here is dangerous example
http://www.stanceworks.com/forums/sh...t=11804&page=4
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7381/8...e6883538_b.jpg
Printable View
here is dangerous example
http://www.stanceworks.com/forums/sh...t=11804&page=4
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7381/8...e6883538_b.jpg
lol or what about this where the tyre popped off the bead?
http://www.houseofstance.com/2013/09...-tyre-stretch/
Just like you can't prove the existance of an invisible unicorn that can't be touched or heard. The truth isn't really clear.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chernoby1
If I want to believe unicorns exist, they exist. Simple as that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Renaissance_x
I completely agree you are increasing the danger. But as oxer tried to put it... you casually do many things that expose you to increased danger, but think nothing of it because the likelihood of the incident occurring is so small. When you assess any risk, the likelihood of an incident must be a factor. What your suggesting is that it is Very likely that a blowout will occur and that when it does, there will be dire consequences.Quote:
Originally Posted by bennjamin
An example that some may relate to here:
The speed limit of a road is 80km/h, i assess the conditions of the road(no debris, no adverse weather, no traffic ect) and based on my previous experience believe it is safe to drive at 100km/h. While it is true that i have increased my risk, i strongly believe that the increase in risk to safety is negligible. If i am not the only one to come to similar conclusions, why is the speed limit set at 80km/h? Is it possibly because the speed limit is set for ALL conditions? Is it to ensure that when things are not ideal, that it is still safe and there will not be a multitude of crashes? Why is it unreasonable for someone to think that they are able to assess the conditions (and thus speed) themselves? Probably due to liability (eg, why was i permitted to travel at a speed that was deemed unsafe when the conditions worsened)
Similarly with the tyre size applications.. how much of that is safety and how much of that is saving their own arse? If i was to stretch the tyres but change my driving habits to accommodate for it... would that be an effective countermeasure to try and control the risk? Or are we saying:
'NUP, blanket ban!!! It is not possible to drive a vehicle on stretched tyres safely regardless of what measures you put in place."
"NUP! Everything that ever touches a powerpoint needs to be tested, and tagged and maintenance records kept... even in your own home. No excuses."
Personally, i think the way safety is managed in australia is too reliant on the systems. While it may be better than a majority of other nations, common sense has nearly been thrown out the window and theres a culture of blind faith in the systems and standards. Im suggesting that the rules should be more accommodating, but a culture shift needs to occur where people consider and take responsibility for their own and other peoples safety.
EG: I've got stretched tyres. Maybe its a good idea for me not to drive around putting load on the sidewalls because they arent designed to be used in that way... Lets be careful going over bumpy roads, ill keep additional distance from other cars because something might happen to my tyres... Sure youve introduced unnecessary danger, but is it risk worth the reward?
If you havent noticed, i have a strong dislike for taking responsibility away from people (even if it does decerse risk). IMO, it breeds a culture of complacency.. Oh ill just follow the rues and nothing can ever go wrong, so ill never ever check anything and just blame the system when things do go wrong.
And if one was to argue that a god did exist but had no impact on anything a human could notice... practically the 'truth' may be that the god doesnt exisist, but it is not the "certain" truth. Certainty is a PITA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Renaissance_x
They might* exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by newpaddy3
This is the general problem with certainty... How can you be sure that is air you are breathing? Mistro Descrates hit it on the head pretty well in the 17th century, the only thing you can be certain of is your own existence.
In a sense I agree with you on the risk part chernobyl, but in this case i think the issue is the degree of stretch.
To put it into your example, yes you take a light risk by going 100 in an 80 zone, but the likelyhood of an accident is only small. However if you were to go faster, the likelyhood becomes higher and higher as you push further past the boundaries.
A small amount of stretch (i.e. a 195 tyre on a 8" wheel) is probably not going to cause problems. But if you were stretching that tyre onto a 9" or even 9.5" wheel you are pushing further and further beyond the boundaries, and increasing the chances of something going wrong.
OP is using a 6.5-7" wide tyre on a 9" wheel. It does not surprise me that he is having issues.
That's what gets me all the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chernoby1
Thinking everything is just my imagination.
Shiiiiiit.
op still here mate, don't say i died, i just dont want to keep replying to people like you mate, since you assumed i was dead, thats why i responded, wishing death upon people isnt funny mate, if you dont have anything to say about the stretch tire/ air leaks/ safety issues with the stretch tires, keep your comments to ya self... FYI ive got rid of the wheels.Quote:
Originally Posted by lolmclol
good shit
good info here guise.
basicly op look at over stretching tyres the same way you would look at piking up dirty ass whores, sure you may go ages before you get the clap/the burn/shanghi special but if/when you do will it have been worth it?
dont be cheap kunt7, sell your tofu and dim sim and buy normal size tyre