Just zis Guy, you know? came up with the following;:
Quoted message said:
On Sat, 7 May 2005 15:43:04 +0100, "Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message <[email hidden]>:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
And don't get me started regarding the Honest John reply which says motorists now have an excuse for driving heavy, big 4x4 vehicles, as the road surfaces are so bad and speed pillows do damage to suspension (*)
Quoted message said:
I've never seen or heard anyone use that argument seriously. We use a 4x4 for various reasons, but that 'excuse' isn't amongst them.
I have. The fact that 4x4s cause more damage to the roads than standard passenger cars adds a mild ironic twist...
I wouldn't have thought they did. Yes, they're heavier than cars, but they also have taller and wider tyres, thus increasing their footprint which, I would have thought but haven't researched the maths of it, would even the possible damage out.
-- Paul ... (8(|) Homer Rules ..... Doh !!! For Sale on Ebay 5771988658
On Sat, 7 May 2005 16:25:55 +0100, "Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message <[email hidden]>:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
I have. The fact that 4x4s cause more damage to the roads than standard passenger cars adds a mild ironic twist...
Quoted message said:
I wouldn't have thought they did. Yes, they're heavier than cars, but they also have taller and wider tyres, thus increasing their footprint which, I would have thought but haven't researched the maths of it, would even the possible damage out.
4WD produces more scrub, and they are more likely to be driven up kerbs. Or so I am told.
Just zis Guy, you know? came up with the following;:
Quoted message said:
On Sat, 7 May 2005 15:43:04 +0100, "Paul - [censored]"
>> And don't get me started regarding the Honest John reply >> which says motorists now have an excuse for driving heavy, >> big 4x4 vehicles, as the road surfaces are so bad and speed pillows >> do damage to suspension (*)
> I've never seen or heard anyone use that argument seriously. We use > a 4x4 for various reasons, but that 'excuse' isn't amongst them.
I have. The fact that 4x4s cause more damage to the roads than standard passenger cars adds a mild ironic twist...
I wouldn't have thought they did. Yes, they're heavier than cars, but they also have taller and wider tyres, thus increasing their footprint which, I would have thought but haven't researched the maths of it, would even the possible damage out.
No, it doesn't, according to TRRL. At equal speeds damage to the road increases with the fourth power of the weight of the vehicle. Number of axles and size of contact patch makes no real difference, apparently.
I've normally seen it quoted as power of axle weight. Not that it makes any difference comparing a 4x4 with a car, but it does for trucks.
And there are different sorts of damage, the contact patch clearly makes difference to how muddy and chewed up a green ride gets than to concrete foundations.
On 09 May 2005 15:53:41 +0100 (BST) someone who may be [email hidden] (Alan Braggins) wrote this:-
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
No, it doesn't, according to TRRL. At equal speeds damage to the road increases with the fourth power of the weight of the vehicle. Number of axles and size of contact patch makes no real difference, apparently.
I've normally seen it quoted as power of axle weight. Not that it makes any difference comparing a 4x4 with a car, but it does for trucks.
And there are different sorts of damage,
That is precisely the point. At one end of a spectrum pressure on the surface of the road affects how quickly it is worn away and some other types of damage. At another end of a spectrum, if a structure is longer than the distance between the axles then what matters is the total weight.
-- David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.
