RE: Don't demonise the Carrera GT: PH Blog

[Chris71]

Consider the income bracket we're talking about here. If you think the idea of someone owning a 250mph hypercar is scary, just imagine what happens when they step into their Learjet.

[LukeR94]

[redacted]

[smokes]

Firstly I think everybody has missed the point of the crash, we don't know if the accident killed the occupants of if was the the fire.

With regards to the accident, along as the occupants survival cell did not suffer any intrusion the occupants may have had a chance of surviving.

The bigger question is why did the car catch fire? It is very unusal for the fuel tank to explode of catch fire in modern cars. It is usally parts of the car that too close to the exhaust that start the fire. Also this car would have had a race spec kevlar fuel tank designed to stop the fuel leaking upon a large impact.

These kevlar tanks need to be replaced every 3 years or so this tank may not have been replaced thus causing the fire.

[carinaman]

Sorry smokes, you may want to read this:

http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/debunking-misinfo...

It's not unusual for vehicles to catch fire after they've been involved in an accident.

Vehicles can catch fire even when they're not in accidents:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/mar/27/6

Some even catch fire when they've been left out alnight in the rain:

http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyI...

Edited by carinaman on Wednesday 11th December 18:23

[Gary C]

Bloody hell, that link suggests that the CGT was travelling at 40-45 mph !

No way.

[mollytherocker]

carinaman said:

Accidents invariably have multiple contributory factors.

Nearly always three factors. Its well researched.

In my job I often do accident investigations and theres usually 3 factors!

[smokes]

carinaman said:

Sorry smokes, you may want to read this:

http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/debunking-misinfo...

It's not unusual for vehicles to catch fire after they've been involved in an accident.

Vehicles can catch fire even when they're not in accidents:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/mar/27/6

Some even catch fire when they've been left out alnight in the rain:

http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyI...

Edited by carinaman on Wednesday 11th December 18:23

You misread what I posted and none of those mentioned the fuel as being the source of ignition.
Looking at the fire ball from the accident it looks like the fuel in fuel was the main source of the fire, ussaully it is a hot part of the car igniting some plastic or heat shielding the car burns first then the fuel in the tank. it give enough time for the pasenger to escape or extingush the fire.

[Gary C]

But there is no way they were driving at ~45 mph. At that speed, then factor in speed lost in the slide and any braking that would make the impact 30 max ?

Think someone is telling porkies.

[Clivey]

Mr.Harris, I agree with everything you wrote, except the GPS limiter idea. The buck has to stop with the driver in the same way that you're allowed to possess "dangerous" objects such as power tools and sharp knives but you're the one responsible if you injure / kill someone with them.

[SteveUKidiot]

Chris Harris , is by far best journo on cars, always a good balanced opinion, and just love the sideways stuff. EVO mag downhill since he left ...

[Emeye]

Rich A said:

PH Blog said:

Modern cars are GPS equipped and have clever ECUs. Why can't they be restricted in urban areas - not totally neutered, but allowed to deliver just enough drama to satisfy the owner, but not enough to cause a shunt?

Are you really suggesting electronically limited performance based on GPS location? That's not a policy I would advocate.
edit: formatting

Not read the whole thread, but that quote seemed a very silly addition to the blog, almost a pander to the Daily Mail, and goes against Chris' own argument that people should be trusted to make their own silly mistakes and it is not the car's stunning performance that causes crashes. If that technology was in place on a supercar, the next step would be to restrict the car to the speed limit wherever you were!

[Clivey]

Emeye said:

Not read the whole thread, but that quote seemed a very silly addition to the blog, almost a pander to the Daily Mail, and goes against Chris' own argument that people should be trusted to make their own silly mistakes and it is not the car's stunning performance that causes crashes. If that technology was in place on a supercar, the next step would be to restrict the car to the speed limit wherever you were!

I've already seen calls for supercars to be factory-fitted with non-switchable ESP.

On a vaguely related point, I do find myself questioning why manufacturers are increasingly building more and more extreme road cars that, because they're built to chase numbers rather than just to provide an enjoyable driving experience, have to be driven dangerously or impossibly fast to enjoy or use anywhere near their potential on a public road...yet because of the compromises made to make them road cars, they're not as fast on track as they would otherwise be.

Of course; we all know the reason: Pretentiousness. Buyers want to be seen to have the "ultimate", even if they lack the skills to actually use the cars properly and will instead spend the majority of their time posing in them. I mean, how many owners have maxed-out a Veyron or will match the Nurburgring lap times set by the new 918, LaFerrari or P1? I think I'd rather have a road car that's built with the primary aim of being enjoyable to drive, rather than just to set records or to play automotive "top trumps".

[carinaman]

I'd agree with comments dismissing the GPS urban speed limiting interlock suggestion. Doesn't the Nissan GTR R35 have such a feature? Didn't Clarkson mention it when he tested one in Japan and his neck went? The GPS allowed full power as it showed the car was on a track and not the road?

Saying GPS should limit cars in built up areas is just asking for the EU Legislators and BRAKE! to say that all cars should be restricted unless like the R35 the GPS says they're about to bounce off of the Armco at Castle Combe?