Explore our other sites
  • kotaku
  • theroot
    jbtut1
    JBT
    jbtut1

    Have you ever actually rented one? 

    This applies to all surfaces. The relative benefit is a function of the difference between static and kinetic friction of the surface and the variability of friction between the different tires. So it’s less advantage on dry pavement and the highest advantage on mixed snow or ice at warmer temps. Very much true on ice

    From Edmunds: Myth: Nearly all cars should be serviced under the “severe” maintenance schedule. This oft-cited rule is a myth the quick oil-change industry (including Jiffy Lube) uses to bolster more-frequent-than-necessary oil changes, experts tell Edmunds.com. When manufacturers say “severe,” they mean situations in

    I’d add to your comment that covid has very clearly shown that many of the people who do live in the cities don’t want to live in the cities as they’ve overwhelmed rural America. They want the higher quality of life that exists outside the city. It’s just that they couldn’t have it before. Remote work? Hard to do

    The issue is that aaa isn’t a reliable source. The manufacturers tell you not to listen to the service industry marketing, because it’s wrong and it’s used to get you to spend more on unnecessary service.

    I don’t think regular commuting really counts as severe duty compared to what they’re thinking. Heavy trucks use mpg as the best identifier of use. You can read up on the testing Cummins used to reach that conclusion by searching for it. So if you’re getting in the EPA estimate mpg - your not severe duty. If you’re

    The tires when linked mechanically will maintain a uniform rotational velocity. Tires with less traction under braking won’t slip first if they’re all linked together like they will with a 2wd car. What you didn’t recognize until now is that uniform brake force on independent tires is not the same as uniform

    My f250 might be the best breaking car in the world! 

    Correct the laws of physics can’t be broken. But the laws of physics dictate that the 4x4 will stop faster. It’s just that you didn’t understand the physics. But there’s really no question about this one. The physics absolutely support the 4x4 stopping faster

    I think that the scientists proved that it couldn’t happen in the software. Because of the parallel system sensor design. You know those idiots at NASA. They’re basically just backyard hacks.

    Highly underrated comment!! 

    As per the service manual for my diesel HD truck, every minute of idle equals roughly 0.5 miles of driving. For service trucks that idle a lot, the oil change interval becomes based on the hour meter not on the distance driven. Often that breaks down to changing the oil every 6 weeks or so. 

    The small weight difference really doesn’t matter. It’s maybe 2-300 lbs. And in general the four-wheel drive options will have larger tires that end up with similar ground pressure.

    The tires when linked mechanically will rotate together at the same speed. You don’t need to have locking differentials only mechanically driven four-wheel drive system. The reason that you don’t need the differentials to lock is because in the braking scenario the power flow is reversed so the tire with the least

    It’s not really about the snow piling up. It’s a about maintaining uniform rotational velocity of all four tires through the mechanical linkage allowing all four to reach the threshold of motion together despite having variable and dynamic static friction coefficients at each tire. Abs can’t do it as well as

    It’s a result of the combined threshold of motion and how the four tires approach the threshold where the peak braking friction exists. Mechanically linked tires will all approach the threshold of motion uniformly, and as a result you can achieve the peak available friction from all four tires at once. With unlinked

    If you define lifetime has infinite - then there’s no lifetime parts for any vehicle. The seats are not lifetime, the engine is not lifetime, the chassis is not a lifetime. I think we have to define lifetime as the vehicle’s life - the typical lifespan before it’s retired. I think in Toyota terms that tends to be

    So... If they study this, and the engineers who study it say that it lasts forever - why not believe them?

    Without some type of long term comparison I’m not sure how we’d ever know if there are more or less failures with more or less frequent changes. The failure rate is so small that I don’t think we can point to anything specific as a cause. Especially when it seems like a lot of people who do change use the wrong fluid.

    I feel like this guy is probably okay in the snow. 🤷