Hello Rod, your writing style is so blatantly unusual I don't even have to look at the fake address, which is also following a very set pattern.
WTF is "high steep road driving" and what has it to do with tighter turning circles?
On the highway/motorway etc at something like 100 mph etc.
It is much harder to do that sort of high speed driving with wheels that can turn at 90 degrees so you can park sideways at the kerb.
There is a reason cars arent designed like that.
Only an Aussie would word it like that. Steep means an incline.
So why is it difficult to have a wheel which CAN (but doesn't always obviously) turn 90 degrees, go at 100mph?
Why did you delete the part where I called you by name Rod?
Were you missing me so badly that you tried to fall out of my killfile again?
You won't last long, you'll bore me within the day.
Sorry, didn't notice my typo even the second time around. I meant speed in the original and the auto correction turned it into steep.
Asks someone who has never had a clue about mechanical stuff.
The only real way to do it is like is done with trolley wheels that can do that and even you should have noticed how poorly they work at higher speed.
You basically need a vertical axle for the entire wheel to pivot around, as well as the axle that the wheel itself rotates around.
There are a very few industrial machines with all 4 wheels like that but they don't do high speed driving.
iirc it's about 3 degrees on the rear but I haven't been following closely.
Around here it would be following an old logging road with a 10% grade at 7000'...
No, you're not following. Turn the front wheels left and the rear wheels turned right. Try to get away from a wall in anything other than a fairly straight line and the rear runs into the wall.
\ \
/ /
It was a WWI design and probably got rethought.
Ah, just like happens when you try to reverse a car (or worse a trailer) while getting away from a wall. The rear wheel steering needs to be adjustable. I assume on modern cars with it, it automatically avoids the wall situation.
I can never remember what those grades mean, either in metric or imperial. We used to have "1 in 4" - is that 1 up for 4 along, or 1 up for 4 lengths of road (ie. the hypotenuse)? Then we got the %. Again, a percentage of what? Is the up a % of along, or a % of the road length, or is the angle a % of vertical? It would be far more sensible to state it in degrees, everyone knows what that means.
Autocorrect sux, better to autounderline, then you can choose the right word.
If I knew I wouldn't have asked obviously.
A car's wheels naturally go back to centre if you don't apply force to the steering wheel. Increasing the maximum angle you can turn the wheels at won't affect that.
Or a nice joint that allows a sharper angle than the current one.
This speed, how does it make it worse?
Mine does both, presumably autocorrecting what it decides is obvious.
Only with the current systems which arent anything even remotely like 90 degrees and even then only when you are only a little off straight ahead,
It does actually even with the hard lock with the current designs. It isnt even possible with a 90 degree system with a vertical axle added.
Not even possible.
There is is no auto centring with a vertical axle and one is needed to get 90 degrees. And in fact you need a bit more than 90 too.
I doubt 3 degrees would be much of a problem nor do I think it would have much effect on the turning radius.
I wouldn't want to think about the repair cost if it breaks. BMW had a different system in the '90s that didn't last long on the market.
From an engineering standpoint I like the transverse engine FWD design. All the stuff is in one place turning in the same direction.
10% is 10 feet of rise in 100 feet or 5.7 degrees. 100% is 45 degrees.
A moderately difficult hiking trail averages out to about 10%. Our interstate highways shoot for 7% but some local streets may get up to 15%.
But 100 feet in which direction? Flat on the map or along the incline? It's very ambiguous.
A percentage should be of the angle, then we'd all know what it was, 10% of 45 degrees should be 4.5 degrees.
Anyway 100% should be vertical.
Bollocks. I consider this to be moderate (without the "ly difficult"), and I'd estimate it to vary between 10 and 30 degrees, not 5.7:
I guess the limitation is for heavy trucks (what do you call actual trucks over there, since a big car is a truck in America?), and how dangerous it gets when icy.
Ever seen that when frozen? You'd be going a hell of a speed by the bottom. I guess you'd have to deliberately bash into the trees or railing to stop.
I wonder who or what bauersecure.com is, we've both ended up linking to them now, presumably from a google images search. I can't find them anywhere, and they don't seem to have an IP listed for bauersecure.com without anything before it.
There needs to be a button to disable it (or even better change to same direction) at very low speed - to make getting in and out of parking spaces easier.
I can't remember seeing an engine the other way round. I think the old Morris Marinas were that way, they had a very long bonnet.
Since you won't even admit you're Rod, f*ck off.
You never could bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag.
'Average' 10%.
https://www.google.com/maps/@56.7983659,-5.0242735,2a,90y,239.48h,92.4t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1ssA0nUaUJ36VNwPFGV63oWw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DsA0nUaUJ36VNwPFGV63oWw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D268.3827%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656 That stretch looks like 0.5%.
The 7% is for the benefit of semis and aging RVs. At 10% many passenger cars will need to downshift.
I've been to Pittsburg but not in the winter. I imaging the locals avoid it. It was nowhere that steep but there's a grade near Holyoke Massachusetts with a stop sign at the bottom. After the first snow the TV station would send a cameraman out to record the antics. It was reminiscent of those clips of gooney bird landings.
The average angle from where the path starts zigzagging (zoom out to satellite to see) to the peak of Ben Nevis is 24 degrees from horizontal, which isn't that steep, it's less than the 2 o'clock position on a wall clock. I worked it out by measuring the distance of the path and the altitude ascended using Google Earth. Inverse tangent (altitude gained / horizontal distance) = average angle of ascent. A pretty easy path, I've done it barefoot. It's not like you need walking poles or crampons. In fact I was overtaken by someone running up it! More surprising was when he ran back down and I had to step to the side rather quickly. I don't believe he had full braking ability.
Since you guys all use autos, who cares?
There's a motorway near here where I have to drop to second top gear to avoid falling below 75mph. That was in a 1.3 litre Rover Maestro, and a 1.6 litre Renault Scenic, neither with much weight in them.
The funniest thing to watch is dustcarts on ice. Since they come out early in the morning, it's seldom gritted.
In the last 10 years or so they've been closing some of my favorite cardiac arrest trails for 'restoration' and building graded trails with switchbacks that are three times as long. I'm not anti-biker but I think it's in part from the bicycle traffic increasing erosion.
Probably a good thing. I grew up back east where the trails mostly went straight up the mountain and had be used for a couple of hundred years. Most of them resembled dry creek beds except in the spring where they turned into creeks.
If you want to post hole through 3 miles of rotten spring snow, more power to you. I'm too old for that shit. It was more of an exploratory trip to see how bad the fire had been and I didn't bring my snowshoes. THe good news was the upslope hadn't burned although the canyon was gutted, including several houses. People insist on building in the woods.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.