Ask A Car Nut

What's the best motorsport at the moment in terms of entertainment, talent, sportsmanship and vehicles?

Will Rally ever reach it's former glory? Was banning Group- B a good decision?

How many races do you enter per year? What kind of costs and knowledge are required for racing? What car are you going to upgrade to?

Tail engine or mid engine?
Is the Ford Focus an American or a European car?
 
Since we're now onto rally, what do you think about the Rally Dakar being moved to South America?
 
What's the best motorsport at the moment in terms of entertainment, talent, sportsmanship and vehicles?
I think that would be F1 and MotoGP at present. Honorable mentions go to Indycar, Grand Am, and Aussie V8.

Will Rally ever reach it's former glory? Was banning Group- B a good decision?
I really don't know all that much about Rally. We don't get much coverage of the WRC here in the US. Speed TV covered it for a few years, but the organizers wanted too much money to continue. Now, it is just shown on Discovery Channel after a huge delay. In the past there was virtually no coverage at all.

The Killer Bs were awesome. There is no doubt about it. But I think they really elevated the inherent risks to a completely unacceptable level. So I see it as a very wise decision to drastically reduce the horsepower, even if it was detrimental to the fan base. This video gives a sense of how incredibly dangerous it was, and what huge risks the fans were allowed to take back then:


Link to video.

Rallying is a very difficult sport to sanction and administer due to the inherent dangers, both to the participants and the spectators. But I think rallycross shows great promise because it limits both to a far more acceptable level. It is far from being where European Rallycross already is, but the sport seems to be getting more and more popular in the US. And it is even starting to even attract some of the top European drivers to come over and compete in some of the races.



Link to video.

How many races do you enter per year? What kind of costs and knowledge are required for racing? What car are you going to upgrade to?
I had to give up racing after only competing for a couple of years. It was just too expensive to continue, especially once I semi-retired and the stock market went to hell. But if I ever get back to the point of having enough cash to properly field a competitive car, I'll be back in a heartbeat.

At the lowest level and doing virtually all of the preparation work yourself, you could probably run a season for $15K or so in operating expenses. Most of that money would be for entry fees, tires, travel expenses, brake pads, rotors, and gas. If something happened to your drivetrain or you had to repair a wrecked car, the costs would jump up considerably. Of course, you would still need to buy a race car, tow vehicle, and a trailer. You can rent a ride for perhaps $2K per race, but that doesn't include travel expenses or insurance.

Due to the costs some people race karts instead. The operating expenses other than travel are cheaper, but it still costs a decent amount of money to be competitive, even though the vehicle and what it takes to move it from venue to venue is far cheaper.

There was a very interesting article in Autoweek a few years ago about what it now costs to become an F1 driver. The amount of money it takes is staggering.

Is the Ford Focus an American or a European car?
It started out as a European car, but Ford quickly changed that after it became evident how popular it was.
 
Great thread, Form.

What would you recommend as a good quality consumer vehicle for daily use on surface roads and highways as well as weekend / occasional road trips to go camping, hiking, etc? I don't need a full-blow SUV but I do want some decent cargo and passenger space. Obviously mileage is an issue but not the only one. And ideally, I want an American car - I live in SE Michigan, and buying Japanese or European (despite how much I like a lot of them) feels a little too much like crapping on my hometown, given the economy here. (Of course, if the quality gap is significant, I can overcome that feeling of obligation.)

I like both the Ford Edge and the Dodge Charger, but I'm kind of stalled for ideas.
 
Hmm. That's quite a disparity other than they are both largish vehicles.

If you want to carry more than 2 adults the Ford Edge would likely be a better choice, unless your friends are less than 6' tall. It is also going to have more room and easier access to camping gear, etc. Other options would be the Buick Enclave/Chevy Traverse or the Ford Explorer. But all of those vehicles are larger, which I assume you don't really want.

From what I've read, the Charger has mediocre reliability while the Edge is rated as very good. Reviewers also don't like the Charger's automatic transmission. That said, the lower center of gravity is going to mean better handling. If you don't mind FWD or AWD instead of RWD, you might want to look at the Ford Taurus instead. It is a bit less dinero, better gas mileage, and more trunk room.
 
I think they are great cars. The 2005 Prius has an incredibly low drag coefficient of 0.26 that beat nearly every other car at the time. They also have a lot of standard equipment which are expensive options on similar cars.

The only thing I'm really not too keen about is the center console approach that is also found on the modern-day Minis. But I guess given sufficient time that one could become acclimated to looking someplace else for critical information than directly in front of the driver. But on the plus side, the display size is usually only found on luxury cars. So it is superb for GPS maps and status info about the car.

----------------------------------------

Update on the Indycar New Hampshire fiasco:

Will Power was given a $30K fine and is on probation for the rest of the season for his conduct.

And Brian Barnhart still has a job after there was a lot of criticism of him for his decision. In particular, Robin Miller was vehemently calling for his ouster:

http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/article/indycar-miller-sounds-off-on-indycar-race-control/

On the decision to restart the IndyCar Series race with 10 laps remaining:

Miller: “We’d been running under the yellow because it obviously was raining pretty hard, and when they announced they were going back to green, my producers and I started laughing and said, ‘Really? Let’s go watch the big screen for this crash because it’s going to be a big one.’ You’ve got slick tires and it was raining harder when they restarted the race than when they’d thrown the caution a few laps earlier. I haven’t heard what Brian Barnhart (IndyCar Series president of competition and racing operations) said yet, although I’ve heard he originally said he had no communication with the drivers. But the drivers were going crazy, telling everybody - the spotters and team managers - that it was raining too hard. But Barnhart hears everything – he’s always monitoring everyone. In the long list of things Barnhart has done that have been inconsistent and lacked common sense, I think he topped himself on this one.”

On Will Power’s display of an obscene gesture toward officials after wrecking on the restart:

Miller: “He snapped. He totally lost it. That should be the indicator about how incensed and crazy he was that they restarted that race in the rain. In an emotional sport, you’re out there risking your life and you’re on slick tires in the rain and they tell you you’re going to restart the race. I think Power was entitled to everything he did. I imagine Randy Bernhard (CEO of IndyCar Series) will pay his fine because I imagine Randy is happy because Power flipping them off will be on every sports highlight across the country. It’s the best PR you can get. It’s auto racing. It’s a highly volatile and sadistic sport, and when you’re out there hanging your ass out, and some guy who has never driven a race car in his life decides to go green, you can’t believe it. It’s too bad Power couldn’t get to Barnhart because he probably would have choked him and given us even better video.”

On Barnhart’s questionable decisions throughout the years:

Miller: “When the race restarted at the cone, Ryan Hunter-Reay spun his tires and Oriol Servia and Scott Dixon both passed him. So, when it went yellow, Ryan actually was third in line and they reverted to the last lap and declared him the winner after they red-flagged the race. Scott Dixon so eloquently said this isn’t go-kart racing or USAC on dirt. We don’t revert to the last lap. We’ve never reverted. He said (Oriol) Servia should have won the race, I (Dixon) should have been second and Ryan (Hunter-Reay) should have been third if you go by what the rules usually are. But he (Dixon) said Ryan (Hunter-Reay) deserved to win the race because he had the best car. Dixon wanted to know what the hell was going on. How can the rules change like this? People like me have been calling for Barnhart’s head for years because I don’t think he knows anything about racing and plays favorites. He’s never driven a race car and I don’t think he makes good decisions about racing. On top of this, look back at the 2002 Indy 500 finish. This clearly illustrates why there has been such an outcry to get rid of him this year from the owners and drivers. The drivers don’t respect him and the owners don’t trust him and I think Randy Bernhard has to make a pretty tough decision but it’s not a tough decision from most people’s standpoint – just get a new chief steward.”

On his overall thoughts on the race:

Miller: “NASCAR doesn’t race in the rain because they don’t have rain tires on a road course, yet Indy cars race on slicks on an oval in the rain. I don’t think there’s a question of who wins the battle of the balls this weekend – it’s IndyCar. And if people didn’t enjoy that race, I give up. It had everything. It had guys upside down, guys crashing the points leader on the restart, guys giving the double bird to the chief steward. It had everything everyone wants.”
You gotta love Robin for his willingness to state his opinion about any controversial topic. It has gotten him in a lot of hot water over the years, but he refuses to change.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some huge news from the electric car front:

An electric Toyota sports racer has set a new record for that class at the Nordschleife: 7:46. It is nowhere near the current record of 6:48 held by a Radical sports racer and is just 4 secods faster than the BMW M3 CSL. But it is still a great achievement. What is really interesting is that you can hear the tires squeal when that sound is usually covered up by the engine noise:


Link to video.

For comparison, here is the current lap record in the Radical:


Link to video.

Of course, the current sports racers that run at Le Mans would be much faster. And so would modern-day F1 cars. But they are so fast and the track is so bumpy, it simply isn't safe for them to run flat-out at the Nordschleife anymore.
 
The sound of a huge vacuum cleaner isn't that impressive though... :-/
 
It sounds a lot like traveling on an older electric train except for the squealing tires.
 
After I graduate I am likely to get my Dad's '99 Subaru Impreza 2.5 RS, if I budget around $2,000 how much will I be able to get out of it? I really like the car, but it's kind of slow I timed my 0-60 at 8.39 seconds and I'm hoping to drop in a turbo and maybe some other stuff. Just wondering if it would be worth it and if I can cover it in that budget maybe?
 
Well, the good news is that the 2.5 RS is a great handling car with a reasonable amount of power.

The bad news is that you can't just drop in a turbo. There are turbo conversion kits out there for your car but most of the Subaru guys think it is pretty risky business. You could drop in a WRX engine from that generation or the next, but it is going to cost more like $10K unless you do all the work yourself, which probably means you are probably better off just selling this one and getting a WRX.

The biggest problem is that turbo cars have far less compression than your car does. The extra compression comes from the turbo. This means that you are likely going to create all sorts of serious engine issues by putting a turbo on this engine unless you take drastic measures, like O-ringing the cylinders to deal with the extra compression and going to forged pistons, yada, yada, yada.

I also don't think you are going to find even bolt-on turbo conversion kits that cheaply even if you decide to ignore the risks of likely engine damage. Here's an example of the costs from a quick google of the internet:

http://www.xcceleration.com/engine-packages.html

Barebones "Stage 1" is $4100. And they also suggest you "upgrade your header, converters, catback and stock air box to a performance intake", plus replace the fuel injectors.

A supercharger would likely make more sense and be less risky with your engine. That is $5K and they want you to upgrade essentially the same external bits as above.

The basic car is very good and should command a fairly high resale price if it is in decent shape. I wouldn't mess with it that much. If it's not fast enough for you, I would sell it and get something else. Where you can make some changes in that price range which would impact performance would be to install performance shocks and bigger anti-roll bars. The wheels on that car are pretty nice and different wheels would likely eat up your entire budget anyway.

But before you do anything, I'd highly recommend checking out autocrossing. This car as is should be pretty competitive in its class in stock and may be a lot more fun than you expect it would be from riding around with your dad. It would also give you some good ideas where you might want to improve the handling and what implications that would have with the class which you would end up. For example the SCCA would allow you to upgrade your shocks and the front anti-roll bar and still stay in the stock class. If you want to PM me with where you live I can hook you up with a local group.
 
I got another question (due to the awesomeness of the thread):

What's your opinion on Tesla? Is it too early to tell if it's a good value or not? I like the idea of not paying for gas ever, but it seems too expensive to merit any savings.
 
Thanks!

The Tesla is simply amazing. But why shouldn't it be given that it is essentially an electric Lotus Elise, which really sets the standard in sports cars in that price range?

There's now a new model out called the "Sport", which is $19K more than the standard model so it is now up to $128.5K. The 0-60 time drops from 3.9 to 3.7 secs, and the interior looks a lot more like what a $100K+ car should.

http://cnettv.cnet.com/2010-tesla-roadster-sport/9742-1_53-50079368.html

But it would still be dominated by this homemade electric VW Beetle at the local drag strip:


Link to video.

An 11 second quarter mile! That is faster than most exotic cars.

Is it worth the huge increase in cost over the Elise, which is about half the price of the base model? It wouldn't be to me unless I had so much money I simply wouldn't care. But I think it does show the tremendous potential of this technology. If they can cut the price in half, even if the performance wasn't quite this good, I think they are going to sell a hell of a lot of them. 244 miles is sufficient range for a commuter car, and that should go up considerably as battery technology improves.
 
How/where does a Tesla refuel/reload/whatever it's called?
Holy cow, one of those is worth more than the place I live in!
squall78 said:
What's your opinion on Tesla?
It's coming atcha live.
 
It recharges anyplace that has an electrical outlet, but a 220V source is a lot faster.

Here's the Top Gear review of the normal roadster:


Link to video.
 
Oh, 220V is the standard here.
 
What kind of electronics do they put in cars nowadays? When will it get to the point that failure of these electronics, whether due to device faults or outside tampering, would prove disastrous to a driver?
 
Any car manufactured nowadays has a DME which controls the fuel injectors, the spark timing, and the air/fuel mixture though a number of sensors. Even NASCAR is finally giving up on carburetors. There aren't many people opposed to those systems, but the worst that could happen is that the engine would simply stop running or it would start working poorly.

There has been a general reluctance to make some of the critical control logic electronic instead of mechanical, such as steering, braking, and throttle control. But ABS brake systems are now prevalent, and they are computer-controlled. But the main control is still hydraulic so even if the electronic ABS system completely fails the car will still be capable of braking.

Modern airplanes and helicopters have been fly-by-wire for quite some time now, sometimes with disastrous results.

Back in the 80s, Blackhawk helicopters were repeatedly crashing and killing soldiers when they were flown near radio towers, microwave towers, and radars. The Navy version didn't have that problem because they paid a bit extra to provide sufficient insulation around the critical wires when the problem first appeared during testing. But for some odd reason, the Army versions were not modified for quite some time with disastrous results.

A bug was found in the F-16 avionics that would have caused it to flip upside down when it crossed the equator. But the bug was found during testing.

Recently an F-22 Raptor lost much of its computer systems when it flew west across the International Date line. Fortunately, it was near a tanker at the time so the pilot simply flew alongside back to a landing strip.

People are still forbidden to use electronics in commercial jets during critical times in fear that a cell phone or a personal computer might cause interference of a critical system. That always struck me as goofy logic. If it isn't safe during takeoffs and landings, why is it safe at other times? If the airplane mysteriously goes out of control, do they rush into the passenger compartment and ensure everybody turns off their PCs?

As a software developer, I certainly have mixed feelings about even working on such critical systems, much less driving a vehicle on the highway which uses them. But I guess it is inevitable. Some cars are already appearing which mimic some of the features these cars can provide, albieit with mechanical linkages. They can now parallel park themselves.

And steer-by-wire is already appearing in forklifts and some tractors.

These systems are certainly subject to sabotage, inadvertent interference, or bugs that do not come up while undergoing testing. Sudden vehicle acceleration may actually become a reality in the future instead of people hitting the wrong pedal.
 
I think they are great cars. The 2005 Prius has an incredibly low drag coefficient of 0.26 that beat nearly every other car at the time. They also have a lot of standard equipment which are expensive options on similar cars.

The only thing I'm really not too keen about is the center console approach that is also found on the modern-day Minis. But I guess given sufficient time that one could become acclimated to looking someplace else for critical information than directly in front of the driver. But on the plus side, the display size is usually only found on luxury cars. So it is superb for GPS maps and status info about the car.

Well the critical info, i.e. speed etc, is displayed right in front of me, and I have control over airflow and radio frequency from buttons built into the wheel. Granted, I still have to look at the touch-screen to know what I'm actually doing, but this is only a minor inconvenience. Take the Yaris, for example, which is another car I looked at. Its speedometer is located at that center console, and unlike some other cars like the Saturn Ion, this central speedometer/odometer is not even tiled towards the driver. It's ridiculous. But the Prius displays useful, but still nonessential information via that central screen.
 
Back
Top Bottom