What is "Fast"?

MikeHiow said:
Read my previous post.
Click to expand...

We've read your previous post and beleive you to be telling lies again.

Let us recap your side of the events.

You pull onto a 0.6 mile stretch of dual carriageway at 40mph alongside an E46 M3.
You both accelerate hard to 100mph, where you are even.
Then, the E46 M3 continues accelerating hard, and 'leaves you for dead'. So he's going to proper fast now.
Then you both slow down in time for the end of the dual carraigeway.

Within 0.6 miles.

In the middle of a town.
 
Conanius said:
Hang on a minute guys...

An s2000, you know, that N/A, torqueless wonder that you have to launch at over 6000 rpm to get a good 0-60 ? The same car I can be seen desperately trying to will on when going down straights at track days to keep up with fast stuff (M3's, 911's, Atoms, etc)...?

Quicker than a Focus ST 0-100.
Click to expand...

Its a good job Bedford is flat mate, otherwise you'd have no chance. ;)
 
It isn't in the middle of a town, and its all over long before 0.6 miles is up.

Hell, a Focus will probably do 100MPH on a standing quarter, yet you think I'm lieing about 100MPH from a 40MPH start in quarter of a mile, going down hill?

LOL.
 
On the topic of 'only 1 second difference' if we turn to our trusty basic equations of motion, v=u+at and v^2 = u^2 + 2as and assume the race took place from 40mph to 100mph (17.9 to 44.7m/s) with the M3 able to do it in 7s and the ST in 8s we get the following distances:

M3: 219m
ST: 250m

So, the M3 should really be a good 30m down the road if there is a second difference in 40-100mph times. Even if the numbers aren't strictly accurate (they assume linear acceleration after all) it still demonstrates that whilst a second may sound a small difference, it translates to a long way on the road.
 
MikeHiow said:
It isn't in the middle of a town,
Click to expand...

It's 1500ft from the high street.

and its all over long before 0.6 miles is up.
Click to expand...

Aah so now we've had this fantastic race in even less distance.

Hell, a Focus will probably do 100MPH on a standing quarter, yet you think I'm lieing about 100MPH from a 40MPH start in quarter of a mile, going down hill?

LOL.
Click to expand...

But the E46 M3 'left you for dead', though, once you reached 100mph. So its therefore safe to assume that you continued to accelerate past 100mph otherwise if you backed off then a Mondeo diesel would leave you for dead if it kept accelerating, so the whole thing would be irrelevent.

But now you tell us you began braking at 100mph?

So really then the only reason this M3 'left you for dead' was because you braked?

It never happened.
 
It sounds to me that the M3 was about 3-4 car lengths behind when they both floored it. He said it left him for dust when it past him so it probably felt like he was keeping with it until that point, which obviously isn't the case.
 
i-bert said:
It sounds to me that the M3 was about 3-4 car lengths behind when they both floored it. He said it left him for dust when it past him so it probably felt like he was keeping with it until that point.
Click to expand...

How would an M3 have left him for dust and still had the distance to slow down from what must have been a peak of what, 130mph+, within the 'much less than 0.6 mile' distance Mike claims?
 
Kenai said:
On the topic of 'only 1 second difference' if we turn to our trusty basic equations of motion, v=u+at and v^2 = u^2 + 2as and assume the race took place from 40mph to 100mph (17.9 to 44.7m/s) with the M3 able to do it in 7s and the ST in 8s we get the following distances:

M3: 219m
ST: 250m

So, the M3 should really be a good 30m down the road if there is a second difference in 40-100mph times. Even if the numbers aren't strictly accurate (they assume linear acceleration after all) it still demonstrates that whilst a second may sound a small difference, it translates to a long way on the road.
Click to expand...


Thank you for proving my point. :)
 
65d1d6af.jpg
 
[TW]Fox;17643346 said:
How would an M3 have left him for dust and still had the distance to slow down from what must have been a peak of what, 130mph+, within the 'much less than 0.6 mile' distance Mike claims?
Click to expand...

Must be a supercharged one then, in which case clearly the guy must have missed a gear which gave Mike the leap. :D
 
[TW]Fox;17643330 said:
It's 1500ft from the high street.



Aah so now we've had this fantastic race in even less distance.



But the E46 M3 'left you for dead', though, once you reached 100mph. So its therefore safe to assume that you continued to accelerate past 100mph otherwise if you backed off then a Mondeo diesel would leave you for dead if it kept accelerating, so the whole thing would be irrelevent.

But now you tell us you began braking at 100mph?

So really then the only reason this M3 'left you for dead' was because you braked?

It never happened.
Click to expand...

You're getting mixed up, my 1/4 mile and 100MPH example was just to demonstrate that 100MPH was possible long before the end of that stretch of road.

I also stated he passed me at 90-100MPH (I cannot be certain, observing the road etc.), so saying I lifted off and applied the brakes at 100MPH could be completely accurate.

Who said anything about the M3 hitting 130+?
 
I once raced a 1.9CDTI Vectra those one's with 150BHP in our Merc diesel which has 143BHP. It was neck and neck from standing start, until I had to lift off because of traffic ahead. I think I hit about 70 tops. Felt quite fast at 70, even though it took about 10seconds to reach 60.

Probably because of the torques.
 
MikeHiow said:
You're getting mixed up, my 1/4 mile and 100MPH example was just to demonstrate that 100MPH was possible long before the end of that stretch of road.

I also stated he passed me at 90-100MPH (I cannot be certain, observing the road etc.), so saying I lifted off and applied the brakes at 100MPH could be completely accurate.

Who said anything about the M3 hitting 130+?
Click to expand...

Well if you are going 100mph and something passes you at 130mph, thats going to feel like you getting left for dust. If he crawled past you at 101mph then you wouldn't have said it like that.

Assuming it happened at all, that is.
 
Seriously.. Fox, shutup man. Are you like this in real life, or does the keyboard make you investigate and criticize everything people say?

Mike, just drop it, no matter what you say, truth or not, you're not getting anywhere.
 
ScoobyDoo69 said:
Seriously.. Fox, shutup man. Are you like this in real life, or does the keyboard make you investigate and criticize everything people say?
Click to expand...

So everyone in the thread is pointing out how none of his story makes any sense, Gibbo has posted a parody thread about how hilarious his claims are yet... it's me you chose to tell to shut up?

Classic :D
 
[TW]Fox;17643467 said:
So everyone in the thread is pointing out how none of his story makes any sense, Gibbo has posted a parody thread about how hilarious his claims are yet... it's me you chose to tell to shut up?

Classic :D
Click to expand...

Because it's always your fault Fox! :p

In seriousness though....I don't know why you get the blame as it's mostly not you. :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom