Hang on, weight is not a factor in stopping distances? I guess Newton was wrong about his law of momentum.Where weight becomes a hinderance is after repeated stops.
So there are a lot of factors involved in reducing stopping distance, awesomeness being one of them, weight not.
Someone must have quickly built aston martins when newton wasn't looking, because they will outstop cars far lighter (like caterhams, porsches...). They will generate more heat in the brakes and tyres though, as that extra energy has to go somewhere.Hang on, weight is not a factor in stopping distances? I guess Newton was wrong about his law of momentum.
I always figured all the stuff he came up with was just a result of being concussed by falling fruit....and other "scientists" thought they'd see how far they could run with it afterwards.
We can see this in an old fifth Gear episode.Weight definitely increases stopping distance, but it also lowers it at the same time (more traction), so it's not cut and dry.
They have solved the brake bias problem. Lots of cars these days can send different braking forces to individual wheels as needed (EBD).excellent post, the one thing to add is that the main reason for "awesomeness" is brake bais (i.e. having all tires break traction at the same time) many cars are setup with extreme bias towards the front tires, which although sounds safer (under-steer instead of over-steer) is actually many times less safe on good road conditions because it leads to much much longer braking distances. This can work okay on front heavy FWD cars, but even with that, on crap tires or a loose surface like dirt or snow the stopping distance suffers greatly. The thing i find strangest of all is that most car companies haven't figured out how to program ABS to fix all this, it seems completely possible, yet over and over again they fail to take the time to improve such a important aspect of vehicle safety.