i have enjoyed reading it and I hope it continues

bundy_harry

Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:22 pm
by juan
How does everyone rate Mickey Thompson MTZ 33" x 12.5"???
I was looking into getting a set

Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 3:25 pm
by quick60
juan wrote:How does everyone rate Mickey Thompson MTZ 33" x 12.5"???
I was looking into getting a set
Depends if they are a wide or skinny 12.5" ?

Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:52 pm
by Beastmavster
quick60 wrote:
juan wrote:How does everyone rate Mickey Thompson MTZ 33" x 12.5"???
I was looking into getting a set
Depends if they are a wide or skinny 12.5" ?
Lol.


I think there's enough should I buy "brand X" threads already going without hijacking this one.

Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:19 pm
by HotFourOk
juan wrote:How does everyone rate Mickey Thompson MTZ 33" x 12.5"???
I was looking into getting a set
search! There's lots of threads on this