View Poll Results: Is the advertisement true or false?

Voters
27. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, in that scenario a Lexus IS350 can do that

    17 62.96%
  • No, Impossible

    10 37.04%
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 50

Thread: Cool Lexus Gravity Ad

  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    6,544
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockefella
    I'm fast, very fast.
    Not as fast as a lexus falling from 4000 ft.

    One needs also to figure the terminal velocity of the car, but I still doubt it could make it.
    TOYNBEE IDEA IN KUBRICK 2001 RESURRECT DEAD ON PLANET JUPITER

  2. #32
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Northern New Jersey
    Posts
    16,602
    Quote Originally Posted by Esperante
    Not as fast as a lexus falling from 4000 ft.

    One needs also to figure the terminal velocity of the car, but I still doubt it could make it.
    I forgot how to calculate that, my physics memory is pretty bad right now.
    Rockefella says:
    pat's sister is hawt
    David Fiset says:
    so is mine
    David Fiset says:
    do want

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Kyushu
    Posts
    6,039
    anybody realise that we already had a thread on this very commercial?
    Honor. Courage. Commitment. Etcetera.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Northern New Jersey
    Posts
    16,602
    Quote Originally Posted by cmcpokey
    anybody realise that we already had a thread on this very commercial?
    Yeah, I know.

    REPOST!
    Rockefella says:
    pat's sister is hawt
    David Fiset says:
    so is mine
    David Fiset says:
    do want

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,552
    Sure, but that one just posed the scenario, this one has a link for the Ad...

    I know, the search feature is our friend
    "Racing improves the breed" ~Sochiro Honda

  6. #36
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Northern New Jersey
    Posts
    16,602
    Quote Originally Posted by PerfAdv
    Sure, but that one just posed the scenario, this one has a link for the Ad...

    I know, the search feature is our friend
    Thread merging in progress.
    Rockefella says:
    pat's sister is hawt
    David Fiset says:
    so is mine
    David Fiset says:
    do want

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,734
    x = ut + 1/2*a*t^2

    gives a drop time ~16 s for 4000ft

    even including wind resistance, no way could a car on the ground match that
    How can men use sex to get what they want?
    Sex is what they want. - Frasier

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Wichita, Kansas USA
    Posts
    11,258
    Quote Originally Posted by VtecMini
    Interesting to note that they block the view of the car landing with the car on the ground.

    On a vaguely related note, falling cars, terminal velocities and gravity completely aside, is it me or does the ground-based IS actually look really fast? I appreciate it's got 300 or so ponies, but the launch in particular looked damn quick.

    God damn bulls**t advertising...
    Actually it's much quicker than I thought. There was a recent test in R&T or Motor Trend - don't remember which. They got a 0-60 time of 4.9 seconds. I was shocked.
    I'm going to eat breakfast. And then I'm going to change the world.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Fort Rucker, AL
    Posts
    3,092
    I just figured it out, it's physically impossible not because of aerodynamics, but because of the friction forces:

    F=ma

    Friction is what propels the car:
    Force of friction: (Coefficient of static friction)*mass*9.8

    Theoretically the only way the coefficient of static friction can be > or = 1 is if the two objects are fused together. Even if the car can manage to create the torque required to accelerate quicker than 9.8m/s/s, the tires can't get the grip to do so.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,457
    Quote Originally Posted by Sweeney921
    I just figured it out, it's physically impossible not because of aerodynamics, but because of the friction forces:

    F=ma

    Friction is what propels the car:
    Force of friction: (Coefficient of static friction)*mass*9.8

    Theoretically the only way the coefficient of static friction can be > or = 1 is if the two objects are fused together. Even if the car can manage to create the torque required to accelerate quicker than 9.8m/s/s, the tires can't get the grip to do so.
    wrong, tires can have coefficient of friction >1. Because tire works on both bonding on molecular level as well as mechanical friction.....

    the thread is irrelavent as the ground vehicle gets a jump anyway, the timing between the start and the drop can be timed...
    University of Toronto Formula SAE Alumni 2003-2007
    Formula Student Championship 2003, 2005, 2006
    www.fsae.utoronto.ca

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1
    Anyone know how to find the time it took for the falling car to reach the ground?

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,734
    Quote Originally Posted by sydney427
    Anyone know how to find the time it took for the falling car to reach the ground?
    http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum...2&postcount=37

    How can men use sex to get what they want?
    Sex is what they want. - Frasier

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    754
    it coudnt be a standing start, and isnt that the lexus with the electric motor thing, it might be possible but i seriously doubt it was a standing start
    Once fanboyism infects you it impares all your judgement.
    It's like being drunk, you lack common sense and everyone laughs at you.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3

    Lexus IS Commercial

    Actually, since the car gets a head start we can infer that the car at most is traveling its maximum speed(2006 Lexus IS350 is 142mph). Therefore the car is at most traveling 208 ft/sec. It would take the car on the ground 19.231 seconds to travel the 4000 feet(1219.2 meters).

    When we look at the fallign car, we can disregard air friction and say that the falling car accelerates at 9.81 m/s^2 or 32.19 ft/s^2. From the equation: x=1/2at^2 we can conclude that the car will take 15.765 seconds to travel the 1219.2 meters(4000 feet). However, air friction will give the car a terminal velocity. Without the terminal velocity, we can figure that the car was traveling 507.475 ft/sec or 346.006 mph. It is obvious that the falling car will be fatser. But lets not overlook terminal velocity.


    Terminal velocity can be calculated using the equation:
    V = sqrt ( (2 * W) / (Cd * r * A)

    v=terminal velocity
    W=weight in Newtons
    Cd=Drag Coefficeint
    r=atmospheric density
    a=area exposed to air(area facing down)

    Furthermore, we find terminal velocity by detwermining our variables. The weight of the 2006 Lexus IS350 is 3,435 lbs. The atmospheric density is a main determining factor, and since the density is decreased by higher temperatures, for the fact of covering margins, lets say the experiment was done at 80 degrees F. This would make the atmospheric density 1.184. Again, for the sake of covering margins, lets say the car fell with its botom facing downward, its surface area of exposure would be equal to the factory dimensions of 180 inches by 70.9 inches, or 88.625 square feet. Lastly, the drag coefficient must be calculated. First, take into account that the drag coefficient of a falling cube is 0.8. this is roughly the shape of the falling car. Also, consider the drag resistence of the front of a lexus IS350(the drag coefficient if the car was falling head first) is very close to 0.3. Once again, for the sake of covering margins, lets use a coefficient of 0.6. After calculating, you will come up with a table looking like this:
    altitude terminal velocity
    3000 ft 243.795 ft/s
    2000 ft 240.198 ft/s
    1000 ft 236.679 ft/s
    0 ft 233.235 ft/s

    Since we will not reach terminal velocity until an altitude of 3000 feet(fallign for 1000 feet), we can disregard the 4000 ft mark. We can then take the average terminal velocity from 3000 ft to 0 ft, about 238.515 ft/s. To cover margins, lets use 240 ft/s.

    Therefore, we can use the equation velocity=acceleration*time. We find that we reach terminal velocity(240 ft/s) using the acceleration of gravity of 32.19 ft/s^2 after 7.456 seconds. We then use the equation distance=1/2*acceleration*time^2 and find that the car had traveled 894.688 feet when it reached terminal velocity.

    Using this information, since the car had traveled 894.688 feet in 7.456 seconds, and since the car is now traveling 240 ft/sec for the remainder of its trip, we conclude that the car will take an additional 12.939 seconds to travel the remaining 3105.312 feet.(dist/veloc=time, (4000-894.688)/240=12.939)
    Through addition we find that the car will take about 20.395 seconds to hit the ground.

    Therefore, we see that(with our margins covered for variations) when we take air resistence into account and factor in a terminal velocity, a Lexus IS350 on the ground takes 19.231 seconds to travel 4000 feet. And as the commercial demonstrates, a Lexus IS350 takes about 20.395 seconds to reach the ground and travel its distance. Illustrating how the Lexus on the ground can, in fact, travel 4000 feet quicker than gravity can accelerate the same car 4000 feet to the ground.

    These statistics(weight, surface area, Cd) are based on the 2006 Lexus IS350 manual transmission. Also, I over estimated many of my values, such as the temperature and the Cd of the Lexus. If they were to conduct the experiment at lets say 30 degrees F, the time the car would take to reach the ground would increase by about 1 second. Also, lets say the Cd of the car was infact close to one of a cube, the terminal velocity of the car would be an average of about 205 ft/sec. This would actually increase the time of the falling car by about 2.301 seconds from 20.395 seconds to 22.696 seconds.

    As you can see, the demonstration done in the commercial is completely plausible as long as the Lexus on the ground starts from near its maximum speed.


    However, if the Lexus did not start from near 140 mph, it would never be able to compete with gravity. Just to compare this car with the Ferrari 333 Sp. This car can accelerate from 0-60 in 3.8 seconds. The Lexus IS350, 5.6 seconds. Just for a fact, the Ferrari 333 SP is a modified race car, not stock. Based on this, and the fact that the Faerrari 333 SP can accelerate at an average of about 20 ft/sec over a quarter mile and gravity, 32.19 ft/sec demonstrates that the Ferrari 333 cannot conquer the feat of starting from a stop, let alone the Lexus IS350.

    The Lexus IS Started near its maximum speed, and was therefore able to beat gravity, as the commercial demonstrated.

    Any questions or comments, feel free to email me at lexus@alexnwolf.com

    Thank You,
    Alex Wolf

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Kyushu
    Posts
    6,039
    well cheers. pretty much settles that, ehh?

    so what is your affiliation with lexus? seems this had already been thought out before coming here.

    oh yeah, welcome to UCP.
    Honor. Courage. Commitment. Etcetera.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Really useful performance listings...
    By Egg Nog in forum Technical forums
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 06-20-2013, 10:45 PM
  2. Lexus IS-F (XE20) 2007-2012
    By Matt in forum Matt's Hi-Res Hide-Out
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 10-29-2011, 12:35 AM
  3. 2002 Lexus Minority Report
    By DarkPhenix in forum Multimedia
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-20-2004, 01:12 PM
  4. 2005 Lexus LF-C Concept
    By DarkPhenix in forum Multimedia
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-20-2004, 12:51 PM
  5. Lexus LF-C Concept 2004
    By Matt in forum Matt's Hi-Res Hide-Out
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 04-13-2004, 08:38 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •