• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Reported Paul Walker of Fast and Furios fame dead at 40.

joko104 said:
Look at the picture of the damage, that car shouldn't have caught on fire and burned. Porsche may have a lawsuit on it's hands.

Such supercars - which they are REALLY rolling out in increasing now - are VERY limited production and DO NOT go thru required crash testing. Their production numbers are too low to be required - and why most only make nor more than 499 per year of any particular model. The total production of what I have was only 194 worldwide total all of the 3 years it was made - averaging less than 100 per year. So the model went thru no government crash or safety testing and standards.

They don't crash 10 top-line Ferraris to test for USA Federal standards, nor Porsche GTs. Likelihood of catching on fire in an accident is one testing standard. The Porsche GT wouldn't have had to meet it. Had those two been in a Camry or Chevy Impala in that same accident they'd likely have just walked away from it. These supercars are a mixed bag. It probably could have handled a blowout at 170 mph, but this particularly scenario leading to a fire was not anticipated or designed to avoid. These are all semi-hand custom cars, not assembly line cars.
Click to expand...
The angle of a crash determines a lot of that too. It's all about the fuel rail in these types of crashes, if the impact was "just right" it wouldn't have mattered what the make/model/ or crash speed was. Even in safety testing, as low as 25MPH has been proven to be lethal impact at certain points of distress.
 
LaMidRighter said:
I get where you are going with it, but any catastrophic failure can happen on any machine, you just hope it doesn't happen at a critical time. We don't know what happened here yet, but it will come out I'm sure in the next couple of months. I warned people against that new "super Nissan" that came out which had even more tech than other supercars that drivers get "too used to" having the car do the work and once stuff fails it's too late to learn.
Click to expand...

I get what you are saying. These low production ubber performance cars are a double edged sword. They do allow a 100% maximum the car can do more than other cars. The computers allow you to do what no other cars can do and that's great. But even without mechanical or electronic failure, if you take that car past that absolute ability level, you will lose the car far worse than other cars - and at a much higher speed. Mechanical/computer/electric failure also would be a disastrous too.

The car I have had all limiters removed and SERIOUS power upgrading the obviously super rich first owner. The car has the capability to go 224 miles per hour. Worthless in any usage sense, but impressive. However, the car being capable of doing 224 mph doesn't mean the tires can do 224 mph. I'm sure than can't. They've been on it too long nor are rated for it. So, really, how fast it can go is as fast as it's going - immediately before I died.

A trivia fact? The tires on the $2 million dollar Bugatti Veyron cost $70,000 dollars to replace, and they MUST be replaced every 2rd high speed run - and they recommend only 1. You can't even go for 250 mph unless the computer has been told the tires are fresh. Before you can take the car to just over 200 mph, you have to completely stop the car, change the mode it's in, and then the computers will do a diagnosis of the car, DROP it's rear air foil, drop the car down and ONLY then will the car decide it will even allow you to try to go that fast.

Personally, for performance fun driving, I preferred the lesser, ordinary cars. They're are fun without the radical g forces, intensity, and fear factors. Plus you don't get to as fast as you dare go without risking a ticket that would destroy you - in about 6 seconds from a standing stop. What I have will get to 60 in just a tad over 3 seconds, and that is limited due to tire hook up problems from a start. It will hit 100 in just over 6 seconds. Insane. Unusable. Unpleasant. An old sports car with a manual tranny straining thru the gears is more fun, though less than half as fast. I always thought I'd love the performance of a super car. Candidly, I don't.

I really would like to know what all they find in the accident, but doubt those details will be published. I bet Porsche is going to crawl all over that car. Whether this will help or hurt Porsche sales is up in the air. It could make that model desirable as a collectable, like Porsche speedsters the same as James Dean was driving can be worth millions. Or it could make them seem like lemons.
 
Last edited:
LaMidRighter said:
The angle of a crash determines a lot of that too. It's all about the fuel rail in these types of crashes, if the impact was "just right" it wouldn't have mattered what the make/model/ or crash speed was. Even in safety testing, as low as 25MPH has been proven to be lethal impact at certain points of distress.
Click to expand...

Yes, however also suggests more. The fuel SHOULD have been instantly shut off in an accident with that level of impact. Then again we don't know how long they were in the car before help arrived. These super cars cut safety corners, something Mecedes is bitching about and struggling with - because they don't. BUT this makes even their super cars MUCH heavier. That Porsche GT was half a ton lighter than Mercedes SL65 Black series and many hundreds of pounds lighter than the McLaren.

Except for the 928 and the other front engine Porsches, I've always felt rear engine Porsches are dangerous, including their tendency to understeer into a corner and oversteer out of it. But that just personal opinion. A rear/mid engine car does not need the center section rigidity of a front engine car (which has to deal with frame torque twisting a rear engine doesn't have to.) This tends to make rear/mid engined cars far more damaged in a side impact. There's not as much structure. Structure that would protect occupants. And fuel lines. The fuel line on my MB runs up the center of the car, with the driveshaft "looped".And it's steel braided - all factory done. A side impact would have to reach thru half way thru the center chassis, which has an internal carbon steel boxed roll cage.

Porsches, more than any major manufacturer of super cars, tends to take a go-fast at any cost approach. Some Lambos are that way. Ferrari has always been fairly safety conscious. I saw an Ferrari Enzo that side impacted and it literally broke in half - completely. But the passenger compartment fully intact as a break-away safety box so-to-speak.
 
Bodhisattva said:
No. I will stay. Thanks... he was in that movie with Jessica Alba in her bikini all movie... Into the Deep. That one was cool . The F&F were stupid beyond belief. If people don't like my deuce and a half, thank you very much, then don't post on the world wide web.
Click to expand...

Each F&F plot was more absurd than the next, though I enjoyed the early ones. They just became too extreme - and too much into video graphics.
 
joko104 said:
Look at the picture of the damage, that car shouldn't have caught on fire and burned.

Had those two been in a Camry or Chevy Impala in that same accident they'd likely have just walked away from it
Click to expand...
:lamo

rs_560x415-131201080811-1024.Paul-Walker-Car-Accident-Scene.jl.120113_copy.jpg
 
Summerwind said:
I'll never have sympathy or give **** at all about people who wrap themselves around poles or trees or whatnot. You have to really be driving recklessly to do that and I've got no patience for folks putting others in potential danger. Thank goodness they didn't hurt any innocent bystanders.
Click to expand...
What a kind and loving person you are.
 
joko104 said:
Yes, however also suggests more. The fuel SHOULD have been instantly shut off in an accident with that level of impact. Then again we don't know how long they were in the car before help arrived. These super cars cut safety corners, something Mecedes is bitching about and struggling with - because they don't. BUT this makes even their super cars MUCH heavier. That Porsche GT was half a ton lighter than Mercedes SL65 Black series and many hundreds of pounds lighter than the McLaren.

Except for the 928 and the other front engine Porsches, I've always felt rear engine Porsches are dangerous, including their tendency to understeer into a corner and oversteer out of it. But that just personal opinion. A rear/mid engine car does not need the center section rigidity of a front engine car (which has to deal with frame torque twisting a rear engine doesn't have to.) This tends to make rear/mid engined cars far more damaged in a side impact. There's not as much structure. Structure that would protect occupants. And fuel lines. The fuel line on my MB runs up the center of the car, with the driveshaft "looped".And it's steel braided - all factory done. A side impact would have to reach thru half way thru the center chassis, which has an internal carbon steel boxed roll cage.

Porsches, more than any major manufacturer of super cars, tends to take a go-fast at any cost approach. Some Lambos are that way. Ferrari has always been fairly safety conscious. I saw an Ferrari Enzo that side impacted and it literally broke in half - completely. But the passenger compartment fully intact as a break-away safety box so-to-speak.
Click to expand...
Yep, noticed that about Porsche as well. Even the much cheaper Vettes are safer by today's standards, of course the Corvette needed a boost in PR after years of being known as a rolling coffin because of the fiberglass chassis with little safety gear.
 
This thread is sickening. Some of the things I see idiots posting is absolutely asinine. A guy dies, leaves a daughter without a father, and the immediate response is partisanship or the always popular "well, it was his fault" lines. Get a friggin grip. If we are following the "it was his fault" line of reasoning, pretty much every death in the world could lead back to that.
 
DiAnna said:
Judgmental aren't you? Of course, nobody has any inside information on what may have caused the accident... the drive-shaft could have snapped for all we know... or even who was driving. That doesn't seem to matter to you. If someone died in a car accident, he freakin' well deserved it, eh? That will be great comfort for all the relatives of the 34,000+ people who died in traffic accidents last year alone. They deserved it, according to you.

You just lost more than a few credibility points around here.
Click to expand...

Where did she say he deserved it?
 
I don't see why some pretty boy Hollywood star dying in a car wreck gets so much attention. In the last week we have had 3 deaths around here from icy roads. Who cares though, they were just ordinary people.:roll:
 
joko104 said:
The photo I saw was quite different.
Click to expand...

Same here. The surroundings of that photo are nothing like the surroundings of the accident photo that was put out there yesterday.
 
I can't say that I am a fan of his acting.


But the following is something I admire.
[...]

Walker's generosity

Tales of the actor's philanthropy are not new. CNN confirmed one story from a decade ago when Walker noticed a young U.S. military veteran shopping with his fiance for a wedding ring in a Santa Barbara jewelry store.

"The groom was just back from duty in Iraq, and he was going to be deployed again soon and wanted to buy a wedding ring, but he said he just could not afford it," saleswoman Irene King told CNN. "I don't think the soldier realized how expensive those rings are, about $10,000."

Although Walker noticed them, the couple apparently did not know who he was, King said.

"Walker called the manager over and said, 'Put that girl's ring on my tab,' " she said. "Walker left all his billing info, and it was a done deal. The couple was stunned. She was thrilled and could not believe someone did this."

King called it "the most generous thing I have ever seen."

[...]

'Fast & Furious' star Paul Walker killed in car crash - CNN.com​
 
People react to an actor's death because they see them on TV, movies. They know "That guy was living the good life, and now he's dead that's soooo tragic!"
People react less so to hearing that "Several Navy Airmen were killed today during routing training operations off the coast of North Carolina..." because they are nameless, faceless people.

It's just human nature, you try to relate to the actors characters, they become not friends, but part of your world in a way, and then they die. Understand the human animal and it makes sense.
 
Summerwind said:
Well you can blame my abusive Lt.Col Marine father for my lack of heart, Mr.MarineTpartier. Bless your heart.
Click to expand...
Yep, it's always someone else's fault......
 
joko104 said:
The KILL appears by the fire, and a steel bodied car would not so much buckle in the center. That Porsche GT was mostly plastic (composite/graphite) and aluminum.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

Body construction was carbon fiber.

This is not 'plastic'.

'Plastic' is not used in automotive frame / body construction.
 
joko104 said:
That's not true. There is plenty going on that topic. Go look at the military board.
Click to expand...

Not in breaking news. I guess celebrity deaths are more important.

I looked in military board, and couldnt find anything posted in such shock as this actor dieing. Alex Viola, for example, killed last week by a bomb, in Afghanistan, sent there to protect Paul Walkers freedom to race cars. Where is his week long media spots and celebrity rememberance tweets from Vin Diesel?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom