Comments on: Episode 117: YouTube Special

By: dora

dora — Sun, 15 Aug 2010 21:33:00 +0000

I’m wondering, in the episode about a spinning tire ignighting into flames. Busted. To begin with, isn’t there a safety feature built into tires now days that keeps the tires from running hot enough to ignight, even with an added accelerant such as gasoline or sparks? So, would this be a “confirmed” if you used older tires, if you could find some prior to when the safety features were added? Also, isn’t using gasoline, the flamant being the vapors rather than the liquid portion of the fuel? So, then if the vapors were to be introduced, rather than the liquid, would that make a difference?

And, in the second try, when Jamie doned a SCBA, it was refered to as “Oxygen mask” Well, it’s realy not Oxygen, think about it, would you take an oxygen tank, straped to your back into a burning building? I think not, as oxygen, although it’s not flamable, is an accelerant. Thus, SCBA tanks hold “breathable air.” The general public is smart enough to know what you are talking about when you refer to an SCBA tank as an SCBA tank with face mask.

Wich brings me to a quest. Have you done an experiment with an Oxygen tank? If the regulator were to be broken off, or the tank fall striking the regulator, how much of a crator would a D tank make vs a K tank for example. And is the PSI to make a crator just as effective filled with oxygen vs empty. And how much force of a hit would the regulator need to blow? And will it make a crator, or will the oxygen tank become a projectile? If it becomes a projectile, will the direction be predictable, going in staight line in position of how the tank is aimed, or will it be helterskelter in the blow pattern? And if it becomes a projectile vs making a crator, how deep of a trail would it make as it’s projecting? And how far will it project?

By: dazza

dazza — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 11:25:46 +0000

omg burnout fires happen all the time in australian burntout comps the reason why they couldnt do it cuz the cars that do it in aus are full on drag cars with 1000+hp and run on methanol add to the fact that the exhaust dont usually run past the diff so extra methanol runs through the exhaust and gets heated

By: Tina

Tina — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 20:15:57 +0000

about the legos. C’mon, check out the youtube video, IT’S ALL A LIE!!!! Seriously, the middle of the day and not a single car wants to drive down that obviously large street in the middle of San Fransisco? People, use common sense and see the facts that are there. And yes, like Adam pointed out above, there are 2 different totals of the amount of legos, and the fact of the noise. Use your heads, don’t be so stinking gullible over something so OBVIOUSLY fake, that is featured on, of all places, Youtube!!!!

By: c.jones

c.jones — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 01:25:40 +0000

you can use a playing card as a throwing star ihope you pick mine

By: yankyourchain

yankyourchain — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 20:29:20 +0000

Link to tire burnout flame: http://www.epicfail.com/2010/02/21/burnout-fail-3/
cause unknown, but seems unintended

By: Dray

Dray — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 03:21:20 +0000

HR, no wonder you stopped at oxygen, it takes four things to make fire, O2, heat, fuel, and an ignition source.

By: Adam

Adam — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 09:22:36 +0000

Dragonfyre, if you watch the Youtube video closely, the guy at the beginning clearly states that it took about 1 million bricks. Even though the very end of the video does say 5 million in bright font, I would be more willing to believe the guy speaking in the video. He most likely would have been involved in the construction and also, it’s easier to remember something like that when it’s fresh in your mind. Keep in mind that the video may have been put together awhile after the film was shot.

By: Adam

Adam — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 09:14:08 +0000

HR, the problem with lots of oxygen when you’re trying to start a fire is that the oxygen can cool the fuel to the fire if it is moving to quickly or if there is just way too much of it. In this case it wasn’t a case of too much but the fact that the turbulence of the tire cutting through the air was blowing over the fuel (ie: the rubber of the tire and the later added gasoline) and simply making the environment too cold to ignite. Keep in mind that the ignition point of rubber is a lot higher than most typical fuels used to create fire. In this respect I’d say they were right to BUST that myth.

By: Adam

Adam — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 09:08:03 +0000

Judging from the televised footage you guys did not glue your ball or interlock the pieces. The other thing I noticed watching the Youtube video is that the ball was probably hollow. I base this theory on the sound the ball is making rolling down the hill. A hollow ball would definitely be easier to roll and do less (although probably some damage to a car) while also being less likely to break apart due to the reduced weight crashing into the earth which would impart the same force back upon the ball each time it smashed. Granted, super glue or its competitors are not as strong as people think I would say that gluing would definitely add stability to the overall structure. I would greatly like to see you revisit this “myth”.

By: Nate

Nate — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 22:05:46 +0000

They were testing the myth that a cars tire can light only from friction with the road. Tires obviously burn of you introduce the heat from the brakes but that wasnt the myth.