If a limit of traction turn actually breaks the bead from the rim, your tires are not slightly underinflated, they are severely underinflated, they are people rolling down their windows and pointing to your tires underinflated.
Are you sure it isn’t the rollover itself that breaks the bead of a tire? Sometimes we get cause and effect backwards. Also, remember that everyone who has an accident looks for something other than himself to blame the accident on.
Oscrmyers, braking while turning will not result in “folding” or bead failure on any properly mounted and properly inflated tire. The only manufacturer I’ve ever heard of that intentionally recommended underinflating tires was Ford in the Explorer. After all the lawsuits, bad publicity, and lost sales that resulted from that, I seriously doubt of any manufacturer would recommend oding that again.
The single biggest cause of rollovers is not tires folding or bead failure, it’s sliding on poor winter roads and sliding over the edge of the embankment. It’s excess speed in poor weather. I see numerous rollovers every winter.
One day here just north of Anchorage Alaska i counted 27 cars in the ditch in just a few miles. Some on there side some upside down.
I wonder if they were driving to fast…
The evidence would suggest that there was an anomolie on he road…like an invisable patch of ice. We have them here that we call “black ice”.
The reason you do zig zag skiing or carving down hill has less to do with distance then it does being able to bring your skii edges into play. They, along with your tush are your only brakes. The main reason it is BS car braking that way, is that you now bring loss of steering control into play, much like you would trying to corner and brake. The newer stability control would sense the loss of steerage and change in attitude and could very well "increase " your stopping distance even more then going in a staight line.
I suppose you could also start hitting expendable objects as in “holleywatt’s” amazingly interesting account. But in a car that has brakes, it becomes another strategy with problematic implications. Just jump on the brakes and let them do their job, steering only to avoid hitting things and remain in your lane. A possible exception, might be steering on packed snow and ice, while searching for better traction areas.
IMHO, both Brian and grand dad are wack jobs here. One for teaching and one for believing this insane attitude toward braking? This is a case where both need to be re-evaluated for their driver license retention… Yes, cars are more prone to roll over when turning…anything that makes a car lean while traveling could increase your chances of rolling over. Including, “tripping” over dry pavement suddenly while sliding sideways on ice for example while doing this zig zag braking garbage. “oldtimer11”,I respectfully submit you are getting dangerously close to being in the same class as Brian and family. ;=) as do we all on different matters.
dagosa:
“The reason you do zig zag skiing or carving down hill has less to do with distance then it does being able to bring your skii edges into play. They, along with your tush are your only brakes”
On a nice wide slope, you can turn back uphill to stop, using gravity to convert kinetic energy into potential energy (elevation). But, while turning, especially a skidding turn instead of a carving turn, does scrub off speed, zig zagging also makes you ski farther for a given vertical distance which effectively makes the grade less steep.
I agree. But down hill skiing in this manner is meant first of all to turn and follow the terrain while keeping you speed in check. But, if you have to stop, like in a car, it has nothing to do with choosing, carving or zig zagging. A jump turn with maximum edge application does that…and that has nothing to do with increasing your distance traveled.
Just saying the phrase “jump turn” makes my upper thighs hurt.
;=)