top speed

Yeah, I just inserted it here for all to see. I didn't intend for it to be directed at you.

Yes, you are correct. It was vastly simplified to show the concept.

That would depend on the cross-sectional area. 1N is fairly small, I mostly used that number because it makes the math simple. Calculating the real drag on an object takes a bit more work and would just cloud over the rest of what I was trying to show.

Quite a bit, in terms of what I can feel. I traded up from a normal WRX and the difference at speed is palpable. The stiffer suspension helps the feel at high speed too.

My problem is crosswind that blows across the road side to side. Not much that can be done about that, no matter what car you drive.

Have you ever tried to close the trunk of an STi? I'm not surprised it was still unlatched. :)

But you said they'd fall at the same rate, and since we're talking about terminal velocity here, I hardly think a 100 ft drop would be representative.

I knew what you meant. Playing silly pedantic games is not something I'd visit on you. :)

No, we started from an STi filled with air, and one filled with water or lead, and I missed the word "dropped".

Especially if we were considering a tumbling STi. *shudder*

Yeah, and I doubt Galileo was working anywhere near TV with the stuff he had. I realize now he was mostly trying to DISprove Aristotle and wasn't really equipped to do much more (using a water clock).

So, I guess the ratio of drag (from form,texture,etc. together) to mass is what determines the TV as well as how quickly it is achieved?(all else equal) Thanx for clearing up my misconception.

Carl

k. ote wrote:

That would be well beyond my calc/physics skills. ;-)

What would've been really impressive in that case would be if the trunk got latched after the drive, due to the downforce of the wing.

Yousuf Khan

Right! The couple of guys that posted that result were looking to see if it would latch, from the downforce...it didn't .