AZ Nomad <aznomad.3@PremoveOBthisOX.COM> wrote in
news:slrnh33f66.hbn.aznomad.3@ip70-176-155-130.ph.ph.cox.net:

> On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 01:20:49 +0000 (UTC), fred <fred@bedrock.rock>
> wrote:
>>ACAR <gmwohl@gmail.com> wrote in
>>news:fad86742-a6df-4074-8389-5e6b31d66bb8@w3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com:
>
>>> On Jun 8, 10:30?pm, jim beam <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> eh? ?then they must be total freds.
>>>
>>> well, in fact they are.
>>>
>>>> ?crv beats the sienna on handling any day.
>>>
>>> define "better handling" for family oriented vehicles.
>>>
>>maximum lateral G without tiping over, same as anything.
>
> That a really crappy definition.

Nope. It's the classic race car definition of the term.

> I car that is really really grippy,

???

> but impossible to control will qualify by your definition as having
> great handling.

Impossible to control at high speed and *very* fast turns you mean by
definition. Entirely dependent on the driver.

>
>
> Great handling means remaining in control and being able to precisely
> control the car even during agressive maneuvering.

Again control depends of the ability (or lack thereof) of the driver.

> The car shouldn't
> roll excesively, it should go where you would expect it to,
> and it should remain predictable during hard braking or acceleration.

Those are only factors that determine lateral G, hence are redundant.
Acceleration (postive and negative) in the direction of movement are
completely beside the point. Lateral G is commonly measured most accurately
on a skid pad in a constant radius turn while *slowly* gaining speed.