# my friend hit a curb in my car....



## 9double8 (Jul 9, 2002)

Well like it says...my friend last night hit a curb driving my car. Not only 
is the curb rash bad on the SER rim but now the car is shaking like a mad
man on the express way. It's the front left tire that hit. On the express way
it is better if i turn right..like changing lanes it doesnt shake as much but 
turning left on the bad tire...its real bad. I also hear a knock, knock , knock
at lower speeds. The alignment is now way off. I took off the bad rim and put
the spare on and the same thing. 

I did search and didn't see anything relating to this when hitting a curb other
than possible engine mount? But I think it might be something with the axle.

I am taking it apart tonight with the FSM handy and will keep you posted. 
Let me know if anyone had something like this happen and any help...Thanks.


----------



## Gsolo (Sep 11, 2003)

I did that in my chevy once, word of advice dont floor a rwd v8 around a corner...anyhow, mine was just bent rim and out of alingment by a few degrees. hopefully thats all yours is but you can also bend a spindle or knuckle or even break something.


----------



## 9double8 (Jul 9, 2002)

Gsolo said:


> I did that in my chevy once, word of advice dont floor a rwd v8 around a corner...anyhow, mine was just bent rim and out of alingment by a few degrees. hopefully thats all yours is but you can also bend a spindle or knuckle or even break something.


I just took the wheel off and don't see anything broken..bent i am unsure. 
Tie rod looks fine and my AGX looks good. Motor mounts look good. 
What size is the nut holding the axle on..that big nut?


----------



## Gsolo (Sep 11, 2003)

9double8 said:


> I just took the wheel off and don't see anything broken..bent i am unsure.
> Tie rod looks fine and my AGX looks good. Motor mounts look good.
> What size is the nut holding the axle on..that big nut?



ummm.....big...i dont have a b14 so can't answer that for you. whatever it is it will take alot of strength to take it off. i would suggest you go have it alinged and see if that makes a difference. if its anything else they would probably notice while doing the alingment anyhow....and make your friend pay for it


----------



## 9double8 (Jul 9, 2002)

anyone else have any ideas...i have to work today till 2pm then I am
going to take it apart to try to find something wrong or broke


----------



## wes (Apr 30, 2002)

*Alignment.*

This will tell you a lot about the problem. You most likely have a bent control arm.


----------



## Playa123 (Jul 27, 2003)

wes said:


> This will tell you a lot about the problem. You most likely have a bent control arm.


Yeah thats the same thing that happebed to me, it doesnt sound like he hit it at too much force, just enough for some road rash. Get it aligned and check out if the control arm is bent or damaged in anyway.


----------



## Dan-zig (Apr 19, 2003)

well considering damage was done to the alignment I suggest you fix it asap, as being off by the slightest degrees and your tires are f-d. If you dont know what your doing have a friend check out, or a shop


----------



## Gsolo (Sep 11, 2003)

whatever is wrong aling it first. take it to les schwab....if you have one....i dunno who else does alingment though. if you had access to an alingment rack you could do it yourself...and better than any shop i've noticed. shops just get it close but dont for exact cause of time.


----------



## azkicker0027 (May 31, 2002)

how fast was your friend going?? is the wheel still centered in the wheel well and fender??? it pulls and all right?? and also has a knocking sound??? an alignment alone may not fix this.


----------



## sentrapower93 (May 11, 2002)

I hit a curb a few years ago driving in the snow, doing about 30-40mph. I had to replace the left front strut, control arm, alloy wheel and tire. Needless to say i've been driving like an old lady in the snow since...


----------



## 9double8 (Jul 9, 2002)

azkicker0027 said:


> how fast was your friend going?? is the wheel still centered in the wheel well and fender??? it pulls and all right?? and also has a knocking sound??? an alignment alone may not fix this.


He was going about 15mph when he hit it. The wheel appears to be centered from looking at it headon. The alignment is off and I am going today to get 
that fixed. I think something is bent.


----------



## nismoweapon (Jul 18, 2002)

A year and a half ago I hit a curb in my '99 SE Limited. I destroyed the lip on the wheel (15in SE-R wheel), bent the control arm, obliterated the wheel bearing, bent the sway bar mount, strut, and strut mount. I actually pushed the wheel back into the fender and the fender back into the driver's door. I was doing about 25mph and hit some gravel and slid into the curb going around a corner. The Nissan dealer repaired everything but didn't find the wheel bearing was bad until they test drove it after an aligment. Thank god there was no unibody damage.


----------



## azkicker0027 (May 31, 2002)

my little curb incident last easter cost me my lh/frt fender, lower control arm, both front wheels, sway bar links, and front bumper, but yeah, only an alignment will determine if things are off and invisible to the eye. :fluffy:


----------



## 9double8 (Jul 9, 2002)

Thanks for all the info. I am getting a 32mm socket to take off the axle nut
to see what i find. i will keep you all posted. i think the axle is bent cause
of the noise it is making on every revolution of the tire.


----------



## OniFactor (Nov 4, 2003)

9double8 said:


> Thanks for all the info. I am getting a 32mm socket to take off the axle nut
> to see what i find. i will keep you all posted. i think the axle is bent cause
> of the noise it is making on every revolution of the tire.



might be the CV joint, too.. i nailed a curb in my kia, and tore my CV joint to hell, not to mention bent the control arm back, pushed the wheel into the fender, and threw off the alignment.. barely got the spare to fit in there, to drive it home


----------



## 9double8 (Jul 9, 2002)

so i am taking everything apart on the left side (the side that got hit) and
I decided to look at the right side to compare and see if something was bent.
Well I seen that a nut broke off w/the stud and all other 3 were extremely lose.
I put back the left side..tightened down the right and seems to be driving fine
except for the alignment I need. mu buddy said he will pay for a 4 wheel alignment tomorrow. weird huh? he must of hit it hard enuff to break off the
right side lug nut and loosen the rest.


----------



## 9double8 (Jul 9, 2002)

Well it seems fixed now. I took it all apart on the left side (the hit side) and 
took off the shock. I went over to the right side to look at it and compare.
When I began to take off the lugs I noticed that one was broken and the 
other 3 were EXTREAMLY loose. I jacked the car up to even out the tire and
tightened down the 3 lugs and put back together the left side. Took it back
on the road and pooofff...it's fixed. 

How weird is that..the force must of broke the lug off the opposite side
and the other 3 lugs were so loose the car was shaking---i am lucky the
wheel didn't pass me up. Tomrrow is an alignment and a balance on the bad
wheel. Thanks for all the help.


----------



## Gsolo (Sep 11, 2003)

should get wheels balanced

nvm, just realized you said balance :fluffy:


----------



## dundee (May 11, 2002)

yeah I got in a dispute with a curb about 3 years ago. Only now have I solved all the problems. since there was some slight body damage I let the body shop fix it back then. They did a really shitty job. they replaced control arm, strut, one wheel and axel. but it never aligned correctly - caster was off (ie bent frame). so this summer the wheel bearing goes out. so I replaced the bearing, another control arm(want to be sure it wasn't the frame), pulled the frame straight and aligned in specs finally! 

CURBS SUCK!


----------



## clsindustries (May 28, 2002)

My little brother just recently had a curb incident in his 91 SE-R. We were doing a little "spirited" driving (myself in my SE-L and our friend in his SVT Contour) and we were on the viaduct here in Seattle. Well traffic got thick so we backed off, it was damp too. So my brother comes into a turn and caught a little too much brake and locked it up.

His right front rim caught most of the impact, doing the same damage as nismoweapon talked about. Wheel into fender, fender into door. His rim was thrashed, he actually cracked the rotor right above the hub, screwed the control arm and bent some other stuff. Thankfully, he had plenty of emergency cash on hand and got it back within a few days.

Word to the wise, the viaduct is a deathtrap when it's wet!!


----------



## Gsolo (Sep 11, 2003)

clsindustries said:


> Word to the wise, the viaduct is a deathtrap when it's wet!!




...and you have lived in Seattle for how long?!?? and all of seattle is just cause of how stupid most drivers are there


----------



## Token Moron (Mar 28, 2003)

nismoweapon said:


> A year and a half ago I hit a curb in my '99 SE Limited. I destroyed the lip on the wheel (15in SE-R wheel), bent the control arm, obliterated the wheel bearing, bent the sway bar mount, strut, and strut mount. I actually pushed the wheel back into the fender and the fender back into the driver's door. I was doing about 25mph and hit some gravel and slid into the curb going around a corner. The Nissan dealer repaired everything but didn't find the wheel bearing was bad until they test drove it after an aligment. Thank god there was no unibody damage.



holy fuckin shit!! same EXACT thing happened to me in my 96 sentra


----------



## Bach42T (Nov 7, 2002)

Got intimate with both sides of a bridge last September while going to a temp. job to make a measly 30 bucks. I came back home with 5K in damage. What happened was I hit my brakes in some rain, and started doing a 180. Rear axle broke and shoved in the right side with my wheel poking out the right side. I had three pages of stuff replaced. Everything from a control arm, front bumper, rear axle, fog light(F left wheel, R right wheel had to be refurbished because there gashes in them) suspension parts, etc were replaced. It took me almost a month to get my car back. Strangely, no panel damage. Even though I hit both curb parts of the bridge, it only snagged the wheels and my right rear mudguard got scraped. Wow, it's the worst thing to think that I was going to make 30 bucks and then came home with 5K in damage. Thank God for State Farm.


----------



## Gsolo (Sep 11, 2003)

Bach42T said:


> Got intimate with both sides of a bridge last September while going to a temp. job to make a measly 30 bucks. I came back home with 5K in damage. What happened was I hit my brakes in some rain, and started doing a 180. Rear axle broke and shoved in the right side with my wheel poking out the right side. I had three pages of stuff replaced. Everything from a control arm, front bumper, rear axle, fog light(F left wheel, R right wheel had to be refurbished because there gashes in them) suspension parts, etc were replaced. It took me almost a month to get my car back. Strangely, no panel damage. Even though I hit both curb parts of the bridge, it only snagged the wheels and my right rear mudguard got scraped. Wow, it's the worst thing to think that I was going to make 30 bucks and then came home with 5K in damage. Thank God for State Farm.




thats one reason why i wouldn't mind having ABS


----------



## Flounder (Sep 4, 2003)

i always have fun in the snow. Sometimes too much fun. Last month i was coming out of a park and i tried to swing the tail out with e-brake. I wasnt going fast enough to swing the tail out and was heading for the curb. I was coming at it at about a 45 degree angle. I also had my wheel turned, but it didn't help. I slammed into the curb. It was a pretty hard impact, but i was only going about 10mph. I stopped and got out to check for damage. Basicly, nothing got hurt at all. There is a little nick on the passenger side wheel, but nothing else. The car is perfectly balanced and still drives straight as an arrow. Guess i got lucky.


----------



## phreako (Mar 4, 2004)

i've done the exact same thing, except i just had to replace my control arm and it was like new again (well, and the tire...which i then just replaced with a set of Kumhos....anyone want to buy a barely used michelin XGT V4?)


----------



## B11sleeper (Oct 15, 2003)

Gsolo said:


> thats one reason why i wouldn't mind having ABS


i had a subaru awd w/ abs and i took it to the snow, going 5 mph down hill you put the brakes on and it takes forever to stop. disable the abs and it stops fine. moral: i don't like abs, but it might work for you.


----------



## ReVerm (Jan 13, 2003)

B11sleeper said:


> i had a subaru awd w/ abs and i took it to the snow, going 5 mph down hill you put the brakes on and it takes forever to stop. disable the abs and it stops fine. moral: i don't like abs, but it might work for you.


ABS is for pavement. If you're on gravel or a thick sheet of snow, you will stop MUCH quicker if you lock your brakes.


----------



## Gsolo (Sep 11, 2003)

ReVerm said:


> or a thick sheet of snow, you will stop MUCH quicker if you lock your brakes.



:dumbass:


----------



## B11sleeper (Oct 15, 2003)

ReVerm said:


> ABS is for pavement. If you're on gravel or a thick sheet of snow, you will stop MUCH quicker if you lock your brakes.


i think you mean in order to build up some junk infront of the tire to help stop, not 'lockup' lockup the brakes, that would be bad.


----------



## Gsolo (Sep 11, 2003)

B11sleeper said:


> i think you mean in order to build up some junk infront of the tire to help stop, not 'lockup' lockup the brakes, that would be bad.


well, on snow you don't want your tires to ever lockup. trust me, we get snow here and if you really really want to argue this next winter I'll give you a ride in my chevy and we can go lockup the brakes on the highway sound like fun? :thumbup: and I'm not saying that to you B11 saying it to ReVerm. And even in gravel you don't stop faster when locking up brakes. Sure if you can't properly use brakes you might think that but if you can properly put as much pressure on the brakes without locking up you will definately stop faster and shorter than locking them up.


----------



## ReVerm (Jan 13, 2003)

Gsolo said:


> well, on snow you don't want your tires to ever lockup. trust me, we get snow here and if you really really want to argue this next winter I'll give you a ride in my chevy and we can go lockup the brakes on the highway sound like fun? :thumbup: and I'm not saying that to you B11 saying it to ReVerm. And even in gravel you don't stop faster when locking up brakes. Sure if you can't properly use brakes you might think that but if you can properly put as much pressure on the brakes without locking up you will definately stop faster and shorter than locking them up.


You don't seem to understand that there's a difference between skidding across loose material and building up loose material in front of the tyre. The most effective way to do either is to lock the brakes and the wheels (though it's much easier to do the former than the latter if you don't have the appropriate tyres on your car). When you do it, how quickly and how smoothly the transition is to a full lock, and how long you maintain it will determine which happens and thus how effectively you stop.

If you want a more practical example of it, watch the wheels of WRC cars as they brake into tight corners on loose surfaces (more apparent with the Group N and Super 1600 cars). They will momentarily lock, not because the drivers aren't good enough to limit brake, but because they need to do so in order to stop quickly.

BTW: This is pretty basic as goes tyre theory.


----------



## B11sleeper (Oct 15, 2003)

Gsolo said:


> ... next winter I'll give you a ride in my chevy and we can go lockup the brakes on the highway sound like fun? :thumbup: and I'm not saying that to you B11


but i like to get cars sideways.

i need a bias controller for my 210 then icy roads would be mad fun.


----------



## Gsolo (Sep 11, 2003)

ReVerm said:


> You don't seem to understand that there's a difference between skidding across loose material and building up loose material in front of the tyre. The most effective way to do either is to lock the brakes and the wheels (though it's much easier to do the former than the latter if you don't have the appropriate tyres on your car). When you do it, how quickly and how smoothly the transition is to a full lock, and how long you maintain it will determine which happens and thus how effectively you stop.
> 
> If you want a more practical example of it, watch the wheels of WRC cars as they brake into tight corners on loose surfaces (more apparent with the Group N and Super 1600 cars). They will momentarily lock, not because the drivers aren't good enough to limit brake, but because they need to do so in order to stop quickly.
> 
> BTW: This is pretty basic as goes tyre theory.



am i rally racing?? i'm not going to argue with you about this. I'm using normal tires on icy roads or even gravel i ain't going to lock em up. And I don't know what you're smoking but when you lock up the brakes in turn the wheels lock up too...thats simple science.


----------



## BikerFry (Jul 31, 2003)

Haha let him think stopping with his wheels locked will stop him faster than if they're turning. Natural selection will get him soon enough. As a good rule of thumb, don't ever try to equate rally car racing with safe street driving. 

We're talking about simple physics: coefficient of static friction is always greater than the coefficient of kinetic friction for a given surface/surface interface. Because of this you have more frictional force available to brake when your tires are rolling as opposed to when they're locked and sliding. Therefore, don't lock your tires if you want to stop quickly.

Oh, and ReVerm: Before you go spreading dangerous myths about how to drive properly on low friction surfaces like snow or gravel, at least learn how to spell the word "TIRE." Then learn a little physics instead of watching WRC competitions.


----------



## Iluvsr20s (Mar 7, 2004)

BikerFry said:


> Haha let him think stopping with his wheels locked will stop him faster than if they're turning. Natural selection will get him soon enough. As a good rule of thumb, don't ever try to equate rally car racing with safe street driving.
> 
> We're talking about simple physics: coefficient of static friction is always greater than the coefficient of kinetic friction for a given surface/surface interface. Because of this you have more frictional force available to brake when your tires are rolling as opposed to when they're locked and sliding. Therefore, don't lock your tires if you want to stop quickly.
> 
> Oh, and ReVerm: Before you go spreading dangerous myths about how to drive properly on low friction surfaces like snow or gravel, at least learn how to spell the word "TIRE." Then learn a little physics instead of watching WRC competitions.


The first paragraph is correct but the second paragraph contradicts itself. Static friction is when your not moving, so even if you lock them up, it will still be kinetic friction. Or if you consider that the tire is not rolling then it is static friction your saying he is right. WHICH OF COURSE HE IS NOT!!!!!! The reason you dont want to lock the wheels is to stay in control of the vehicle because when you lock the wheels your car becomes a sled you know how hard it is to steer a sled, anway if they are locked the cars momentum will trump what ever you do in the car

Is the reason you lose traction when the tires are locked, becuase gases build up and push against the wheel, like the reason you get vented or drilled brake rotors??????


----------



## Iluvsr20s (Mar 7, 2004)

Sorry if i sounded mean. I didnt mean too, just trying too be helpfull.


----------



## ReVerm (Jan 13, 2003)

Gsolo said:


> am i rally racing?? i'm not going to argue with you about this. I'm using normal tires on icy roads or even gravel i ain't going to lock em up. And I don't know what you're smoking but when you lock up the brakes in turn the wheels lock up too...thats simple science.


I never said you should lock your tyres on icy roads. Ice isn't a loose surface. It doesn't matter whether you're rally racing or not, or whether you have snow/gravel tyres on. The physics still applies. I just used WRC cars as an example because it's so easy to see from outside the car. 

Also, I never said the wheels wouldn't lock if you locked the brakes. That just doesn't make sense.


----------



## ReVerm (Jan 13, 2003)

BikerFry said:



> Haha let him think stopping with his wheels locked will stop him faster than if they're turning. Natural selection will get him soon enough. As a good rule of thumb, don't ever try to equate rally car racing with safe street driving.
> 
> We're talking about simple physics: coefficient of static friction is always greater than the coefficient of kinetic friction for a given surface/surface interface. Because of this you have more frictional force available to brake when your tires are rolling as opposed to when they're locked and sliding. Therefore, don't lock your tires if you want to stop quickly.
> 
> Oh, and ReVerm: Before you go spreading dangerous myths about how to drive properly on low friction surfaces like snow or gravel, at least learn how to spell the word "TIRE." Then learn a little physics instead of watching WRC competitions.


I am not saying that you should always lock your brakes when you stop on any surface. That's common sense. What I'm trying to say is that locking your brakes will not always lead to a loss of control or increased braking distances. I am also not equating rally racing to street driving. I just used that as an example so you could see what I was talking about.

Your argument about tyre physics is not only incorrect on the elementary level, it does not apply directly to this subject. Why? Newton's laws only applies to friction between smooth, solid surfaces. Tyres are made of rubber and are designed to slip in order to generate more traction. Gravel and thick snow are not solid surfaces. The physics of this is completely different from what you'd get from your average lower level college physics course.

Also note that "tyre" is the British English spelling of the word "tire". I'm just used to spelling that way because most of the books I read about the subject are written in British English (and even some American authors spell it that way as well).

You people seem to be confusing "loose surfaces" with "low traction surfaces". Locking your brakes will get you very little on a solid low traction surface. But there's a lot more to it when the surface moves as well. That's what I'm talking about here.


----------



## Gsolo (Sep 11, 2003)

ReVerm said:


> I am not saying that you should always lock your brakes when you stop on any surface. That's common sense. What I'm trying to say is that locking your brakes will not always lead to a loss of control or increased braking distances. I am also not equating rally racing to street driving. I just used that as an example so you could see what I was talking about.
> 
> Your argument about tyre physics is not only incorrect on the elementary level, it does not apply directly to this subject. Why? Newton's laws only applies to friction between smooth, solid surfaces. Tyres are made of rubber and are designed to slip in order to generate more traction. Gravel and thick snow are not solid surfaces. The physics of this is completely different from what you'd get from your average lower level college physics course.
> 
> ...



now you are sounding better....but what about mud?? I can lock up on mud, mud will build up in front of tires, but i'm not going to be stopping anytime soon. Believe what you want about stopping on gravel cause there is some truth to that even though in physics you can't reallly prove it, its a trial and error thing. But when it comes to snow don't even chance it. Thats why ABS was invented. yeah, on dry pavement ABS sucks for the most part, and I would hate to be racing with ABS, but on snow "generally" ABS is awesome. I say generally cause i know some ppl have had some weird and bad experiences. And what's the point of ABS?? Anitlock Braking System. You push on the pedal as hard as you can, alot of brake pressure, HCU senses when wheels lock up and releases enough brake pressure to compensate then puts it back on, pulsating who knows how many hundreds of times a second so that the wheel doesn't lock up but has full brake pressure. 

sorry about dragging this out :cheers:


----------



## ReVerm (Jan 13, 2003)

Gsolo said:


> now you are sounding better....but what about mud?? I can lock up on mud, mud will build up in front of tires, but i'm not going to be stopping anytime soon. Believe what you want about stopping on gravel cause there is some truth to that even though in physics you can't reallly prove it, its a trial and error thing. But when it comes to snow don't even chance it. Thats why ABS was invented. yeah, on dry pavement ABS sucks for the most part, and I would hate to be racing with ABS, but on snow "generally" ABS is awesome. I say generally cause i know some ppl have had some weird and bad experiences. And what's the point of ABS?? Anitlock Braking System. You push on the pedal as hard as you can, alot of brake pressure, HCU senses when wheels lock up and releases enough brake pressure to compensate then puts it back on, pulsating who knows how many hundreds of times a second so that the wheel doesn't lock up but has full brake pressure.
> 
> sorry about dragging this out :cheers:


You are trying to use anecdotal evidence to disprove what can be proven both on paper and through controlled testing. The driver element can be considered a trial and error thing. The physics is not. Despite the fact that elementary mechanics can prove little about how tyres work, you go a few levels deeper and you will find that in fact, physics can explain how tyres grip on a great number of surfaces.

As goes mud, it really depends on the composition of the mud (I do realize that mud is just a term for sediment grain size, but I think the mud you are referring to is the nonuniform stuff you find after dirt gets soaked), but the theory still applies. Again, immediately diving in and slamming on your brakes won't help you, as you will be accumulating little in front of the tyre and will be skidding across the top of the mud. What the driver needs to do is to control when and how the lock occurs so he can form enough of a wall of material in front of the tyre without completely filling up the tyre treads, jumping over the wall of material, or causing too sudden a loss of traction. How the driver does this will depend on his car, the tyres, and the composition of the surface he's on. This sounds like a lot of work, and it is. But with just a bit of practice it's pretty easy to learn how to do this safely and effectively. And yes, it will help you stop faster. Just like with gravel and snow.

ABS was invented to make limit braking easier for people who can't or don't know enough to do so. There are two things ABS was not designed to do:
-The first is to make an average or poor driver brake as well as a better trained driver. That isn't possible. Stopping quickly isn't as simple as slamming on your brakes and forcing the brakes to operate at the limit. There are so many factors you have to deal with it's not even funny. There's a reason the entire four wheeled driving world agrees that it's one of the hardest things you will ever learn to do properly in a car.
-ABS is not designed or tested for surfaces other than pavement. Pavement (even wet pavement) is a lot more forgiving of the inherent lack of smoothness of ABS sytems than almost any loose surface. This could (and does) lead to the case that the ABS will cause the tyre to momentarily lose traction, effectively lengthening the total stopping distance. It's no coincidence that B11sleeper, amongst many people with ABS equipped cars have had trouble stopping their cars on snow.

The only thing ABS can do that a human foot cannot is to apply the brakes at the same frequency in a given amount of time. However, that does not directly make the Anti-lock Braking System better than a trained human foot in any way. Not only that, but if you can hold the brake system at its absolute limit in a given situation, you will stop faster than the fastest ABS that can possibly be built. I am not implying that ABS is a useless technology. Good Anti-lock Braking Systems are a great driver aid on or off the track (that is IF you know how to use it properly). What I am saying is that ABS cannot and will not do what it is not designed to do.

BTW, if you're wondering where I'm getting all this information, I have a long list of books that you can (and probably should) read. I'd reccomend starting out with Drive to Win by C. Smith and The Physics of Tire Traction, Theory and Experiment by Warren (check me on the title for that second book. I borrowed it so I don't remember what it was exactly). They'll give you the basics and you can move up to the more modern and specialized sources of tyre information from there (namely the science behind creating tyres for specific surfaces, conditions, applications).


----------



## Gsolo (Sep 11, 2003)

ReVerm said:


> You are trying to use anecdotal evidence to disprove what can be proven both on paper and through controlled testing. The driver element can be considered a trial and error thing. The physics is not. Despite the fact that elementary mechanics can prove little about how tyres work, you go a few levels deeper and you will find that in fact, physics can explain how tyres grip on a great number of surfaces.
> 
> As goes mud, it really depends on the composition of the mud (I do realize that mud is just a term for sediment grain size, but I think the mud you are referring to is the nonuniform stuff you find after dirt gets soaked), but the theory still applies. Again, immediately diving in and slamming on your brakes won't help you, as you will be accumulating little in front of the tyre and will be skidding across the top of the mud. What the driver needs to do is to control when and how the lock occurs so he can form enough of a wall of material in front of the tyre without completely filling up the tyre treads, jumping over the wall of material, or causing too sudden a loss of traction. How the driver does this will depend on his car, the tyres, and the composition of the surface he's on. This sounds like a lot of work, and it is. But with just a bit of practice it's pretty easy to learn how to do this safely and effectively. And yes, it will help you stop faster. Just like with gravel and snow.
> 
> ...


ABS has always been known for lengthening stopping distances. And yes a good trained driver can stop better without ABS...but average joe can't stop worth a damn. and i understand what you're saying about building up material in front of the tires...but for all the snow driving i do its worthless to even try  yes on gravel it works, but the only car i've tried stopping really on gravel is my chevy which is to unbalanced and bad brakes to make a difference. But like I said I don't rally, i just put (sometimes a fast put) around town and try to dodge all the idiots out there (and occasional dogs)


----------



## B11sleeper (Oct 15, 2003)

my father and i argue about the merits of ABS and ABS related 'traction control' yeah, joe driver is better off with the help.

there was a big problem with police and highway patrol officers getting in wrecks because they were trained to drive without ABS and then they got ABS cars and they didn't stop as expected.

what happens with traction control when the computer can't keep the car in check anymore? does it suddenly slip out from under you with little warning?

man we jacked this thread days ago


----------



## minute rice sentra (Mar 21, 2003)

damn Gsolo, did you really need to quote that?  
yeah, ABS does suck a big one, I can't stand not having total control over a ton of steel at high speeds with me sit in the middle of all of it. I hate P/S too.


----------



## Gsolo (Sep 11, 2003)

minute rice sentra said:


> damn Gsolo, did you really need to quote that?
> yeah, ABS does suck a big one, I can't stand not having total control over a ton of steel at high speeds with me sit in the middle of all of it. I hate P/S too.



you know me. :cheers: 

i'll admit, i've had a few times i would have loved to have ABS in my 4 wheel drum brake 2 ton beast in the winter


----------



## ReVerm (Jan 13, 2003)

B11sleeper said:


> my father and i argue about the merits of ABS and ABS related 'traction control' yeah, joe driver is better off with the help.
> 
> there was a big problem with police and highway patrol officers getting in wrecks because they were trained to drive without ABS and then they got ABS cars and they didn't stop as expected.
> 
> ...


We really did. Sorry 9double8.

I'd agree with your average Joe/Jane Driver being better off with ABS on their cars, but I do think that far too many people have no idea how to operate them properly. I know it sounds weird, but a lot of people, having never locked their brakes on a car without ABS and being advised to "pump the brakes" in case of a sudden stop, seem to get confused and do all kinds of strange things (like pumping the brakes... which doesn't help them in their ABS equipped cars).

I'm not sure about what traction control systems would do if something suddenly went wrong while the car was teetering on the edge of traction. I'd imagine that if the system itself malfunctioned (like if a sensor shorted out), it would turn itself off. However, I can't tell what the system would do if it just got confused. Most TCs just apply braking to individual wheels, shut off one cylinder, or something of the similar, so I don't see a serious theoretical problem if the system just started working full force, but I have no idea if the systems are designed to do that in that situation (I don't have enough experience with modern traction control systems). Does anyone know for sure what happens?


----------



## 9double8 (Jul 9, 2002)

ReVerm said:


> We really did. Sorry 9double8.


No big deal...jack away. knowledge is power.


----------



## B11sleeper (Oct 15, 2003)

Gsolo said:


> i would have loved to have ABS in my 4 wheel drum brake 2 ton beast in the winter


the bel air has 4 wheel drums... scary! abs wouldn't really work well on drums, you should get an anchor or a parachute or something


----------



## Gsolo (Sep 11, 2003)

B11sleeper said:


> the bel air has 4 wheel drums... scary! abs wouldn't really work well on drums, you should get an anchor or a parachute or something


believe it or not they had the predecessor to abs available, but with front discs. and alot of cars have had abs on drums.....and yes i need an anchor or parachute. 

And newer cars have alot of fail safes for ABS. ABS uses inputs from speedometer, individual wheel sensors, and an inertia sensor. So lets say therotecially all 4 wheels maanged to lock up at the exact same millisecond (like on black ice) well you'd think abs won't work cause all for wheels aren't turning and speedo says 0...but the inertia sensor says 'hey wait we're still moving'. One of the problems with older ABS systems was that the star (what the wheel sensor reads) would get mud in it and it couldn't read right. newer ones are programmed to know what to read, and if somethign doesn't seem right then it just shuts the abs system off and turns on your light.


----------



## B11sleeper (Oct 15, 2003)

my question about traction control failure is not failure from the system malfunctioning, but from when it's ability to compensate for what's already happening is exceded, because it can't see the road ahead or know what crazy things the driver is going to do.


----------



## Gsolo (Sep 11, 2003)

B11sleeper said:


> my question about traction control failure is not failure from the system malfunctioning, but from when it's ability to compensate for what's already happening is exceded, because it can't see the road ahead or know what crazy things the driver is going to do.



...hehe...it's one of those days for me where its been so bad that nothign makes sense...give me an example of such situation.


----------



## B11sleeper (Oct 15, 2003)

Gsolo said:


> ...hehe...it's one of those days for me where its been so bad that nothign makes sense...give me an example of such situation.


road with bad traction conditions, and the driver feels confident because the traction control makes the car feel more stuck to the road then it really is and the driver doesn't slow down, and driver comes upon a sharp turn with a slippery bit at the apex. does he just end up sideways suddenly? would there be any warning? at 60mph you'd be sideways and at a dead stop in about 1 second.

it's a major what if.

i've put things sideways suddenly, the traction control should make you drive slower to keep you out of dangerous trouble.


----------



## Gsolo (Sep 11, 2003)

B11sleeper said:


> road with bad traction conditions, and the driver feels confident because the traction control makes the car feel more stuck to the road then it really is and the driver doesn't slow down, and driver comes upon a sharp turn with a slippery bit at the apex. does he just end up sideways suddenly? would there be any warning? at 60mph you'd be sideways and at a dead stop in about 1 second.
> 
> it's a major what if.
> 
> i've put things sideways suddenly, the traction control should make you drive slower to keep you out of dangerous trouble.



well...in that situation with ABS as soon as the person hit the brakes abs would keep them from locking up which helps keeps the car steerable and won't let it swing around so easily. Those TCS systems usually will take power away from a wheel that starts to slide...like what Bravada or Land Rover has. i think VW 4motion does the same thing but not sure.


----------

