I CALL SHENANIGANS! These are prone to heavy understeer.
I am going to guess he had the front sway bar disconnected or a 25mm rear sway bar installed with high tire pressures in the rear and possibly had the ABS disabled. The stability control may be crap but in stock form a professional driver probably couldnt do this if he TRIED.

I find it laughable that they allowed the Jeep engineers to attempt to "fix" the problem on-site. The important variables are: A) vertical center of gravity, B) track (width between wheels), and C) tires and tire pressure (coefficient of friction). Probably in that order.

They can't do much of anything significant to alter any of those variables on-site -- they are design issues. Loading the vehicle down with a shitload of weight to lower the center of gravity (a little) "helped" slightly in terms of the roll, but put way more stress on the tires. Still, it did provide some useful information to the engineers in that they know to focus redesign work on getting the engine mount and other heavy bits lower in the frame.

So the thing to take away from that is that yes, the Jeep needs a redesign (I wouldn't buy one with that problem), but don't read too much into the "failures" caused by their adding weight to the vehicle. I'd wager that if you loaded the same weight into the Volkswagen and Volvo they tested/praised, you'd get a hell of a lot of blowouts also. Kudos to those models for not needing a redesign and handling the test well, but to me I saw the Jeep engineers simply doing what was possible on-site to figure out what needs to be done to address the problem.

bicycle tire pressure reform ?

FINALLY!

>> ^joedirt:
"because UPS is an integral part of a server."
Yeah, sure. And my spare tire pressure is a critical statistic I brag about my hotrod.
Duh, the UPS has nothing to do with server operation nor power efficiency. Look at the spare tire on that Posche!!!! Wow, that's hot.


When you get a flat tire on your "Posche", it only inconveniences you (and your passengers, if any). I'd say that's a maximum of 4 people being inconvenienced, maybe 6 if you have one of those silly "Posche" SUVs.
Now, take a look at google - a single data center has capacity for 45,000 servers, and each server probably handles 10s to 100s of simultaneous requests (being conservative). Now lets say the data center loses power, without the UPS, every request is lost.
30 seconds later the generators kick in, all the machines reboot in a few minutes, and facility is back online, but in the meantime you've just inconvenienced a million people. Not really good for PR....

So for a business like Google, a UPS IS an integral part of a server.

As far as efficiency - take a 10 megawatt data center, assume you have a central UPS (for reasons mentioned above) that is 95% efficient. That means you lose 500kW of power in the form of heat. If you replace that UPS system (as a whole) with one that is 99.9% efficient, you lose only 10kW of power to heat.

To put this in perspective, the average household in America consumes about 14,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy.
That's an average of 1.6kW per hour. So by going from 95% eff to 99.9% eff UPS system, google saved 306 households worth of electricity.

The main reason for the effeciency gain is that you aren't going AC-AC-DC-AC-AC-DC, like a traditional server room, but rather AC-AC-AC-DC.
(AC = alternating current, like power lines ; DC = direct current, like batteries; hyphen represents a conversion, none of which are 100% efficient)

"because UPS is an integral part of a server."

Yeah, sure. And my spare tire pressure is a critical statistic I brag about my hotrod.

Duh, the UPS has nothing to do with server operation nor power efficiency. Look at the spare tire on that Posche!!!! Wow, that's hot.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'truck, oil change, tire pressure, air filter' to 'truck, oil change, tire pressure, air filter, mpg, mileage, hypermiling' - edited by Stingray

And, of course, the cons had to lie and claim that "proper tire pressure" was the sum total of Obama's energy plan. So typical.

If they can't lie, they can't win.

They've been like that for at least ten years.

See, by misrepresenting Obama's statement about tire pressure, McCain undoubtedly secured at least a few votes from the hive of mind-numbingly idiotic "fence-sitters" and I couldn't be more serious.

I call bullshit on a number of different areas. The big one for me, is that if you are doing an experiment to see if your MPG will change by adding acetone, then keep everything else constant and just change the fuel.

Removing the spare tire and jack? In what way is that a normal action for your average car owner? Sure, tire pressure and excess crap in the truck, but why remove standard equipment? Just doing this stuff, he started changing his MPG and this had nothing to do with acetone, so this baseline should not be part of the results.

Holy hell, he changed out most of the ignition system, wow, look how much affect the acetone is having! What do you mean it hasn't been added yet? Up 8 MPG and nothing has changed with the fuel yet.

The final result looks like it was based off of a single set of driving, which is in no way conclusive. There are so many flaws in this "experiment" that it just leaves too much room for doubt.

The whole thing should be done again, with only the fuel changing, and over longer driving distances using a brand new vehicle, not some clunker from the past. Who knows, maybe his old car was supposed to be getting 35 MPG when it first rolled off the lot and everything that he did was just fixing old problems?

Just rediculous.

its stupid the fact is for snow its stupid the fact that the wheels have low serfice airea mean it wont work good on poweder snow + the grip bit at the back will slow the bike when going down hill. personaly i have had grate fun riding my bike on snow just with the corect tires and tire pressure u can ride up most snow and down most as well just have to be cerfull when terning making sure the front wheel dosent jam.

for geting up hills on snow kites seem the best in my own opinoin.

not that surprising. but interesting that they had to weigh down the car that much and double the tyre(tire?) pressure.