What car is Tom Sawyer describing in Lost
Discussion
I'm re watching lost because I am a masochist. I've just heard Sawyer reading from an automotive magazine to sooth Claire's baby, and he's reading about a car. But what is it..?
It's a 32v 4.4l supercharged V8 with 400hp and 350lb ft, and a six speed sequential gear box.
The flight was from Australia to USA so probably an Aus magazine, maybe US. It's season 1, which was aired in 2004.
Thoughts??
ETA... James Sawyer FFS, not Tom.
It's a 32v 4.4l supercharged V8 with 400hp and 350lb ft, and a six speed sequential gear box.
The flight was from Australia to USA so probably an Aus magazine, maybe US. It's season 1, which was aired in 2004.
Thoughts??
ETA... James Sawyer FFS, not Tom.
Edited by TheBALDpuma on Wednesday 17th February 21:37
Puggit said:
You've gone through all of Netflix, Amazon, NowTV, Pornhub, AppleTV, Youtube and so you're back at Lost?
Pretty much it, haha.wolfracesonic said:
Volvo B8444S, though that was turbocharged; maybe the engine only exists in the writers imagination?
I thought this but it would have been just as easy for Sawyer to be reading from an actual magazinewolfracesonic said:
Volvo B8444S, though that was turbocharged; maybe the engine only exists in the writers imagination?
I know this is seriously splitting hairs, but aren't turbochargers a type of Supercharger, as in all Turbo cars are supercharged, but not all Supercharged cars have a turbo. Or is it the other way around?Anyway, I'd bet on it just being something the writer came up with. Imported US/Euro cars were still really rare and really expensive in Australia in the early 2000s thanks to their import rules. Lots of Japanese cars, but back then they were all listed at 280PS, nothing of that sort of spec springs to mind, the 3.2 in the NSX was a V6 and N/a, the Supra and GTR were both IL6s.
Anything of that sort of output would have been some kind of Aussie market engine. The Falcon had a 32v Straight 6 Turbo engine, the Commodore would have had a Supercharged 32v V6 with 229bhp or a N/A 5.7l LS1 with 329 up to 2004, from 2004 (the first episode of Lost was released in 2005) they'd just gone over to the VZ commodore with a 6.0 Gen4 L76/LS2, it's a N/A 16v V8
Edited by P-Jay on Thursday 18th February 11:09
P-Jay said:
I know this is seriously splitting hairs, but aren't turbochargers a type of Supercharger, as in all Turbo cars are supercharged, but not all Supercharged cars have a turbo. Or is it the other way around?
No, not the same thing. Turbos use exhaust gases to spin a turbine, which in turn spins another turbine to force more air into the engine. Needs some revs in the engine to get the turbines spinning up, hence turbo lag.
Superchargers do the same thing, drive more air into the engine, but use a mechanical link to the engine (usually a drive belt) to rotate the turbine blades. means no lag but does tend to be less bang for your buck as well.
Piersman2 said:
P-Jay said:
I know this is seriously splitting hairs, but aren't turbochargers a type of Supercharger, as in all Turbo cars are supercharged, but not all Supercharged cars have a turbo. Or is it the other way around?
No, not the same thing. Turbos use exhaust gases to spin a turbine, which in turn spins another turbine to force more air into the engine. Needs some revs in the engine to get the turbines spinning up, hence turbo lag.
Superchargers do the same thing, drive more air into the engine, but use a mechanical link to the engine (usually a drive belt) to rotate the turbine blades. means no lag but does tend to be less bang for your buck as well.
Ah, from wiki "Turbochargers were originally known as turbosuperchargers because all forced induction devices are classified as superchargers. Technically, turbochargers are superchargers, however today, the term "supercharger" is typically applied only to mechanically driven forced induction devices"
InitialDave said:
It could be the Northstar V8 in a Cadillac STS, but the supercharged ones made a good chunk more than 400bhp?
This fits in terms of engine size, supercharging and period.As it's a car magazine, it could easily have been a concept car or 'preview' type article describing what was in a press release etc.
Also, the Aussies are properly metric, using KW for power, and Nm for torque, so unlikely to be an Aussie magazine he's reading out giving imperial figures. However, reading an Aussie mag they'd have feasilby done a very rough conversion to American units for the sake of not confusing their audience talking about Kilowatts and Newton metres, at which point the conveniently round numbers of 400 / 350 make more sense...
ThrottleLine30 said:
Really enjoyed Lost. One of my favourites. Must be in the Minority with that one!
The problem I think is EVERYONE loved it at first, but for me at least after a few series there was a terrible moment of stark realisation that it was all bulls
t. I was happily watching and out of no where, the words "THIS IS BULLst" came shouting out of my mouth, I had to check with my House Mate at the time that I'd said it and not him. It seemed my subconscious, desperate to save me, had completely bypassed my inner monologue and even the conscious part of my brain to tell me. I've never known anything with such utter conviction before or since, it was as fundamental to me as the colour of the sky. Every episode only served to provide a cliff-hanger for the next. That was the entire point of it, it wasn't entertainment, it was addiction. I started every episode desperate to cure myself of the withdrawal symptoms caused by the ending of the last. For years, as the series carried on, I'd occasionally get the FOMO and I'd pick it up again, but the spell was broken, once I'd learned the cliff hangers were empty promises, it was just a boring soap opera like TV show with the odd Polar Bear thrown into the mix.
I was finally cured when I read a piece in one of the papers, the makers admitted two things, 1) The writers didn't have an ending ready when they started it, and 3 (of 6) series in, they still didn't. They were trying to reassure readers there was plenty of Lost left, but to me It was obvious at that point there was never going to be an amazing revelation at the end that explained all the strange things that had happened, it was ALWAYS going to end Bobby Ewing style. 2) Something I'd long suspected. They cheated with the cliff hangers. For example, when an episode would end, a character might be standing on a precarious ledge, in the last vital second they'd start to fall, when the next episode started they'd still be stood on the ledge but they wouldn't fall, they just cut that second like it never happened.
When it finally ended, and everyone who'd stuck with it hated it and felt cheated, I felt vindicated, when I actually read how it ended I was appalled how little effort that put into it.
Lost was amazing, until it wasn't.
Early on when everything was mysterious and you're getting little tidbits of info about the Others, Dharma etc, it keeps you hooked.
Then they brought in time travel and it all got ridiculous, and as mentioned above - they never had an ending planned so just kept throwing in more st as it progressed, before finally saying "yeah that whole purgatory thing that lots of people theorised and we denied countless times? well we're out of ideas so it may as well be true. the end."
Early on when everything was mysterious and you're getting little tidbits of info about the Others, Dharma etc, it keeps you hooked.
Then they brought in time travel and it all got ridiculous, and as mentioned above - they never had an ending planned so just kept throwing in more s
t as it progressed, before finally saying "yeah that whole purgatory thing that lots of people theorised and we denied countless times? well we're out of ideas so it may as well be true. the end."Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff