Talk:Automobile handling

message: Great new article! If you don't mind one suggestion, however, I think the article should use the more common spelling, tire. Without debating American vs. British spelling, our goal is to create a seamless encyclopedia, and any encyclopedia should remain consistent. Since Wikipedia's article on tires is located at tire (while Tyre simply includes a brief mention that it is an alternate spelling), that standard should probably be reflected throughout the encyclopedia. Otherwise this is a terrific start on a great new article!! Cribcage 14:42, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll yield, there are more cars in America -- Solipsist 14:55, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: We've gone back to tyre now. The Manual of Style recommends maintaining consistent spelling within an article. -- Solipsist 11:13, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed all references of "tyre" to "tire," excepting the picture, which obviously, I cannot change.  I understand the need for consistency regarding word choice within an article.  However, to much of the English-speaking world, Tyre means something totally different (see Tyre).  As such, this seems to be a perfectly reasonable instance to make an exception.Sixtus LXVI 01:21, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: But it would not be reasonable to waste our time reverting between equally good styles of spelling. The suggestions in WP:MOS National varieaties of English are helpful. Meggar 02:03, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If reverting between two equally good styles of spelling is a waste of time, then why bother reverting it back again so it uses tyre?  I continue to stand by the argument I made previously, even though the Maunal of Style recommends otherwise.  To restate (and slightly modify) Cribcage's post at the begining of this thread, Wikipedia's article on tires is located at tire while the page Tyre contains no mention (as of my most recent checking) of tyre being as another spelling.  I believe this is enough to warrant the use of tire.  Regardless, I shall acquiesce to what appears to be the majority opinion.  Sixtus LXVI 05:37, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

text: To help ease this important spelling issue between tire and tyre, both articles now go to the same article tire. Links above have been updated. The commonly used article about the Lebanese city is now available at Tyre. Widefox 17:16, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Hi Discordant, I see that you are a new editor. After a short while here we come to accept that there is no preference among the major national varieties of English; none is more “correct” than any other. There is a well written guideline on that here. Meggar 06:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tire/Tyre

message: I'm not quite sure when it changed, but the article currently opens "A ground vehicle's handling..."  Whilst I appreciate the desire to expand the scope beyond cars, the phrase is a little awkward. There are also problems in that the opening para should use the article's title in bold, and later any redirect to the page should also be in bold. And second, the discussion only really applies to wheeled vehicles, wouldn't 'ground vehicle' also include tanks and other tracked vehicles?
The previous phrasing of "A car's handling..." wasn't brilliant either, because the bolded portion doesn't exactly match the title, and as observed, much of the discussion applies to lorries and vehicles other than cars.
I'm stuggling to come up with a better alternative, but how about;
:Car handling and vehicle handling is a description of the way wheeled vehicles perform transverse to their direction of motion, particularly during cornering and swerving.
and then put in a redirect from vehicle handling. This has the downside that 'vehicle handling' is a bit too general, but if in future someone else wants to describe the handling of other types of vehicle then they can change the redirect and make the opening phrase here more specific. Oh, but then I'm forgetting motorbikes. -- Solipsist 20:33, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Opening phrase

message: Sorry about the spelling.  I tend to run everything through my (American) spelling checker without thinking.  --David R. Ingham
:No worries. More important than spelling is adding good content, and that's coming along nicely. -- Solipsist 20:26, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  spelling 

message: I think that is a little extreme.  I saw Porsches in a slalom doing just fine with their wheel a foot off the ground.  I had a friend whose TR3 lifted its wheel sooner than mine did, and he just got used to it and didn't mind it any more.
The TR3 changes handling in the height of the rubber stop, while the Porsche wheel picks up when its load gets to zero and after that the weight transfer continues to increase in the rear but the front just continues to be held up by the outside tyre.  So it is just the rate of change of oversteer that takes a jump in the 911 while it is the oversteer that jumps in the TR3.
http://www.kent.k12.wa.us/staff/TomRobinson/physicspages/po2001/Handling/balance.html  gives a 911 as the example of good handling, but I don't see an email to discuss it there.
I am not clear on whether bigger rear tyres and a smaller front anti-roll completely bar fix the problem.  Maybe there are models where it is fixed.  I didn't include the bathtub because there were few cars in those days that handled as well as it did.  Germans were used to oversteering cars back then.
The main point is that all road vehicles should be optimised for going beyond the driver's previous experience, not for lulling him/her into a sense of false security.
--David R. Ingham 18:13, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gzuckier (→Cars with unusual handling problems):  Porsche 911 

message: Remeber that the angular inertia impedes the car's straightening out as well as its starting to turn, so it is not always causing understeer.
I still don't believe there is really much down force at anything like US legal speeds.  In Germany, maybe.
Cars without any rear devices tend to be aerodynamically unstable, and of course this contributes to high speed oversteer.
The Peugeot 403 was said to be aerodynamically unstable, and then people criticised the 404 for having fins when they were out of style!
David R. Ingham 20:12, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aerodynamics and angular inertia 

message: That above remends me that I noticed in Road safety and Speed limit that the US with speed limits has around once and a half the motorway (freeway) deaths that Germany does with no limit.
Sertainly speed limits and passive safety help, but apparently not as much as paying attention, expert instruction and active safety do.  A German told me he had never seen anyone eat while driving.
David R. Ingham 16:40, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  safety 

message: Thanks to whoever corrected my erroneously changing "A arm" to "An arm". Of thousands of similar edits, this is the second of two errors, I hope those of a charitable disposition will see that my mistake as quite understandable. It seems to me that hyphenation to "A-arm" as in "An A-arm or wishbone..." would be appropriate here. A quick google suggest that this is common . That will certainly prevent a repitition. I won't make the change myself, instead I will leave this to the judgement of a better informed editor. Gaius Cornelius 13:30, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A-Arm 

message: What is with all the references in this article to this specific car? I'm removing them, you can revert if you want. -- 67.32.202.43 17:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A good call I suspect. This isn't an article to promote any particular car. -- Solipsist 21:49, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  You are correct I think.  I wanted to show that even a conventional luxury car maker agrees with enthusiasts that smaller cars are more fun.  I re-inserted the material in a more general form.  David R. Ingham 03:24, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  BMW M6 

message: "Greater width, then, though it counteracts centre of gravity height, hurts handling by increasing angular inertia. Some high performance cars have light materials in their fenders and roofs partly for this reason." 
This strikes me as misleading at best. You ALWAYS increase the track to the maximum allowed, so far as I am aware, for handling. Does anyone have any counterexample? Also to be honest I can't remember anyone giving a monkey's about roll inertia.
Greglocock 08:06, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Width 

message: It's unfortunate that the article/entry is unsuitably entitled "car handling" because the definition is independent of the type of road/trail vehicle. In the definition of "handling" we could be talking about a Formula-1 race car; pickup-truck-based SUV vs. car-based minivan, (see Talk:Sport_utility_vehicle ); airport fire-engine; Baja racer; military amphibious vehicle; "double-bottom" tractor-trailer truck; and so on. (We could even be talking about aircraft while they are being operated on the ground; some have had notorious problems because aircraft engineers have been less familiar with this subject.) 
I don't know what's involved in changing an entry name, but "Wheeled, non-tracked vehicle handling" would seem more appropriate, except of course something less bulky is needed while not limiting it to "car". Thanks. -- truthdowser (talk) 14:57, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is already too long, largely because it is full of fanboi witterings. I'd suggest that you figure out a sensible title for an article, then start a NEW page with that title, and then steal the more general content from this one, include a subsection on car handling in your new page with a main article link back here. How about Handling of ground vehicles? The problem is that handling has at least two main meanings. In the real world we call it vehicle dynamics, but that is fortunately already taken. Dynamics of ground vehicles? Greglocock (talk) 22:57, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  The proper encyclopedic term should be as broad as possible, with the article then dividing off into sub-articles for the specifics within. Therefore this article should be titled vehicle handling ... which is currently just a redirect back to here. DMahalko (talk) 22:05, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title: "CAR handling" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Automobile handling. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111101011227/http://www.consumersunion.org/pub/core_product_safety/001236.html to http://www.consumersunion.org/pub/core_product_safety/001236.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071011214458/http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com:80/tech/0506_sccp_making_it_stick_part_1/index.html to http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/tech/0506_sccp_making_it_stick_part_1/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:48, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified