to physics nerds: false advertising in falling LEXUS ad?!
 

So i know this may sound ridiculous, but i couldn't help but be curious to do the math and see if it works. :D

So LEXUS had this ad where they dropped a new IS350 from 4,000 feet, and at the same instant, another IS350 punched it from a standstill, 4,000 feet away from where the falling IS350 would land.

The claim? That an IS350 could cover 4,000 feet across the ground faster than one could fall from the sky.

So it's been probably seven or so years since I've done elementary newtonian physics lol but it seems to me that this is an outrageous claim:

I calculate that the IS350 would take only 15.78 seconds to fall from 4,000 feet: 15.78 seconds would be a respectable 1/4-mile time, there is NO WAY it could travel 4,000 feet.

I just used:

PE = KE
mgh = 1/2mv^2
2gh = v^2

g = 9.81 m/s^2
h = 4,000 feet = 1219 m

v = 155 m/s

then, (vf - vi) / t = 9.8 m/s^2 --> t = 15.81 s

What's LEXUS trying to pull?!

I agree with your math if im doing it right. Its been about `10 years since ive taken physics so im not positive though. But im sure its bullshit just like every other ad

what?? so the twins actually do NOT exist?? WTF are you smoking???!:nanana:

Lexus makes horrible ads. This is just another example.

I would think an IS350 would be way to slow.....maybe an IS-F....better yet a 335i! ;)

i hate lexus ads too...why must they use a "british" narrator???

What twins.
And I think the worst Lexus ad is where its on a runway and every time it shifts you see the gear number on the pavement 1 thru 8. It is a retarted comercial

the toyota 0-70-0 ad was better.

Toyota can't make good ads because their cars can't corner. If they tried to make an ad involving twisty roads, the cars would have to drive too slowly or else risk understeering into the next tree. Hence, your "straight line only" ads.

BMW used to make good ads before they switched agencies. I vaguely remember an ad where a guy walks into a BMW dealership, and starts daydreaming about the fun he'd have driving as the ad focuses on the 325i accelerating and driving on twisty roads. Ah, nothing pricks my ears like the sound of an inline 6.;)

What you are missing from your analysis is the drag coefficient and that fact that the car would reach terminal velocity rather than continue accelerating at 9.81 m/s2. I have no idea what the drag coefficient is of a car falling wheels first but I'm guessing the terminal velocity is <75m/s. So while it is possible it isn't all that impressive.

You're right. A car falling wheels first would produce a heck of a lot of drag and would hit its terminal velocity pretty quickly and would not be going particularly fast. I'm guessing it probably wouldn't even hit 100 mph, but that's just my guess.

Just another ad promoting driving that is illegal - I really hate those "closed course, professional driver" ads and those ads with the 4'8" model that make the vehicle seem huge

OMG, I think your thinking a little too hard about the Lexus commercials :rofl:

Yeah I LOVED the new 3 series ad billboards that said "3 Cheers the ALL new 3 is here!"

My All Time Favorite Commercial for a BMW?

The WHOLE reason I bought an X5, the 2003 Commercial for the new 2004 X5 with X-Drive that had the 4 angels on it

I have to say Mercedes does the best commercials, I LOVE the SL500 commercial where it shows the whole history in generations of the SL

Plus, the car on the ground had a running start.

I forgot what that sounds like since I've been without my car since January 12 :(

vacationing?

yeah, i considered the drag factor but didn't think it would be THAT significant an issue here. I know terminal velocity for a person is something around 135 mph ... right? anyway ... hm. i'll check with my buddy who's a phd student at cal tech ... he can straighten this out once and for all :)

this is why i'm a lawyer and not a physicist :D

Yep, they let the ground car hit the start line (release point) at a pre-set velocity. Crazy though, If the heli was 20 ft too low at release. . :yikes:

well in that case, if the laws of physics DID allow the stunt to be performed, i still wonder whether they really did it (in which case, WOW props to that ad agency!!) or whether it was just CG.

well 135mph for a human is a lot more than the car could fall, especially since they have it falling wheels down, it's essentially a falling brick (which is not going to happen, it should fall front end facing the earth because of the mass of the engine), meaning the drag has a huge impact

I think we're starting to catch on.

Not CG, but two separate shots pasted together.

Tricky ad agencies....

and no, not vacationing :(

It has been way too many years since my college physics for me to comment on this.:NOADD: