The 928 was always one of my favourite Porsches along with the 944. Maybe it's just me but it seemed like Jamie and especially Adam were trying their darnedest to confirm this myth.
If only there was some kind of extremely simple aerodynamic effect that should have been obvious from the very first test set-up for the surfboard myth, such as if a foam board sent horizontally at high speed with a nose pointing down might perchance nose down in flight.
@@Mtlkat77 true. But I think the last test shows that even if the surfboard was twice as heavy and going perfectly straight without losing speed it wouldn't have pierced the windshield
@fostena Doesn't matter what kind d of surfboard you'd use (well, maybe except the one from silver surfer), it won't make it through all layers of a windshield. But still, kind funny seeing those experts, not accounting for one of the most obvious and visible variables this test has and trying to be smart by saying it could have to do something with the surfboards shape. Like whaaaaat?! You really think so, Sherlock😂
Well, powder printers are still stupid expensive. My work still has one and my boss told me it costs so much to run just in consumables that its cheaper to repeatedly buy new fdm printers
@@Magmafrost13 Is it still useful for something? I know only of metal powder printers being only option for printing quality metal prints but dunno about these ones.
@@WwarpfirewW Powder is self supporting, and you can pack parts into a 3D cube in order to print many items at once. Quality is usually better than FDM. They're less convenient for desktop use but very useful in many applications.
well in ther defence, mytbusters have never axidentaly blown anything upp, and its tory who brakes stuff, and we all know jaime helped build the appolo rocket and was supoised to be the first man on the moon but they wouldn't let him where his baret to the moon
Well they never blew up the Hangar and it was a science show NASA was more tolerant and I think Adam has also said they were just plain lucky to get their support
The car I've always heard was the culprit of the aerodynamics myth was the Austin Allegro which had the aerodynamics of a brick whichever way it was going (and it was a crock to boot)
If you use an antique hardwood surf board on the other hand that myth works fine. That's not what they used in the movie so this isn't a complaint, but rather the source of where someone might have gotten the idea that this might be plausible back in the 1980s
I feel like they should have tested the surf board myth with an older style wind screen. That movie was pretty old even at the time of filming. Windshields may not have been as strong or reliable at that time.
Weight distribution could play a role. and the altered exhaust could change the power output. Also the 0-60 test could be more accurate with a GPS speedometer in the car. Should have done a Power output test before and after.
I think it would get more expensive to do it right. I also think than in the 0 to 60 test the backwards car was let down by traction rather than aerodynamics. And in the aerodynamic test, the backward car didn't have the wheel archers in the back which would make even more drag. Having said that, I dont think it would change the outcome, the normal car has better aerodynamics in this case lol
Wrong assumption with the surf board myth. The momentum of the car isn't transferred to the board, but to the crash vehicle and the security walls. The only momentum the board has is the one it had from the car's initial speed minus what's needed to get loose from the holding clamps. If you want to transfer more momentum to the board, you need an elastic impact to the rear of the board or a lever for a slingshot
I'm not a mechanic or anything, so my thought was, could they not have just done changes to make the car drive in reverse? It is about weight distribution or perhaps to would be too hard to drive that way?
yup a drop is good in aerodynamics but not perfect. there are factors playing into that as well cause it's a liquid. a drop can't turn around but might be more aerodynamic then because a pointed shape does better than spherical shapes.
i think backwards car using more fuel is correct, because car is heavy and powerful enough to easily get to 60 and run quarter mile. i'm fairly certain that if you'd replace that body with something less aerodynamic, then it wouldn't change the result much. so in other words, engine is powerful enough to overcome the aerodynamic differences, but it takes a lot more power to do so. they should have measured how much power car uses. weighting the tank is wrong method, they should use that tool they used in other episodes, where they measured the current fuel consumption. i'm sure that would have proven my point that aerodynamics don't matter much when getting from 0 to 60 as engine is powerful enough, but it does take much more fuel to do so.
Ok, I've not watched the video fully, I'm three minutes in,, But I'm a Brit, and I can tell you that one of our cars, the Austin Allegro, was rumoureed to be more aerodynamic from the rear, I doubt that a Porsche 928 would be even less than the Allegro. I'm gonna be surprised if the Porsche does this... It sounds more like US anti-european sports cars, especially as the US' ones were so crap at the time..
it is a common misconception, "aerodynamic" for a sport car doesn't mean less fuel consumption (aka less drag), it means greater vertical force to be able to drive quicker in the turns (aka more negativ lift ) and greater stability at high speed.
@@retroferret3424You're not wrong, but by the same account it's like... an eighties car in spirit. It's like the Suzuki Katana. Technically it's a seventies (designed) bike but it would go on to define the eighties. It's all about the vibe babyyyy.
@@bobbyr It really is a no brainer because if your flip it over, those fins on the back would stop it from sliding from the car. And a straight board wouldn't help eaither because it's very hard to kill somebody with a piece of styrofoam. Not that I know but I suspect it would be hard. But aiming it at somone's neck while driving a car with the board on the top is impossible. Ther's just a couple of things to consider: speed of the car, weight of the board, earodynamic properties, height of the target, the distance between the board and the target at the moment of launch. Imagine how spot on everything would have to be to make the board hit the target and then there is a whole new problem of the board's ability to kill.
@@ardvark84 Styrofoam? The ones I've seen were made from glass fiber and resin, with a foam core. Very hard and dense. And straight. One probably weighed 30-40 lbs.
leaving aside the fact that porsche engineers would be obviously not that stupid and the wind tunnel already showed it's better the way it's designed, there're still many considerations that might render the full scale experiment useless. firstly, the body reversed car was installed in a visibly lower angle of attack and any aoa different than zero would increase drag upfront. secondly, the wheelhouses are not quite integrated which might mess up with the outer flow and again increasing drag. thirdly, the whole cooling system wouldn't function in reverse which would mean less drag from there. btw many comments below talk about mirrors but although not insignificant, that wouldn't be a huge contributor. but as said, there're already a bunch of stuff (aoa, wheels, cooling) that might or might not balance out in the end and at the end of the day the experiment doesn't prove anything. base form ain't everything in aerodynamics anyway 😒
The angle of attack matters a lot to the way the projectile will pierce a surface. The B crew is so stupid sometimes when they don't test things properly.
They destroyed the aerodynamics on the red 928 when reversing it and cutting out all the wheel arches leaving some gaping holes for the wind to grab onto.
I just wonder if the surfboard at 85mph would be able to penetrate genuine 1989 wind shield :) the episode was shot in 2010, and 20 years is pretty lot of time when it comes to car safety :)
Getting 2 old used cars with the same make and model isn't the same as having two cars the same, theres an episode of topgear where they all buy the same used cars and the performance of them vary massively
I have no idea of veracity, but I 'beieve' that in the 70's? a car carrying a kyack rear-ended another vehicle and sent the kyack flying through the vehicle in front. ???
It's not just the air resistance. Rolling resistance of the tires, tire pressure, wheel alignment or sticking brake caliper could cause one to be slower than the other
As a child/teenager i often realized some flaws about how they approached certain myths, today it's quite surprising how far off they often were, especially with automotive myths they often halfassed it. For example, using two supposedly identical old Porsche 928s might be correct, but no engine is like the other, not even in a brand new car, but especially after 25+ years. Then there are other obvious differences like tires, but also other internals like brakes, transmission, bearings and so on. At the time i also didn't quite realize how unpleasant Jamie was, working with him must've been quite difficult.
Why do they call them K rails when they are clearly a Y | at 26:40 weight is no longer a constant between tests, since they had to add extra mass in the form of steel reinforcement, so the fuel efficiency is now irrelevant, they should have used a variable ballast, liek 10 kg water barrel,
Surfboards in the 70s and 80s at least in Europe were A LOT more heavy, harder and had a thicker shell. Quite massive, when it comes to a stronger impact ! Even having increased the speed of the board can't compensate for a harder material and heavier board, which might not have broken apart like that light one they used, and also might not have deflected as easy on the windshield.. just saying..
Did they call a porche 928 a race car thats like calling a cat a dog its a grand tourer meant to cruse att speed in luxury as far from a race car as you can get
Short notice: For the race you used the first version of the Porsche 928, for the test at NASA-Labs you used a model of the 928 S4, which has updated aerodynamics (see the lower front and bumpers for example). -> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_928
I can't believe they run with the mirrors backwards. Door mirrors are are huge drag makers as they are, but when you flip the body they are backwards towards the direction of travel so the drag is even worse. Maybe it doesn't matter too much under 60mph but still makes the test unvalid.
Americans are so strange not wanting to name the brand of stuff since it’s commercial 😂 Hiding brand on clothes with duct tape and stuff lol But seeing a Porsche in reverse was excited 😂😂
Considering that many episodes on this channel are from BBC (which is a British company), I'll assume this one is too. And British are very peculiar about ads in shows. So, I think it's not a US thing, but a UK thing
I have a friend in calif was on the fwy a LG truck infront of her it was loaded w lumber one of the boards came flying back when thru her windshield n came straight to her right n thru the back seat..her son was strapped into his seat on the back right. The board missed them both but they were covered n impeded w glass pieces n jus bt the grace of God no one was hurt badly. No one was stopping..it jus flew backwards off the truck. The board was a long 2x4..
A Porsche? Never. Sounds like something Americans would say about "foreign" cars to discredit them to their peers... because Americans didn't actually make performance cars until recently... and that is including the Corvette, Mustang ect... they are not the same lol
i wonder if they considered that friction is another force stopping the cars and, as such, they would have to use brand new tires in both cars to make things fair
Jamie changed his business into a very closed company and has become somewhat of a recluse. Adam has his own channel where he mostly builds stuff in his workshop and holds questions and answers sessions, and he visits cosplay and makers conventions a lot. Possibly also does commissioned builds as well, off camera. Kari has done some TV hosting work since MB shut down, and released an autobiography a few years ago ("Crash Test Girl"). Tory has likewise done some TV hosting work since. Grant sadly died a few years ago, from a ruptured brain aneurysm.
@mytube001 Last I heard, Jamie was doing some teaching at a university in Finland. He also made an appearance with Lauri (from the Hydraulic Press Channel) in some promo videos for an aluminum or steel company. And a short video telling the Russian army to go f*** themselves and leave Ukraine.
Personally seen a surfboard come off the roof of a car in a rear end crash and go through the rear window of the car it hit, the driver was hit and injured by the surfboard but it didn't kill the driver.
Maybe examine the dynamics of the surfboard BEFORE smashing 5, or however many cars... (I know this video is old, still stupid. And I also know it's for entertainment, doesn't make it less stupid)
This was just as hilarious to me, cus I just thought "hold on guys, you usually make a test with small models for everything, why not here...this would REALLY benefit from it as a lot of things are rogue factors". I even had that question back when this one aired on TV and now years later I still cannot fathom what they were thinking hahaha!
@@baumyl3vi232 The only thing that makes sense to me is they knew that it's obviously impossible and didn't want to build up to a disappointment. Or they couldn't justify going full scale if they knew it was going to fail (although it's not like it stopped them before).
This is by far the most ridiculous and sad project they came up with, I think..A waist of a perfectly good oldtimer Porsche, it proves basically nothing in the end all'n all a total waist of car, time, effort and watching. Love the show a lot , for sure. They should let young boys get into the show
They always used to do that, this isn't really a good show for car enthusiasts (atleast those that like early 2000s/late 90s cars) and I think for collectors it'd get shocking sometimes. Also what I find funnier than them ruining them, is how they just flat out REFUSE to name any of the cars by their proper names. It's always changed to "The sportscar" or "The SUV" and it's done so bizzarely strictly that it's almost comical hahaha!
@@baumyl3vi232 To be fair, a lot of the cars they used weren't super valuable back then. Look at Top Gear for example, they used to be able to buy 80s supercars for less than a modern boring sedan.
@@baumyl3vi232 not naming the cars by brand is because they dont want to get problems with the car manufacturers/brands. they also dont want to seem like they endorse a certain brand. since they do a lot of tests, and a lot of it is not what the cars were designed to do, the company could be salty about them showing them using their product in a bad way or puting it in a bad light
@@retroferret3424 honestly I figured something like that was the case cus why pay extra fines or risk lawsuits ey? Just really funny in retrospect how it kinda makes some lines in their script real clunky sounding hahaha!
The specific model of sports car? A Porsche 928.
THANK YOU
You forgot to mention this model is from the 1980s & not the 1970s lol
@@michaelmayhem350 idk with a production from 77-95 i think it definitely classifies as a car made in the 70s?
@@retroferret3424I think he meant that the specific car shown in the episode is from the 80s, not 70s
The chicken was still warm.
Cant describe how happy I am that the series is coming on youtube.
I liked presenters, debunking myths, but hated editing up to a point of stoping watching them entirely.
The 928 was always one of my favourite Porsches along with the 944. Maybe it's just me but it seemed like Jamie and especially Adam were trying their darnedest to confirm this myth.
If only there was some kind of extremely simple aerodynamic effect that should have been obvious from the very first test set-up for the surfboard myth, such as if a foam board sent horizontally at high speed with a nose pointing down might perchance nose down in flight.
Ditto.
They look stupid.
the board in the movie i beleiv was a long board anyway which is flat, thicker and heavier.
Shows once again that a higher budget doesn't always mean better. Scaled test would have been cheaper and, possibly, better
@@Mtlkat77 true. But I think the last test shows that even if the surfboard was twice as heavy and going perfectly straight without losing speed it wouldn't have pierced the windshield
@fostena Doesn't matter what kind d of surfboard you'd use (well, maybe except the one from silver surfer), it won't make it through all layers of a windshield.
But still, kind funny seeing those experts, not accounting for one of the most obvious and visible variables this test has and trying to be smart by saying it could have to do something with the surfboards shape.
Like whaaaaat?! You really think so, Sherlock😂
Meanwhile in 2020+: A 3D printer costs around 400 bucks. Can do everything you would have wanted it to. Good to know, technology has improved.
Well, powder printers are still stupid expensive. My work still has one and my boss told me it costs so much to run just in consumables that its cheaper to repeatedly buy new fdm printers
@@Magmafrost13 Is it still useful for something? I know only of metal powder printers being only option for printing quality metal prints but dunno about these ones.
@@WwarpfirewW
Powder is self supporting, and you can pack parts into a 3D cube in order to print many items at once. Quality is usually better than FDM.
They're less convenient for desktop use but very useful in many applications.
Now 2024
@@Gametherapist so true, the tec is impressive
To me, what's equally fascinating is the "weels" on that forklift truck.
38:06
I'm always amazed what kind of equipment NASA lets the Mythbusters use, considering their reputation for breaking stuff and/or blowing it up.
well in ther defence, mytbusters have never axidentaly blown anything upp, and its tory who brakes stuff, and we all know jaime helped build the appolo rocket and was supoised to be the first man on the moon but they wouldn't let him where his baret to the moon
Well they never blew up the Hangar and it was a science show NASA was more tolerant and I think Adam has also said they were just plain lucky to get their support
@@streamer9923 Good point.
@@streamer9923 my eyes
And no one at NASA suggested maybe they should think about the shape of the board and that it might be generating negative lift?
Thank you glorious people behind this channel, this is our childhood.
These episodes are always a treat
The car I've always heard was the culprit of the aerodynamics myth was the Austin Allegro which had the aerodynamics of a brick whichever way it was going (and it was a crock to boot)
That was a shit car that my father in law had in shit brown and it was, indeed, shit...
@@Rincypoopoo yea, they are definately shit! In tan!!
@@Rincypoopooatleast they labelled it correctly then hahaha
OMG, I do hope the Ehcrop 829 still exists,what a toy! Imagine a lights race scenario...
21:34 OMG how cute is that helicopter recording an areal shot.
If you use an antique hardwood surf board on the other hand that myth works fine. That's not what they used in the movie so this isn't a complaint, but rather the source of where someone might have gotten the idea that this might be plausible back in the 1980s
31:31 "Hooper" starring Burt Reynolds, has a Chevy pickup flipped around backward. There's five minutes of the movie for ya.
For the Porsche, they had to seal the fenders as the air getting in was making the body act like a parachute which made the aerodynamics worse
Wouldnt it just be better to put the surfboard on a conveyorbelt that moved at the same speed as a car?
Well yeah but then they couldn't have crashed a car into a wall
I feel like they should have tested the surf board myth with an older style wind screen. That movie was pretty old even at the time of filming. Windshields may not have been as strong or reliable at that time.
Would've been cool to see if the difference in aerodynamics actually increases with more modern (and hopefully better designed) cars.
Weight distribution could play a role. and the altered exhaust could change the power output.
Also the 0-60 test could be more accurate with a GPS speedometer in the car.
Should have done a Power output test before and after.
I think it would get more expensive to do it right. I also think than in the 0 to 60 test the backwards car was let down by traction rather than aerodynamics. And in the aerodynamic test, the backward car didn't have the wheel archers in the back which would make even more drag. Having said that, I dont think it would change the outcome, the normal car has better aerodynamics in this case lol
The chicken was still warm, and that's all that matters when talking about the 928
Great episode! Thanks
Wrong assumption with the surf board myth. The momentum of the car isn't transferred to the board, but to the crash vehicle and the security walls. The only momentum the board has is the one it had from the car's initial speed minus what's needed to get loose from the holding clamps. If you want to transfer more momentum to the board, you need an elastic impact to the rear of the board or a lever for a slingshot
Woah that's an early 3D printer, not seen any of that kind in a while
I'm not a mechanic or anything, so my thought was, could they not have just done changes to make the car drive in reverse? It is about weight distribution or perhaps to would be too hard to drive that way?
yup a drop is good in aerodynamics but not perfect. there are factors playing into that as well cause it's a liquid. a drop can't turn around but might be more aerodynamic then because a pointed shape does better than spherical shapes.
Cool. A red sports car. I wonder what brand it is.
Surprisingly, it's not a Ferrari. Porsche 928, according to people in the comments.
Everyone talking about that Porsche and I’m sitting here heartbroken about all those Jeeps getting destroyed 😂
This is the only Porsche that Jeremy Clarkson doesn't hate.
And the 911 GT3 (not the RS). He has more than once said he agrees it's an incredible driver's car.
could be a reason to disike it? seriously, probably the only porshe i would buy. if you are offering, i'll take any one. 924 was okay too.
i think backwards car using more fuel is correct, because car is heavy and powerful enough to easily get to 60 and run quarter mile. i'm fairly certain that if you'd replace that body with something less aerodynamic, then it wouldn't change the result much.
so in other words, engine is powerful enough to overcome the aerodynamic differences, but it takes a lot more power to do so.
they should have measured how much power car uses. weighting the tank is wrong method, they should use that tool they used in other episodes, where they measured the current fuel consumption. i'm sure that would have proven my point that aerodynamics don't matter much when getting from 0 to 60 as engine is powerful enough, but it does take much more fuel to do so.
According to Jeremy Clarkson, the 928 is an allright car. I'll take the man's word.
29:02 spoken like a true engineer 🫡
Ok, I've not watched the video fully, I'm three minutes in,, But I'm a Brit, and I can tell you that one of our cars, the Austin Allegro, was rumoureed to be more aerodynamic from the rear, I doubt that a Porsche 928 would be even less than the Allegro. I'm gonna be surprised if the Porsche does this... It sounds more like US anti-european sports cars, especially as the US' ones were so crap at the time..
it is a common misconception, "aerodynamic" for a sport car doesn't mean less fuel consumption (aka less drag), it means greater vertical force to be able to drive quicker in the turns (aka more negativ lift ) and greater stability at high speed.
I can guaratee you the the lift on that 928 would not be better in reverse
I will always remember jeremy story about that porsche
The 928 was really more of an 80's car than an 70's one.
i dont know how produced in 1977 would not make it a 70s car
@@retroferret3424You're not wrong, but by the same account it's like... an eighties car in spirit. It's like the Suzuki Katana. Technically it's a seventies (designed) bike but it would go on to define the eighties. It's all about the vibe babyyyy.
@@montlejohnbojangles8937 Except they are literally taking about a car being designed in the 1970s
@@retroferret3424 It was produced from 78 to 95.
It's presence was most notable in the 80's.
@@dgthe3 but the viiiiibe thooooo
I don't understand why they used a curved surfboard instead of a regular, straight one?
To intentionally make it not work
Mostly wonder why they had it laying with it sloping downward. Seems like a no brainier to have it the other way around.
@@bobbyr It really is a no brainer because if your flip it over, those fins on the back would stop it from sliding from the car. And a straight board wouldn't help eaither because it's very hard to kill somebody with a piece of styrofoam. Not that I know but I suspect it would be hard. But aiming it at somone's neck while driving a car with the board on the top is impossible. Ther's just a couple of things to consider: speed of the car, weight of the board, earodynamic properties, height of the target, the distance between the board and the target at the moment of launch. Imagine how spot on everything would have to be to make the board hit the target and then there is a whole new problem of the board's ability to kill.
@@ardvark84 Styrofoam? The ones I've seen were made from glass fiber and resin, with a foam core. Very hard and dense. And straight. One probably weighed 30-40 lbs.
especially when the one in the movie was flat as a pancake.
The catapult hook on the surfboard impacted the front of the roof frame stopping it from hitting the dummy.
leaving aside the fact that porsche engineers would be obviously not that stupid and the wind tunnel already showed it's better the way it's designed, there're still many considerations that might render the full scale experiment useless. firstly, the body reversed car was installed in a visibly lower angle of attack and any aoa different than zero would increase drag upfront. secondly, the wheelhouses are not quite integrated which might mess up with the outer flow and again increasing drag. thirdly, the whole cooling system wouldn't function in reverse which would mean less drag from there. btw many comments below talk about mirrors but although not insignificant, that wouldn't be a huge contributor. but as said, there're already a bunch of stuff (aoa, wheels, cooling) that might or might not balance out in the end and at the end of the day the experiment doesn't prove anything. base form ain't everything in aerodynamics anyway 😒
The angle of attack matters a lot to the way the projectile will pierce a surface. The B crew is so stupid sometimes when they don't test things properly.
They destroyed the aerodynamics on the red 928 when reversing it and cutting out all the wheel arches leaving some gaping holes for the wind to grab onto.
I just wonder if the surfboard at 85mph would be able to penetrate genuine 1989 wind shield :) the episode was shot in 2010, and 20 years is pretty lot of time when it comes to car safety :)
Foam/fibreglass board? No way. Waxed wood board (which were not in common use in the 1980s to be clear) would be a different matter
I NEED one of those car jacks
Not having arch liners in the reversed build wouldn't help aerodynamics
I was amused that they NEVER mentioned the make/model of the car. Fear of getting sued by Porsche...?
They started off picking the wrong model for the myth. How did they think to not pick the "top 3" to give the process some validity?
they should put tires backwards so rolling resistence of a tire would be the same
Dzięki za odcinek. Tego brakuje mi dzisiaj.
In the last test the windshield didnt stopped the surf board, but the metal part that was attached to the string hit the roof of the car
Getting 2 old used cars with the same make and model isn't the same as having two cars the same, theres an episode of topgear where they all buy the same used cars and the performance of them vary massively
I get the idea of the Porsche myth, but I feel the more flat end will create more drag than the more streamline nose
I have no idea of veracity, but I 'beieve' that in the 70's? a car carrying a kyack rear-ended another vehicle and sent the kyack flying through the vehicle in front. ???
It's not just the air resistance. Rolling resistance of the tires, tire pressure, wheel alignment or sticking brake caliper could cause one to be slower than the other
As a child/teenager i often realized some flaws about how they approached certain myths, today it's quite surprising how far off they often were, especially with automotive myths they often halfassed it.
For example, using two supposedly identical old Porsche 928s might be correct, but no engine is like the other, not even in a brand new car, but especially after 25+ years. Then there are other obvious differences like tires, but also other internals like brakes, transmission, bearings and so on.
At the time i also didn't quite realize how unpleasant Jamie was, working with him must've been quite difficult.
The VW SP2 is very similar to this Porsche 928
if u turn a car with spoiler around u will have less drag from the friction to the ground
Why not use a datalogger for mesuring precisely the 0-60 times i.o their vague and inefficiënt method.
Why do they call them K rails when they are clearly a Y | at 26:40 weight is no longer a constant between tests, since they had to add extra mass in the form of steel reinforcement, so the fuel efficiency is now irrelevant, they should have used a variable ballast, liek 10 kg water barrel,
Did they restore the butchered Porsche? I felt sorry about that car!
What they did not count is weight distribution, the reversed car has most of the mass on the front, leaving drive rear wheels slipping during start
This is such a scam. Buster lost his head and his car was hardly touched in the first crash of the surfboard myth.
Surfboards in the 70s and 80s at least in Europe were A LOT more heavy, harder and had a thicker shell. Quite massive, when it comes to a stronger impact ! Even having increased the speed of the board can't compensate for a harder material and heavier board, which might not have broken apart like that light one they used, and also might not have deflected as easy on the windshield.. just saying..
Ummm... couldn't they have just flipped the differential upside-down.....?
Hello I think your problem was you had the surfboard upside down
Wait a second…they don’t just tell the myths?!
25:17 You see why this car is scrape.
Where the old surfboards not made out of wood.
Did they call a porche 928 a race car thats like calling a cat a dog its a grand tourer meant to cruse att speed in luxury as far from a race car as you can get
The 928 is definitely not from the 70s
the stickers on the car don't help
they didnt say they put 2 cars infront
Short notice:
For the race you used the first version of the Porsche 928, for the test at NASA-Labs you used a model of the 928 S4, which has updated aerodynamics (see the lower front and bumpers for example).
-> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_928
I can't believe they run with the mirrors backwards. Door mirrors are are huge drag makers as they are, but when you flip the body they are backwards towards the direction of travel so the drag is even worse. Maybe it doesn't matter too much under 60mph but still makes the test unvalid.
Bekokmmt man das durch den TÜV?
Wenn man Jamie Heyneman heißt, dann ja.
Hang on that surfboard is not completely straight
Americans are so strange not wanting to name the brand of stuff since it’s commercial 😂
Hiding brand on clothes with duct tape and stuff lol
But seeing a Porsche in reverse was excited 😂😂
Considering that many episodes on this channel are from BBC (which is a British company), I'll assume this one is too. And British are very peculiar about ads in shows. So, I think it's not a US thing, but a UK thing
@@Yorick257 I have the original US recordings, it's the same :)
Who are the Mythbusters?
I have a friend in calif was on the fwy a LG truck infront of her it was loaded w lumber one of the boards came flying back when thru her windshield n came straight to her right n thru the back seat..her son was strapped into his seat on the back right. The board missed them both but they were covered n impeded w glass pieces n jus bt the grace of God no one was hurt badly. No one was stopping..it jus flew backwards off the truck. The board was a long 2x4..
Rigidity and weigh plays a big role, surfing board cracking on impact is a lot of power absorbed
The so called surf board is not a surfboard in the movie it looks like one of those with sails whatever they are called.
A Porsche? Never. Sounds like something Americans would say about "foreign" cars to discredit them to their peers... because Americans didn't actually make performance cars until recently... and that is including the Corvette, Mustang ect... they are not the same lol
Make sure Jeremy dosent watch this...
Prime example how mythbusters took something that could have been very easy to test and made it a thousandfold more complicated.
Hollywood science.
24:49 the one piece is real
Kino
i wonder if they considered that friction is another force stopping the cars and, as such, they would have to use brand new tires in both cars to make things fair
It also looks like it has no vents for cooling in reverse as well. I'm not surprised it was slower pulling in just hot air.
They forgot to flip the side mirrors 🤔
If the teardrop shape test should be fair the side mirrors should have been mounted so they don't make draft!
Does anyone has an update on the team members? What they are doing now? Are they any in other tv show?
Jamie changed his business into a very closed company and has become somewhat of a recluse. Adam has his own channel where he mostly builds stuff in his workshop and holds questions and answers sessions, and he visits cosplay and makers conventions a lot. Possibly also does commissioned builds as well, off camera. Kari has done some TV hosting work since MB shut down, and released an autobiography a few years ago ("Crash Test Girl"). Tory has likewise done some TV hosting work since. Grant sadly died a few years ago, from a ruptured brain aneurysm.
jessi comb die in a car crash (550KM/H), for scottie idk what she doing these day (but she's on instagram)
@mytube001 Last I heard, Jamie was doing some teaching at a university in Finland. He also made an appearance with Lauri (from the Hydraulic Press Channel) in some promo videos for an aluminum or steel company. And a short video telling the Russian army to go f*** themselves and leave Ukraine.
Jamie is teaching in a university , Adam now runs Tested, and all three of them were in white rabbit project( it's on Netflix)
@@avirajsinghmehta1857 white rabbit project was cancelled by netflix after 1 season
Personally seen a surfboard come off the roof of a car in a rear end crash and go through the rear window of the car it hit, the driver was hit and injured by the surfboard but it didn't kill the driver.
Back Windows on cars are not laminated. They easily break. Windshields are different. But still, something heavy will on force penetrate thrue.
this one should of been called advert busters i saw more adverts than the proper video
"Race-off"?
Pretty sure it's just a race, but, y'know, been wrong before.
😂❤😂❤
Why don´t drive the forward and the reverse car to it´s maximum speed?
Oh, you got no Autobahn, to do that?? What a shame...
Exactly! Aerodynamics are more relevant at higher Velocities (couldn`t spell Iinflue........)!
Maybe examine the dynamics of the surfboard BEFORE smashing 5, or however many cars...
(I know this video is old, still stupid. And I also know it's for entertainment, doesn't make it less stupid)
It is made for stupid audiences ....,so..
@@georgesos then why are you here?
This was just as hilarious to me, cus I just thought "hold on guys, you usually make a test with small models for everything, why not here...this would REALLY benefit from it as a lot of things are rogue factors". I even had that question back when this one aired on TV and now years later I still cannot fathom what they were thinking hahaha!
@@baumyl3vi232 The only thing that makes sense to me is they knew that it's obviously impossible and didn't want to build up to a disappointment. Or they couldn't justify going full scale if they knew it was going to fail (although it's not like it stopped them before).
@@JcGross93 it seriously must have been something along those lines.
Did they have to pay if they said Porch ?
NO!They`re testing a vehicle not a Carport. Fun Idea!
Porsche*
This is by far the most ridiculous and sad project they came up with, I think..A waist of a perfectly good oldtimer Porsche, it proves basically nothing in the end all'n all a total waist of car, time, effort and watching. Love the show a lot , for sure.
They should let young boys get into the show
why did ruin so many cars
They always used to do that, this isn't really a good show for car enthusiasts (atleast those that like early 2000s/late 90s cars) and I think for collectors it'd get shocking sometimes. Also what I find funnier than them ruining them, is how they just flat out REFUSE to name any of the cars by their proper names. It's always changed to "The sportscar" or "The SUV" and it's done so bizzarely strictly that it's almost comical hahaha!
For science!
@@baumyl3vi232 To be fair, a lot of the cars they used weren't super valuable back then. Look at Top Gear for example, they used to be able to buy 80s supercars for less than a modern boring sedan.
@@baumyl3vi232 not naming the cars by brand is because they dont want to get problems with the car manufacturers/brands. they also dont want to seem like they endorse a certain brand. since they do a lot of tests, and a lot of it is not what the cars were designed to do, the company could be salty about them showing them using their product in a bad way or puting it in a bad light
@@retroferret3424 honestly I figured something like that was the case cus why pay extra fines or risk lawsuits ey? Just really funny in retrospect how it kinda makes some lines in their script real clunky sounding hahaha!
Myth Buster at it again, ruining beloved cars. :(
first
I knew someone had to do it 😂
What's it with Americans and 'the bad guy'? When invading another country who's 'the bad guy' then?
Are they on tik tok? 😂
tiktok didn't exist while they were doing the show