Learned a lesson - driving in rain.
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 29,871
Likes: 5,425
From: Ontario Canada
I got caught in torrential rains on the way to the Dragon last year, a good 3 hours of highway driving in heavy rain with lots of standing water on the roads. My Ap1 had Bridgestone SO-2's on the rears and everyone says that they are the worst tires in the rain. Doing 60-70 mph wasn't a problem, you just have to know when to lift throttle and tip toe through the tough areas. If I had used cruise control it would have definitely bitten me in the rear.
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 927
Likes: 35
From: ATL, GA
Yes....it has happened only a handful of times that I've been caught in the rain. Generally I never take a chance. I don't want to get rear ended driving 10mph below speed limit. Keep in mind I also make twice as much power as stock so I have fun with it but mostly in good weather :-)
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 3,296
Likes: 260
From: Vermont
The real difference is the speed at which the tail gets away. With the Ranger the whole thing starts much more slowly, making the recovery easier. The quick steering of the S, & the speed of the rear breakaway cause many to apply too much opposite lock, a bit too late, leading to the thing snapping back the other way. This is the one they don't get back.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
I raced back in the day when we used the same tredded tyres wet or dry. Be it a tin top or an open wheeler Formula 1, lap times were from 15 to 20% slower in the normal wet conditions, & impossible with a lot of standing water. This gives an indication of the reduction in grip in any car.
I have not found the S any worse than many cars in really wet conditions, but it is very badly effected by just damp conditions. I go into tiptoe mode when it first starts to rain lightly. The car becomes easier & more predictable once the roads are really wet.
In Fact it is less affected than most utes/pickups. My old 2.5L Ford Ranger tray back, with light truck tyres was diabolical in those just damp conditions, & still bad with fully wet roads. The new 3.2L crew cab Ranger, with wide mud tyres is a little better, with more weight on the back wheels, but still loses traction more easily than the S. It can be difficult to get away from stopped at uphill traffic lights in the wet, particularly when towing a ton or more.
The real difference is the speed at which the tail gets away. With the Ranger the whole thing starts much more slowly, making the recovery easier. The quick steering of the S, & the speed of the rear breakaway cause many to apply too much opposite lock, a bit too late, leading to the thing snapping back the other way. This is the one they don't get back.
I have not found the S any worse than many cars in really wet conditions, but it is very badly effected by just damp conditions. I go into tiptoe mode when it first starts to rain lightly. The car becomes easier & more predictable once the roads are really wet.
In Fact it is less affected than most utes/pickups. My old 2.5L Ford Ranger tray back, with light truck tyres was diabolical in those just damp conditions, & still bad with fully wet roads. The new 3.2L crew cab Ranger, with wide mud tyres is a little better, with more weight on the back wheels, but still loses traction more easily than the S. It can be difficult to get away from stopped at uphill traffic lights in the wet, particularly when towing a ton or more.
The real difference is the speed at which the tail gets away. With the Ranger the whole thing starts much more slowly, making the recovery easier. The quick steering of the S, & the speed of the rear breakaway cause many to apply too much opposite lock, a bit too late, leading to the thing snapping back the other way. This is the one they don't get back.
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 3,296
Likes: 260
From: Vermont
[/quote]
I just love hearing your perspective on these things. Thank you for sharing!
[/quote]
Me too. I especially like the fact that Old Racer owns or has owned an S. Validates my decision to buy this car.
I should also say I agree about pickups. I have owned many and they can lose it really quick too - especially in snow and icy conditions like we have in my area about 6 months of the year. I've always attributed that to being so light in the back - many people around here add weight in the bed during the winter. I have no clue if the weight issue is the really the source of the behavior - but I suspect it is.
I just love hearing your perspective on these things. Thank you for sharing!
[/quote]
Me too. I especially like the fact that Old Racer owns or has owned an S. Validates my decision to buy this car.
I should also say I agree about pickups. I have owned many and they can lose it really quick too - especially in snow and icy conditions like we have in my area about 6 months of the year. I've always attributed that to being so light in the back - many people around here add weight in the bed during the winter. I have no clue if the weight issue is the really the source of the behavior - but I suspect it is.
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 305
Likes: 51
From: South East Queensland Oz.
Yes I drive an S, among others.
I have a Triumph TR8 which has always been a limited use toy. Well I did until my son pinched it.
I have a restored TR7, which was my daily driver for a few years, until I gave it an expensive mint paint job.
Silly boy, I then stopped parking it in car parks.
I bought the S as a daily driver. I wanted a bit of go, good handling, & a good hood mechanism. I bought a number of things, a Peugeot, Mazda, BMW & an MG, but quickly moved them on.
I found a mint 17,900 miles S about 5 years ago, & love it. It does everything I need in a road car very well, other than sit in car parks. I've bought an old Mazda 323 for shopping trolley duties, & use the S for fun.
I don't expect to ever replace it, at 76 the Triumph & S2000 well see me out.
I have a Triumph TR8 which has always been a limited use toy. Well I did until my son pinched it.
I have a restored TR7, which was my daily driver for a few years, until I gave it an expensive mint paint job.
Silly boy, I then stopped parking it in car parks.
I bought the S as a daily driver. I wanted a bit of go, good handling, & a good hood mechanism. I bought a number of things, a Peugeot, Mazda, BMW & an MG, but quickly moved them on.
I found a mint 17,900 miles S about 5 years ago, & love it. It does everything I need in a road car very well, other than sit in car parks. I've bought an old Mazda 323 for shopping trolley duties, & use the S for fun.
I don't expect to ever replace it, at 76 the Triumph & S2000 well see me out.
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,358
Likes: 31
From: Phoenix, AZ
Please stop driving period- take the bus. People who use flashers during the rain are some of the worst people you can encounter on the roads. Flashers in the rain are a huge safety concern and against the law for a reason. Flashers are for disabled vehicles, not slow people. One of the many reasons I despised FL drivers when I lived there. I safely drove a 400whp s2000 on UHP tires for 8 years without using my flashers.
Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 82,468
Likes: 1,193
Originally Posted by windhund116' timestamp='1474792083' post='24069394
[quote name='pwrinxs' timestamp='1474767666' post='24069320']
I usually don't take chances when I'm caught in the rain... Flashers go on and I drive 55mph max no matter what tires in running.
I usually don't take chances when I'm caught in the rain... Flashers go on and I drive 55mph max no matter what tires in running.
You put your emergency flashers on, when it rains?
Yes....it has happened only a handful of times that I've been caught in the rain. Generally I never take a chance. I don't want to get rear ended driving 10mph below speed limit. Keep in mind I also make twice as much power as stock so I have fun with it but mostly in good weather :-)
[/quote]
Driving with flashers on is illegal.