• 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.

There are little custom car shows nearly every weekend here. The old guys finally having the time and money to make their perfect hotrod. Some are 1920s to 1940s classics with hotrod V8s. Some are fully restore 1960s and early 90s' muscle cars. They do their cars to pristine, show car condition. They're plenty cool, though I wouldn't personally want one to drive.

What always strikes me is how SIMPLE classic cars are under the hood. There's the carb. Screw on air filter. Coil. Spark plug wires. Radiator hose. Alternator and belt. Exhaust manifold or headers. AND THAT'S ALL THERE IS! A simple motor anyone could work on.

If I take off the motor cover on the MB, there is so many solinoids, little boxes, wires and hoses everywhere, leading to sensors everywhere - and many of those are leading all over the car to the brakes, shocks, transmission, wheels, exhaust, turbos, wastegates, radiator, intercoolers, G-force sensors, even external tire rotation and ground travel sensors, even doors, windows, door locks - all interfaced - that there's no reason to ever take off the engine cover because there is nothing I can roadside or garage determine and fix. And it's state of the art for '05 - approaching a decade old. I can just imagine what the 2015s will be like in technology and complexity.

I know the same model for 2013 has over 100 interfaced computers. Over 100 computers?!
 
Last edited:
The new direction for ubber performance cars, which now go WAY into 6 figures, is to include reading the road and surroundings, using radar, lasers, road map history, your driving route history and GPS - so when you approach a corner the car knows the corner before you ever come to it - for which it adjusts the suspension, motor, transmission and braking - so you could come into it at almost any speed and computers will take it around the corner as fast as they calculate it can safely go - adjusting and using the brakes, transmission, suspension, even steering and throttle millisecond to millisecond. You're almost just along for the ride almost like a passenger.

What is in 6 figure cars this year will be in 90% of ordinary new cars probably within 3-5 years.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Crude? Yea, sure pal. What you got? I got money I can out run it.
Click to expand...

"Outrun it" by what measure? Mine will do 224 mph. And that's not a pretend 224. Your's?
 
joko104 said:
There are little custom car shows nearly every weekend here. The old guys finally having the time and money to make their perfect hotrod. Some are 1920s to 1940s classics with hotrod V8s. Some are fully restore 1960s and early 90s' muscle cars. They do their cars to pristine, show car condition. They're plenty cool, though I wouldn't personally want one to drive.

What always strikes me is how SIMPLE classic cars are under the hood. There's the carb. Screw on air filter. Coil. Spark plug wires. Radiator hose. Alternator and belt. Exhaust manifold or headers. AND THAT'S ALL THERE IS! A simple motor anyone could work on.

If I take off the motor cover on the MB, there is so many solinoids, little boxes, wires and hoses everywhere, leading to sensors everywhere - and many of those are leading all over the car to the brakes, shocks, transmission, wheels, exhaust, turbos, wastegates, radiator, intercoolers, G-force sensors, even external tire rotation and ground travel sensors, even doors, windows, door locks - all interfaced - that there's no reason to ever take off the engine cover because there is nothing I can roadside or garage determine and fix. And it's state of the art for '05 - approaching a decade old. I can just imagine what the 2015s will be like in technology and complexity.

I know the same model for 2013 has over 100 interfaced computers. Over 100 computers?!
Click to expand...

That is not a good thing, that is a bad thing.
 
Helix said:
if you really want to drool, check out this 1953 Jaguar XK120 :

View attachment 67158474

broke a speed record at 172 MPH. plus, i mean, just look at it.
Click to expand...

THAT is a GORGEOUS CAR!

The Jag XK120, XK140 and XK150 were definitely watershed cars, considering this was in the 1950s. The number indicated their top speed and those were unheard of that era, particularly in the Jaguar price range.

That's what I mean in cars that are FUN to drive. For road work you HAD to work the motor, the clutch, motor brake, and you felt like you were FLYING, without having to be going 150 to do it. Jaguar was THE car to beat even in the USA for many years.

I bought a used 2005 XKR hardtop coupe (a supercharged XKE 4.5 V8) about 3 years ago. Dark Green. Optional wheels. VERY Beautiful. A real head turner eye candy. And got rid of it within 6 months. Absolutely useless back seat there only to meet some EU standard. So restricted on computer controls it couldn't be modified. Before it, I had a Jaguar XKS coupe with a custom front bumper setup, Corvette yellow, someone had dropped a 450 hp BIG block chevy into. Very pro-done. It wasn't really that fast nor handled well, but sounded good and turned heads. It had been parked almost 4 years and I sold it cheap just a few months ago to just get rid of it.

The classic XKEs - with the straight 6 - are a real thrill to drive. Extraordinary sound. You FEEL the road and almost like you become 1 with the car - a mechanical extension of yourself, and the one-of-a-kind British "personality" each of their true sports cars had. You sit so low you feel like you're really flying.

The British sports cars of the 50s and 60s is an era never to be repeated, a very special one, just like the American muscle car era that lasted only about 8-9 years was a special time in history never to be repeated. For a "classic," I'd pick such as above (as if I could afford one!) over an American muscle car - other than muscle car would be more affordable to work on.

No one makes a car to match the aesthetic - from visual to physical senses (sight, sound, feel) of those 1950 and early 60s sports cars. "Driving by the seat of your pants" aesthetics.
 
Helix said:
it's performance car talk. given that the actor was very much into that kind of stuff, it's relevant.
Click to expand...

Speaking of which . . .

It was already well known that the Porsche Carrera GT was a very twitchy, very high performance car that was difficult to manage properly, even by professional race car drivers.

It was originally built for homologation for a racing class that was cancelled before the car was done, so Porsche, in it's infinite wisdom, made it into a road going car, and decided to sell it to the general public, without, unfortunately, stability management software, which is should have had given it's troublesome behavior.
 
Mason66 said:
That is not a good thing, that is a bad thing.
Click to expand...

Computers are always a love-hate thing. LOVE what they can do. HATE how they can screw up and fail. Who would give up their computer? Who hasn't cursed their computer?
 
joko104 said:
Computers are always a love-hate thing. LOVE what they can do. HATE how they can screw up and fail. Who would give up their computer? Who hasn't cursed their computer?
Click to expand...

Computers in cars are a life or death thing.

Since they control everything, you really have no say in what they do and the older they get, the more dangerous they are.

Let's say, for example, a car lived around the beach. How much damage will the salty air do to the internals of the computer?
 
eohrnberger said:
Speaking of which . . .

It was already well known that the Porsche Carrera GT was a very twitchy, very high performance car that was difficult to manage properly, even by professional race car drivers.

It was originally built for homologation for a racing class that was cancelled before the car was done, so Porsche, in it's infinite wisdom, made it into a road going car, and decided to sell it to the general public, without, unfortunately, stability management software, which is should have had given it's troublesome behavior.
Click to expand...


That is the review of it I saw too. It was a collectable due to being rare, and a showing of "LOOK AT ME! I GOT MONEY!!"

2005 was a cutting edge year for what are called "hyper" performance cars - and some hyper performance cars were past the edge into the new technology, and some were not (such as "traction control" or as you put it "stability management." "Stability management" not only manages the suspension, but even operates the brakes, motor and transmission. The Carrera GT didn't have it. But it DID have engine management, which he probably had "re-chipped/reprogrammed" to remove torque limitations. That, combined with not having the corresponding stability control interfaced to it, is a deadly shorting.

The other problem is even skilled race car drivers (as that driver was), were not familiar with the new computer management systems. Because the Carrera GT DID have engine management but did NOT have traction/stability control, it would almost impossible for any driver to know where it's safe maximum operation in cornering is. I wrote quite a bit on another thread how that could get someone into trouble real quick, as I have an '05 German hyper performance car and twice I've punched it when not on a straight line and it instantly went sideways. Fortunately I wasn't going that fast, wasn't trying to corner, was on 4 lanes and no one around me.

The Carrera GT isn't worth anywhere near what it costs - then or now. Nor THAT rare, but it is a Porsche and there are Porsche fanatics that will pay ANYTHING to have the model they want for the prestige of it. The earliest Porsches aren't all THAT rare and are little more than souped up VWs, but people will pay into 6 figures to have one for the prestige. So many people want that it runs the price thru the ceiling. Even 1980s 911s now bring top dollar - and they weren't that cool - while for a fraction of the $$ a person could buy a Porsche 928 that'd blow the 80s 911s away (except maybe the top turbo models).
 
Last edited:
Mason66 said:
Computers in cars are a life or death thing.

Since they control everything, you really have no say in what they do and the older they get, the more dangerous they are.

Let's say, for example, a car lived around the beach. How much damage will the salty air do to the internals of the computer?
Click to expand...

True, and they assure the cars are "throw away" cars. Porsche 928s were truly fabulous and costly cars. They still are very respectable in terms of performance. BUT they were early crude computer cars and their electrical/electronics systems as they age make it so they are constant problems. I had 2 that I bought used for cheap. WONDERFULLY excellent handling for a GT 2+2 and plenty quick with the manual tranny. But something was ALWAYS wrong with them electronically or electrically. A REAL pain in the ass. More than once I was in the garage of a 928 expert tracking down some electrical/electronic issue. Finally I said "to hell with this! I want a car to drive, not to fix." They became known as "trailer babies." (taking them to be fixed) - though their drive train was good for 300,000 miles.

For cars made today, when their computers die the car will die with it, the way for older cars when you blew the motor or tranny it wasn't worth fixing.
A flooded car now is always totaled and given a salvage title for the reason you gave. Because the computers now also are safety related, they are never considered safe again.

BUT the computers give levels of performance and safety that could not exist without them. So the love-hate thing.
 
Last edited:
joko104 said:
That is the review of it I saw too. It was a collectable due to being rare, and a showing of "LOOK AT ME! I GOT MONEY!!"

2005 was a cutting edge year for what are called "hyper" performance cars - and some hyper performance cars were past the edge into the new technology, and some were not (such as "traction control" or as you put it "stability management." "Stability management" not only manages the suspension, but even operates the brakes, motor and transmission. The Carrera GT didn't have it. But it DID have engine management, which he probably had "re-chipped/reprogrammed" to remove torque limitations. That, combined with not having the corresponding stability control interfaced to it, is a deadly shorting.

The other problem is even skilled race car drivers (as that driver was), were not familiar with the new computer management systems. Because the Carrera GT DID have engine management but did NOT have traction/stability control, it would almost impossible for any driver to know where it's safe maximum operation in cornering is. I wrote quite a bit on another thread how that could get someone into trouble real quick, as I have an '05 German hyper performance car and twice I've punched it when not on a straight line and it instantly went sideways. Fortunately I wasn't going that fast, wasn't trying to corner, was on 4 lanes and no one around me.

The car isn't anywhere near what it costs - then or now. Nor THAT rare, but it is a Porsche and there are Porsche fanatics that will pay ANYTHING to have the model they want for the prestige of it. The earliest Porsches aren't all THAT rare and are little more than souped up VWs, but people will pay into 60 figures to have one for the prestige. So many people want that it runs the price thru the ceiling. Even 1980s 911s now bring top dollar - and they weren't that cool - while for a fraction of the $$ a person could buy a Porsche 928 that'd blow the 80s 911s away (except maybe the top turbo models).
Click to expand...

All in all I agree with this. I'll admit that I don't know the GT's evolution details such as what you are sighting, but given that V10 race motor bomb in the middle, it's not hard to see where given a good throttle romp, it'd easily put the carbon fiber car sideways and way out of control of mere mortals.

To drive a car fast on a circuit, you really don't want traction overwhelming power output. That's why turbos are more difficult on the track, and why most racers are normally aspirated (guess what, the GT is NA).

An NA engine has a far more linear and far more predictable power output curve, where turbos and superchargers, especially the aftermarket bolt on type with limited tuning, typically have an output 'lunge', which upsets the stability of the car, especially when driven at the limit. One power output lunge at the wrong moment, say mid corner, and you're off the track. Not where you want to be.
 
joko104 said:
THAT is a GORGEOUS CAR!

The Jag XK120, XK140 and XK150 were definitely watershed cars, considering this was in the 1950s. The number indicated their top speed and those were unheard of that era, particularly in the Jaguar price range.

That's what I mean in cars that are FUN to drive. For road work you HAD to work the motor, the clutch, motor brake, and you felt like you were FLYING, without having to be going 150 to do it. Jaguar was THE car to beat even in the USA for many years.

I bought a used 2005 XKR hardtop coupe (a supercharged XKE 4.5 V8) about 3 years ago. Dark Green. Optional wheels. VERY Beautiful. A real head turner eye candy. And got rid of it within 6 months. Absolutely useless back seat there only to meet some EU standard. So restricted on computer controls it couldn't be modified. Before it, I had a Jaguar XKS coupe with a custom front bumper setup, Corvette yellow, someone had dropped a 450 hp BIG block chevy into. Very pro-done. It wasn't really that fast nor handled well, but sounded good and turned heads. It had been parked almost 4 years and I sold it cheap just a few months ago to just get rid of it.

The classic XKEs - with the straight 6 - are a real thrill to drive. Extraordinary sound. You FEEL the road and almost like you become 1 with the car - a mechanical extension of yourself, and the one-of-a-kind British "personality" each of their true sports cars had. You sit so low you feel like you're really flying.

The British sports cars of the 50s and 60s is an era never to be repeated, a very special one, just like the American muscle car era that lasted only about 8-9 years was a special time in history never to be repeated. For a "classic," I'd pick such as above (as if I could afford one!) over an American muscle car - other than muscle car would be more affordable to work on.

No one makes a car to match the aesthetic - from visual to physical senses (sight, sound, feel) of those 1950 and early 60s sports cars. "Driving by the seat of your pants" aesthetics.
Click to expand...

I'd love to have one of those old XKEs. The more toggle switches the better.

My uncle had a red Healey in the '60s. Beautiful car; lots of quirky problems. His joke was to pull up to gas stations and say "fill it up with oil, and check the gas." Lol. I used to sit in that car as a kid and pretend I was driving. Of course the thing hadn't run in years by then. It was still awesome, though.
 
eohrnberger said:
Speaking of which . . .

It was already well known that the Porsche Carrera GT was a very twitchy, very high performance car that was difficult to manage properly, even by professional race car drivers.

It was originally built for homologation for a racing class that was cancelled before the car was done, so Porsche, in it's infinite wisdom, made it into a road going car, and decided to sell it to the general public, without, unfortunately, stability management software, which is should have had given it's troublesome behavior.
Click to expand...

I've been curious about what happened there. I thought I saw a news report that they were going 45 MPH or so, but the damage seems more severe than that. I wonder if the rear end got away around a tight turn, and then it was the overcorrect / roll scenario.
 
eohrnberger said:
All in all I agree with this. I'll admit that I don't know the GT's evolution details such as what you are sighting, but given that V10 race motor bomb in the middle, it's not hard to see where given a good throttle romp, it'd easily put the carbon fiber car sideways and way out of control of mere mortals.

To drive a car fast on a circuit, you really don't want traction overwhelming power output. That's why turbos are more difficult on the track, and why most racers are normally aspirated (guess what, the GT is NA).

An NA engine has a far more linear and far more predictable power output curve, where turbos and superchargers, especially the aftermarket bolt on type with limited tuning, typically have an output 'lunge', which upsets the stability of the car, especially when driven at the limit. One power output lunge at the wrong moment, say mid corner, and you're off the track. Not where you want to be.
Click to expand...

I have an '05 CL65 Merc - twin turbo V12 putting out a whooping 26 psi. Renntech Stage 5 modified. 1014 ft/pound torque. Massive. To keep it from shattering the tranny, it was necessary to go to a non-lock up stall speed torque converter to prevent the hammer effect. But DAMN, that turbo lag - and they're tucked in as tight and close as possible. To this is the unpredictability of the stall torque converter too. Ungodly fast straight line acceleration - BUT... There's NO middleground and everything happens the moment AFTER you do in in terms of the throttle. Extremely easy to overpower in curves. Very difficult NOT to.

I saw a video by Top Gear (British) driving a nearly identical CL600 that had been dual turboed and built up like mine is. He (Jeremy Clark) hated it, and he likes hyper performance cars. The computers had no idea how to handle it, and their film footage showed the tach jumping all over the place and the car radically jerking in turns unpredictable as the motor, brakes, transmission and suspension could never syncho up to the turbos.

Since America is all about drag racing, there is little sense that brakes are 100% as important as power, that suspension really does matter, and too much tire is probably worse than too little. It is about BALANCE. That it all is in harmony AND in harmony with human/driver skills too. Hyper performance cars are so much on the edge of all that it takes very little out-of-balance to instantly create an out-of-control situation, something Clark has also commented about modern computer management systems.

They absolutely allow superior performance on road courses. BUT if you go past their abilities, as Jeremy Clark put it all you can do is throw up your arms and scream because there is no chance you can recover the car. The Carrera GT is NOT a "balanced" car in many regards.
 
Helix said:
I've been curious about what happened there. I thought I saw a news report that they were going 45 MPH or so, but the damage seems more severe than that. I wonder if the rear end got away around a tight turn, and then it was the overcorrect / roll scenario.
Click to expand...

I think that is exactly what happened, though doubt there was a roll over. I think the rear tires lost traction (over power) and then he over-corrected - the engine management doing everything AFTER whatever the driver was doing even without turbo lag. The '05 engine management systems also have more "lag" than new systems. I also suspect he may have been trying to "drift" around the corner, and the Carrera GT is not well suited for drifting. The driver was a race car driver, so probably figured he knew how to do that corner at the max - and lost it because he was in Walker's car and he was unfamiliar with it's quirks.

On my German '05, in terms of management systems - in terms of stability/traction control - everything happens AFTER, not when, I do it.
 
Last edited:
joko104 said:
I have an '05 CL65 Merc - twin turbo V12 putting out a whooping 26 psi. Renntech Stage 5 modified. 1014 ft/pound torque. Massive. To keep it from shattering the tranny, it was necessary to go to a non-lock up stall speed torque converter to prevent the hammer effect. But DAMN, that turbo lag - and they're tucked in as tight and close as possible. To this is the unpredictability of the stall torque converter too. Ungodly fast straight line acceleration - BUT... There's NO middleground and everything happens the moment AFTER you do in in terms of the throttle. Extremely easy to overpower in curves. Very difficult NOT to.

I saw a video by Top Gear (British) driving a nearly identical CL600 that had been dual turboed and built up like mine is. He (Jeremy Clark) hated it, and he likes hyper performance cars. The computers had no idea how to handle it, and their film footage showed the tach jumping all over the place and the car radically jerking in turns unpredictable as the motor, brakes, transmission and suspension could never syncho up to the turbos.

Since America is all about drag racing, there is little sense that brakes are 100% as important as power, that suspension really does matter, and too much tire is probably worse than too little. It is about BALANCE. That it all is in harmony AND in harmony with human/driver skills too. Hyper performance cars are so much on the edge of all that it takes very little out-of-balance to instantly create an out-of-control situation, something Clark has also commented about modern computer management systems.

They absolutely allow superior performance on road courses. BUT if you go past their abilities, as Jeremy Clark put it all you can do is throw up your arms and scream because there is no chance you can recover the car. The Carrera GT is NOT a "balanced" car in many regards.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree with you more.

67157695d1386271268-happy-toy-car-imag0423.jpg

eohrnberger;bt2558 said:
1991 Porsche 944-S2 with 202,064 miles as of 12/5/2013 (and counting)
Magnacor plug wires, KLA Strut Brace, KLA Monoball strut mounts Koni black double adjustable sport shocks with coil-overs, adj. spring perches & helper springs, Hypercoil springs 300 LBS/In. Front 250 LBS/In. Rear with stock torsion bar setup Complete ground up engine rebuild @ 186,914, with Nikasil bores, Diamond Racing pistons (47 grams lighter ea.), balanced crank, weight matched rotating assembly (1/10 gram difference min to max), all new bearings, seals & gaskets, Ishihara-Johnson Teflon crank scraper, Witchhunter cleaned & flow matched injectors
Rennbay track rated ball joint repair kit, poly-graphite spring plate bushings, Delrin banana arm and trailing arm bushings Stainless Steel braided brake hoses, Period correct Porsche sport seats
Click to expand...

This in fact, is a very well balanced car for road circuits. I've seen 1g lateral and near 1g decels on the data logger. :mrgreen:

The only downside is it's a bit of a brick when going over rough roads, but hey! the seat IS a suspension component, right?
 
Mason66 said:
Computers in cars are a life or death thing.

Since they control everything, you really have no say in what they do and the older they get, the more dangerous they are.

Let's say, for example, a car lived around the beach. How much damage will the salty air do to the internals of the computer?
Click to expand...
I live in Florida, and never put an ECM in a car of mine. Within a mile of the beach.
 
eohrnberger said:
I couldn't agree with you more.

67157695d1386271268-happy-toy-car-imag0423.jpg



This in fact, is a very well balanced car for road circuits. I've seen 1g lateral and near 1g decels on the data logger. :mrgreen:

The only downside is it's a bit of a brick when going over rough roads, but hey! the seat IS a suspension component, right?
Click to expand...

VERY NICE. The 944 was the 928's little brother, having exactly half a 928 V8 motor (they used the same heads). I heard that about the suspension of the 944. Good for loosening up the bowels. :lol:
 
CRUE CAB said:
Pfffffft 97 grounds per light is not charm.
Click to expand...

Ah, but the joy when the light actual comes on and stays on. The feeling of accomplishment!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom