The End Of A Beautiful BMW

CJREX · 05-05-2008, 05:30 PM

Just Wow.

VERY bad day.

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum...d.php?t=992964

**kunar** · 05-05-2008, 05:44 PM

that was a good lookin car too.

motohead771 · 05-05-2008, 06:01 PM

looked like a low rider wheel that hit it.

**MAKG** · 05-05-2008, 06:31 PM

Quite a lot of older vehicles have screw-on type wheels. Like 1965 Mustangs.

I'm trying to figure out how that guy walked away from that, given the shape of the passenger compartment. But apparently, he did.

That counts as a "holy $%@# Batman!"

Dishtowel · 05-05-2008, 06:57 PM

I love how everybody on that forum was so surprised that the tire did that much damage.
65mph+65mph = a ~60-70lb~ wheel traveling 130 mph. And the tire will actually speed up when it leaves the vehicle because it 'grows'. It becomes a bigger circle because it is no longer being squished by the car. Bigger circle + constant RPM = faster ground speed. I would know, I had my rear tire come off and pass me.
How did you think a windshield was going to VS a 60lb body traveling 130mph? Lots of kinetic energy there.

He is a luckylucky dude that is wasn't a bit to the right...
No open casket there.

Edit:
speaking of kinetic energy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZkTy_Zb-Kw

**ZMan** · 05-05-2008, 07:36 PM

Ya I saw that yesterday, pretty wild and scary. He's definitely lucky.

Shoeboy · 05-05-2008, 07:38 PM

People walk away from strange things all the time, look at the pictures of my former Ranger. There is no way I should have walked away from that accident of mine, and there is no way he should have walked away from that as well. Man, he must have borrowed my golden horseshoe, theres no way he should have walked away from that.

srteach · 05-05-2008, 08:06 PM

Assuming 65mph, a 22 inch tire diameter, and a weight of 50 lbs, the kinetic energy is equal to about 2 tons per square inch on a square face impact. BOOM! I did not include calculations concerning gravity acceleration as it dropped from the sky (9.6 feet per second per second squared), or rotationally induced impact traction (after contact push from spinning). That impact estimate only accounts for the tire hitting a non moving object, not the speed of the vehicle moving in the opposite direction (square of the speed, squared - for opposite directional movement). I may be calculating wrong, but I think it is close. If anyone can do better, please do.

Tires will speed up once they are released from compression, as stated earlier. Gyroscopic force will keep the tire headed in one direction, even up an angled incline (or over or through a crash barrier), and cars can drive with three wheels due to gyro effects (engine, wheels and steady straight line movement) for a mile or more. I've seen inflated tires 60 ft up in trees, wheels attached, and seen em bounce 1/8 mile.

projectnitemare · 05-05-2008, 08:36 PM

I saw a lady on I-95 in Virginia, drag her spare under her Econoline van until the cable broke and that tire had a similar effect on a Chevy Lumina. I didn't care to stop just incase.

Matt

**metalmacguyver** · 05-05-2008, 08:50 PM

Daumn.

Yeah, that cable for suspending the spare tire was definately one of the more retarded ideas out there.

**Mark_88** · 05-05-2008, 09:04 PM

Wow! He said in his first post he was trying to change lanes...good thing he didn't probably...

srteach · 05-05-2008, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark_88

Wow! He said in his first post he was trying to change lanes...good thing he didn't probably...

If he was changing to the Left, he was too slow. Changing to the right, just slow enough to live.

05-05-2008, 05:30 PM	#1
CJREX Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: N. GA. Year: 1989 Make: Ford Model: Ranger Engine: 4.0 Class: 4x4 + Used For: Truck stuff Posts: 737 Rep Power: 13 iTrader: (1)	The End Of A Beautiful BMW Just Wow. VERY bad day. http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum...d.php?t=992964 __________________ '89 Ranger 4x4:Gone :-( '90 FSB: 351W, 4" lift, 35x12.50 AT '00 Super Duty: V10 5 speed
	Tweet

05-05-2008, 05:44 PM	#2
kunar Odd One Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Toledo, Ohio Year: 1987 Make: Ford Model: Ranger Engine: 4.0 Class: 4x4 Posts: 3,485 Rep Power: 10 iTrader: (17)	that was a good lookin car too. __________________ 1987 Ranger Supercab STX, 4.0/M5OD/BW1350 4.10LS, 2" Lift, Cut Fenders, 33's 1987 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe (Mostly stock, for now...) 1991 Escort GT (Daily Driver) Past: 87 Supercab, 87 Longbed, 89 Shortbed, 96 Explorer Sport
	Tweet

05-05-2008, 06:31 PM	#4
MAKG RBV Technical Advisor Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: California central coast Year: 1991 Make: Ford Model: Explorer Engine: 4.0L Class: 4x4 Posts: 4,643 Rep Power: 21 iTrader: (0)	Quite a lot of older vehicles have screw-on type wheels. Like 1965 Mustangs. I'm trying to figure out how that guy walked away from that, given the shape of the passenger compartment. But apparently, he did. That counts as a "holy $%@# Batman!" __________________ 1990 VW Jetta GL, 1.8L 8V gasoline engine, manual transmission, painted in oxidized red paint and ponderosa pine sap, unknown mileage. 1991 Exploder, 4.0L, M5OD-R1 manual transmission, electronic BW1354 transfer case, 3.54 gears, 31 inch tires, icky two-tone blue paint with little clear coat, 230K miles. 1972 Chevy C-10, 250 I-6, SM465 (2WD) four-on-the-floor, 3.73 gears in a GM 12-bolt, puke green with a white cab. The "4 wheeled trash can," with x70K miles. x is probably 2.
	Tweet

05-05-2008, 07:36 PM	#6
ZMan TOTM Coordinator Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Medina, Ohio Year: 1992,1994,1995 Make: Ford,Ford,Jeep Model: Ranger,Ranger,ZJ Engine: 4.0l,3.0l (soon to be 302),5.2l Class: 2wd Street Used For: learning experiAnce, daily Posts: 3,019 Rep Power: 10 iTrader: (1)	Ya I saw that yesterday, pretty wild and scary. He's definitely lucky. __________________ My build thread Cardomain '92 Ranger X-cab 4.0l '94 Ranger long bed 3.0l, bagged and chopped '95 Jeep Grand Cherokee 5.2l, wheeler someday '13 F-150 Ecoboost 4x4 daily driver www.lhinteriorsllc.com
	Tweet

05-05-2008, 08:06 PM	#8
srteach Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Year: 1999, 2001 Make: Ranger, F350 Model: XLT supercab, SuperDuty Engine: 4.0L, 7.3 Diesel Class: 4x4 both Used For: DD / light OR, DD Posts: 979 Rep Power: 14 iTrader: (0)	Assuming 65mph, a 22 inch tire diameter, and a weight of 50 lbs, the kinetic energy is equal to about 2 tons per square inch on a square face impact. BOOM! I did not include calculations concerning gravity acceleration as it dropped from the sky (9.6 feet per second per second squared), or rotationally induced impact traction (after contact push from spinning). That impact estimate only accounts for the tire hitting a non moving object, not the speed of the vehicle moving in the opposite direction (square of the speed, squared - for opposite directional movement). I may be calculating wrong, but I think it is close. If anyone can do better, please do. Tires will speed up once they are released from compression, as stated earlier. Gyroscopic force will keep the tire headed in one direction, even up an angled incline (or over or through a crash barrier), and cars can drive with three wheels due to gyro effects (engine, wheels and steady straight line movement) for a mile or more. I've seen inflated tires 60 ft up in trees, wheels attached, and seen em bounce 1/8 mile.
	Tweet

05-05-2008, 08:36 PM	#9
projectnitemare Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Osceola Mills, Pa Year: 1988 Make: Ford Model: Ranger XLT Engine: 396W Class: 4x4 Extreme Posts: 1,112 Rep Power: 15 iTrader: (2)	I saw a lady on I-95 in Virginia, drag her spare under her Econoline van until the cable broke and that tire had a similar effect on a Chevy Lumina. I didn't care to stop just incase. Matt __________________ 88 Ranger XLT 4x4, no drivetrain, no frame, nothing....new stroker, frame and drivetrain in the works
	Tweet

05-05-2008, 08:50 PM	#10
metalmacguyver Yeah, I built that. Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Plymouth MA home, Buzzards Bay MA Year: 1997, 1994 Make: Ford Model: Ranger, F350 Engine: 4.0, 7.3 Class: 4x4 Extreme Used For: Working and Wheeling Posts: 3,822 Rep Power: 10 iTrader: (28)	Daumn. Yeah, that cable for suspending the spare tire was definately one of the more retarded ideas out there. __________________ Horsepower is how fast you hit a wall. Torque is how far you move a wall. http://www.therangerstation.com/foru...ad.php?t=21890 1994 F350 7.3L PSD, 5spd, DD/tow rig, 2wd for now... 1997 Excab/4.0/5spd/Manual1354/4.88/locked F/R /35"BFG MTs/WarnXD9000i/6"lift/HYDROBOOST!!/Extended radius arms/Wheeling only.
	Tweet

05-05-2008, 09:04 PM	#11
Mark_88 Einstein I'm NOT Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Uxbridge, Ontario Year: 1988 Make: Ford Model: Multi-year Ranger Engine: 2.3 Carbureted Class: 2wd Used For: Space travel Posts: 13,528 Rep Power: 78 iTrader: (0)	Wow! He said in his first post he was trying to change lanes...good thing he didn't probably... __________________ Rome and my Ranger were not built in a day...
	Tweet

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode