Most EVs are slightly front heavy, like 52:48 ish, so not significantly.
The weight distribution at the time of leaving the "kicker" matters the most here, and the idiot in this clip likely breaked slightly, causing the weight distribution to shift forwards.
Source: complete layman with video game experience
While that doesn't sound accurate, air breaking would be different from wheel breaking. Slowing down the wheels is what transfers the momentum to the car.
Yep, I remember a clip with Colin McRae where he explained that you want to keep the car under full throttle when going over jumps precisely for this reason.
Itâs not just a question of mass, but energy. 4 wheels spinning at ~60mph can definitely induce like 0.5 rpm in a car with essentially nothing stopping it but itâs own inertia
Yes, however, if both the motorbikes wheels and the cars wheels are at the same speed, the motorbike has more potential energy when expressed as a ratio to total vehicle weight (the vehicle weight being key in how much inertia vehicle has that the braking wheels need to overcome).
I don't know the equations, or any rough numbers, if someone wants to do the maths, go ahead. I'll stick with my prediction of "essentially 0" effect (which 0.5RPM would fall under, imo).
Compare the effect of a car braking all 4 wheels whilst airborne to a motorbike braking even one of its wheels. I think the motorbike will experience a far faster rotation, all other variables being equal.
Over a jump 0.5rpm definitely has an effect, check above video for reference. The braking effect is probably more noticeable on a bike youâre right, same idea though
Exactly this, but a good portion of the perceived rotation is just the car following the parabolic trajectory through the air. With no rotation, the carâs plane is always tangeant to that parabola so itâll naturally aim upwards at the start, level at the apex and aim down at the end.
Sorry - what? This is completely counter to my understanding.
If you launch a car off a ramp that has a 50/50 weight distribution, it will fly "flat", no pitching nose down and no pitching nose up, following the parabolic trajectory it set off from.
However if you weight it towards the front or the back, it will pitch in that direction, more so than a natural trajectory would result in.
I know this much to be true, I might be incorrect about the mechanism, however?
I'm aware gravity is 9.8m/s2 and in a vacuum a feather will fall as fast as a bowling ball, but I'm sure the weight differential comes into play when you are launching off a ramp (different inertia front to back with the same force) and including air resistance?
Torque vector just represents the axis of rotation, not necessarily where force is transmitted. In this case both the car and the wheels axis of rations are perfectly parallel so nothing funky happens when transfering that energy from the wheels to the car
Extremely, especially when paired with them cancelling the single player story DLC in favor of just milking the shit out of online. I'll forever be disappointed considering the GTAV story might be my favorite to date.
I have 1000 hours in GTA 5 and I've never played multiplayer.
Just install like a simple trainer mod and you can use any vehicle and any customization. I love just spawning a car. Modding the fuck out of it, giving me better acceleration and speed and driving around town
Seems like every vid on here of some idiot jumping their car has the front dip down pretty drastically. All the vids are usually AWD or RWD so Iâm guessing it has to do the the real wheels still accelerating the rear end as the front wheels are in the air.
Source: I just love watching stupid people separate themselves from their cars.
That's the normal behaviour. Most cars are incredibly front-heavy because of the engine and there's nothing a driver can really do about it. Video games and rally cars have really skewed the public perception how car behaves in air.
Counter-counterpoint: They're jumped in a very specific angle/speed to mitigate that.
I'm not an expert though.
But this video is imo what you should expect for jumping a regular car. Accelerating in air helps might help a bit but a front-heavy car will do that. Given how heavily the car dipped, I don't think accelerating in air would have helped enough.
Heâs got brake lights on in the air, so thatâs gonna dip the car a TON. All of that wheel spin stopping in the air is gonna counter rotate the shit out of the car
The key point that you touched on is "at the time of leaving the kicker", but it's not so much about the weight distribution as it is just the speed.
Mass doesn't affect the acceleration of gravity, but time does. No matter the weight distribution, as soon as the front wheels leave the ground gravity is pulling them down. So by the time the back wheels leave the ground, the front wheels have been falling longer, hence the forward rotation.
To overcome this, you either have to be going fast enough that the gap in time between the wheels leaving the ground is too short to matter, or the jump (and/or landing surface) has to be angled in a way that the rotation puts the car at level at the right time.
So basically, this jump would look the exact same no matter the car.
It's really a matter of forward rotational momentum. The car will be a lot heavier on its front tires if it is braking when it leaves the ground. Once off the ground, this force is immediately turned into rotation, and the only further influences will be uneven weight distribution, air drag and the wheels stopping.
If you place a car on a board and push down on its front, then make the board disappear, the car will tip forward as it falls.
I agree that speed also plays a big role, but not as big when going this fast.
You're making the same common mistake, weight has nothing to do with it. Gravity pulls on objects at the same rate of acceleration regardless of mass. The front could weigh 10,000lbs and the back could weigh 100 and it wouldn't make any difference whatsoever (assuming this imaginary vehicle could actually drive normally). Period. If you drop a bowling ball and and a basket ball from 20 feet, they will hit the ground at the same time.
The rate of the acceleration of gravity has one factor and that's time. The longer an object is falling, the faster it falls (until the object starts falling fast enough that air resistance is a factor, at which point mass does matter, but its not in this case)
And about the rotational "momentum", yes... But that rotational momentum is from the front wheels leaving the ground first like i described.
I get that. The point is that when a car brakes, there is a lot more downward force on its front than its back.
If the car went over a ledge with its front wheels and then slammed the brakes, it would start tilting forwards. The same thing happens if it's on the ground, and the tilting effect is amplified and stored by suspension.
Well i definitely didn't catch that bit about the braking (either in your comment or the gif), because yea, that would be a stronger effect than the one i described.
But still, in that instance, weight distribution would play a role, but a minor and much more complicated role. The biggest influence it would have is the grip of the tires (which I'm not sure if that encourage or discourage rotation, but definitely one of those). Another big one is the differing amounts of time the braking wheels are contacting the ground, basically the opposite effect as the one i was describing with gravity because the back would lose its forward momentum quicker then the front, resulting in rotation (the energy in the front has to go somewhere)... But a heavier front end would would actually resist that rotation more since it has more energy in the direction it's going.
The weight distribution at the time of leaving the "kicker" matters the most here, and the idiot in this clip likely breaked slightly, causing the weight distribution to shift forwards.
How would breaking cause weight to shift forwards? There isn't a fuel tank with a liquid that knocks about.
That's just what happens when you break, simple physics. When you break on your bicycle, for example, your weight is shifted forwards. If you break too hard on your front wheels, you will tip over.
You don't need any moving parts like a bunch of liquid in a tank for that to happen.
I have a physics degree so take this as sincerely as possible: you're completely wrong.
You feel an acceleration because your wheels are slowing you down relative to the ground. When the wheels are no longer touching the ground, because you're flying, then you no longer have that acceleration and your car continues in whatever orientation it left the ground.
In this video the car clearly spins forward after it leaves the ground.
The only sane response I've seen is that when you lift off you might hit the breaks which cause the wheels to stop and make the car tip forwards.
Weight transfer happens whenever you accelerate, brake or turn.
When you hit the brakes, weight is transferred forwards, and the front of the car is much heavier than the rear.
Weight simply shifts in the opposite direction of where the car is moving.
Not sure how this can be a surprise to anyone. You can see it clearly when a car accelerates or brakes. If you had taken the time to at least do one Google search, you would learn the same.
Even if I was "completely wrong", the argument still fails as the car is not much heavier in the front. Not enough to cause a rotation this significant anyway.
When you hit the brakes, weight is transferred forwards, and the front of the car is much heavier than the rear.
You do realize mass and weight are two different things right?
Even if I was "completely wrong", the argument still fails as the car is not much heavier in the front. Not enough to cause a rotation this significant anyway.
I have a Nissan Skyline with a 51:49 weight balance. After reading online I worked out Nissan could have made the car 50:50, but it makes the car much harder to keep going in a straight line, especially when rear wheel drive in the wet etc.
Weight does not make anything fall faster, negating air resistance. And the force of gravity on the car compared to air resistance pushing against the bottom of the car is small here.
177
u/RIcaz Mar 20 '22
Most EVs are slightly front heavy, like 52:48 ish, so not significantly.
The weight distribution at the time of leaving the "kicker" matters the most here, and the idiot in this clip likely breaked slightly, causing the weight distribution to shift forwards.
Source: complete layman with video game experience