>While everyone is celebrating their right to drink, grill, and have an extra day off on this Memorial Day weekend, FPH would like to thank those that have served this country. Thank you for protecting our freedoms and way of life. This being an automotive blog, we thought it prudent to showcase some military hardware that have also served this country well.
Happy Memorial Day! Have fun, be safe, and buy a serviceman a drink.
>I don’t even know why I’m writing a synopsis:
The three most prominent new/concept vehicles of 2011 come together at the Concorso d’Eleganza. Thank you, classicdriver, for sharing the incredible footage!
Done. Mind is blown… I’ll need a moment to collect myself.
OH, and here’s a sound bite
>
For those of you who are unfamiliar with the video, 32 year old Manal al-Sharif is a women’s rights activist amongst Saudi Arabia’s hyper male dominant culture. Her most recent cause is actually something very close to my heart, and something that many of us have taken for granted– the right to get into the driver’s seat.
After watching the video, many of us would be very quick to cry injustice and criticize the culture’s antiquated thinking. But when I take a step back, I’m afraid we aren’t so different over here.
A couple of weekends ago, my friend and I were cruising along the BQE when a car cuts me off. The car wasn’t driving with the typical trademark New York City aggression, but instead, it rather carelessly drifted into my lane due to a likely failure to check its blind spot. I gave the car a warning honk and it quickly swerved back.
It’s an unnecessary habit, but I would often try to pull alongside the car that wronged me if only to just have a glance at what sort of jerk-face is sitting behind the wheel. Lo’ and behold, it was a woman. To this observation, and because this is the second woman we’ve encountered to have earned a WTF (two for two), my friend responds, “I can no longer defend my gender.”
I know I’m minority when I say this but it is possible to put an end to the “women drivers” stereotype. After all, statistically speaking, men are charged with a higher insurance premium. According to insweb.com (not the most reputable source, I’ll admit), women are almost 50 percent less likely than men to have a DUI/DWI on their driving record. Furthermore, they’re 10 percent less likely to have a moving violation on their record. So if it isn’t a gender issue, then what is it?
My theory is that women drivers are also 50% more likely to be what some call “Sunday drivers,” or drivers that only get behind the wheel on occasion. Based on a sample set of female friends and acquaintances, many simply prefer not to drive if they don’t have to and designate their boyfriend, husband, dad or brother for the task instead. Conveniently, their lower frequency behind the wheel also explains why they receive less traffic citations.
But really, it’s that infrequency in driving a car that perpetuates the issue. When I first began driving, I was very anxious behind the wheel as well. I was young, inexperienced, and I played a lot of Grand Theft Auto. I clearly did not know what I was doing. But now, after six years of practice, I’ve had to have improved. And in the end, it really is about the seat time.
Nevermind the honks you get and nevermind your backseat drivers screaming at you when you’re only getting started. No one is born to tackle Queensboro Bridge at rush hour. It’s one of the most unnatural things in existence and you will never be comfortable with it. But you can at least get used to it.
Seat time is a numbers game. As a person logs more and more driving hours, that person will more likely encounter testing moments. Drivers will learn from these experiences and naturally, their situational awareness and their ability to react to a sudden obstacle will improve. Instead of freaking out and stomping on the accelerator when trying to find the brake, an experienced driver can calmly recall an instance and use their experience to get themselves out of harm’s way.
Ladies, your notoriety for awful driving is not your fault– at least not completely. I hope Manal al-Sharif and your Saudi soul sisters who boldly rocked the boat have empowered you to go out there and actively support their cause. But more than that, and more than proving a long standing stereotype wrong, hopefully you’ll realize that you are ultimately practicing safe driving for yourself.
Have an awesome long weekend, everybody!
>In anticipation of the coming Monaco GP, let’s revisit the glory and glamour of the historic French Riviera. Notice the changes of the city and circuit, as well as the changes of the drivers, teams, and mechanics through the decades.
Happy Friday!!
>In a totally and completely unexpected turn of events, the F1 has decided that it will soon ban the most innovative break through in F1 technology. Wait a second. This isn’t unexpected at all! This is the status quo considering the “double diffuser” and “F-duct” were banned after only a single season of use. Keep reading to see what I’m on about.
At the beginning of the season, this car, Renault’s R31, appeared in full view of the public bearing nothing that resembled a conventional exhaust outlet. The general public as well as the international media were more than just a little baffled by this. In testing, the truth became very clear that Renault had an ace up its sleeve with a forward facing exhaust that is mounted just below the sidepod opening. Look closely and the split pipe arrangement can be seen above the R in Rover.
Conventional wisdom would say that this makes no sense. Expelling hot exhaust gas in front of an opening reserved for cooling electronics and radiators is a stupid idea. In addition, Formula 1 cars laugh in the face of conventional wisdom and Newtonian physics.
Seriously though, the front facing exhausts make a lot of sense. By introducing hot exhaust gas in front of the diffuser the flow is accelerated more than by just having a diffuser by itself. As the flow and velocity increase, so does the amount of downforce on the chassis.
The concept of using exhaust gasses as an integral part in the aerodynamics of an F1 car is not a new concept. It was used in the 80s and made a comeback with the banned “double diffusers” of 2009 and the single “blown diffuser” introduced in 2010 on the Red Bulls of Mark Webber and Sebastian Vettel.
The key difference is the location of where the exhaust gasses are introduced. By having front facing exhausts, all the exhaust gasses are introduced to the front of the diffuser and used to accelerate air flow and downforce. By applying the exhaust gasses over the top of the diffuser element like on the RB6 in 2010, the flow of air through the diffuser is simply aided by the exhaust flow and is not as efficient.
Critically, in 2010 all the top tier teams saw how effective the blown diffuser was and copied the concept from Red Bull for their own cars. This would make people wonder why the teams, especially struggling Ferrari, wouldn’t copy this year’s Renault design. The most obvious reason is that, while Renault is faster than expected, they are not constantly on the top step of the podium like Red Bull was last year. Additionally, rerouting an exhaust system down a few inches and heat shielding components isn’t the hardest task whereas redesigning a whole car to work around forward facing exhaust requires more than a couple weeks in between grand prix weekends.
So, what’s the big deal? Recently, Colin Kolles, boss of HRT, has brought to the attention of FIA technical delegate Charlie Whiting and FIA President Jean Todt the issue of both of these components being illegal as they are adjustable pieces of aerodynamics. Taken very lightly the aerodynamic component in question would be the rear diffuser, which doesn’t move at all. The argument that is being made by the underfunded and underachieving Kolles is that the exhaust is a by-product of the motor that has moving parts like pistons, valves, etc. Controlling that motor and how it expels its exhaust is the driver’s right foot. This is his long-winded way of saying the adjustable aerodynamics are driver controlled and therefore should be banned from competition.
Really, this all seems like a case of sour grapes. HRT is the lowest on the F1 totem pole in both championship standings as well as financial backing. They failed to qualify for the Australian GP because they couldn’t run a competitive lap time within the 107% rule. Without a competitive car or driver to start with and lacking funds to develop their own blown diffuser like every other team, the logical step is to whine about the rules and make everyone take a step back as opposed to progressing their own program.
Lucky for HRT, Formula 1 is looking to push a green initiative and blown aerodynamic elements need a bit more fuel than a “normal” car. While blowing hot exhaust gasses over the elements creates additional downforce, the flow of gasses is not a constant. As stated before, the amount of gas exiting the pipe varies with the application of throttle. Considering that throttle application does not correlate favorably to the ability to turn, engineers needed to find a way to have a constant flow of exhaust gas even when the driver is off the throttle. For them it was just a matter of programming the ECU. This extra fuel that is still being burned throughout each turn equates to about a 10% increase over race distance according to Renault. Considering the size of the fuel tank is already mandated by the FIA, what’s the problem? Being innovative and developing a more efficient motor in order to save fuel to use for the diffuser doesn’t seem like an issue. Even with a ban on blown elements, the teams will push the balance between power and fuel efficiency to finish a race with nothing left in the tank.
Regardless, the FIA had already decided to ban the aerodynamic aids prior to this past week’s Spanish GP. The problem arose when no course of action could be settled upon and the ban was subsequently postponed. After all this blows over, it’s guaranteed every team’s lap times will be negatively affected. Some say the loss of downforce will account for a half second per lap. Though, this isn’t a huge set back. Somebody will push the envelope a bit further next year and gain back that half second and then some. After all, Formula 1 cars do laugh in the face of conventional wisdom
>These posts are usually undertaken by Danny Chin, our resident eBay ‘meister’. But I’ve got something pretty incredible– and an opportunity to steal a bit of Danny’s thunder is too irresistible to pass. (I love you, bro)
Behold! I was able to find not one, but two extremely rare and iconic BMW 2002s listed on eBay at the same time! If you’ve got $40k readily available, this can be your lucky day. If you’ve got the means to buy both of them, then you just made me spend the better of ten minutes trying to decide what insult to drop on you… You probably have a pencil mustache and I don’t like you. UGH.
>
It has been 10 years since Dale Earnhardt died at the Daytona 500 but to this day he remains one of the most popular and profitable names in NASCAR. So it seems natural to slap his name on just about anything. If you combine that fact with the empire that is Dale Earnhardt Inc., it is actually a bit surprising that there isn’t two dozen special editions already out there.
Looking past my own jaded opinions it is actually a pretty stout vehicle. It boasts 704 HP and 695 ft-lbs of torque via a Eaton supercharger. Other performance highlights include a one inch drop all the way around, 2″ exhaust, cross drilled rotors, high flow injectors, and chassis stiffening through sub frame connectors.
Obviously a lot of the appeal of the car is that it’s officially a product of DEI, and Dale Earnhardt Chevrolet. It sure has a lot of badges to make sure you don’t forget too. I mean lets be honest, the macho of having the latest baddest super ultra mega special edition is what moves the new muscle car market. If it didn’t, there wouldn’t be a million versions of the Mustang out there.
I guess it really comes down to if it’s cool. Yes… But is it worth the $79,993 base price? ehhh…
You can find more pictures and specs here
>There are a lot of things that annoy me about what people do when they have a car. I’m not quite sure if this is because I’m an auto enthusiast, an engineer, or just a neurotic putz. Regardless, here are the top five things that my girlfriend says I complain about most.
First up is the Prius owner. It’s not just any old Prius owner though. It’s the specific Prius owner who puts a cargo carrier on top of the car like the one pictured above. Now, I don’t have any problem with the carrier itself. I have a huge problem with the fact that these things are very rarely taken off of the car once installed. Nevermind that the Prius was designed to be as slippery as possible to cut right through the air to achieve its fuel efficient numbers.
The Prius had long ago become a status symbol and by owning one you are telling the world that you are saving it regardless of the fact that a bigger midsize car would suit your size needs more adequately and for a lower sticker price to boot.
Recently I noticed that a lot of people like to ask me if I’ve raced anybody. I don’t know if this is a local phenomenon or if all car guys get asked this. Yes, I know my car has decent power ratings and it is classified as a tuner car. That doesn’t mean that “I live my life a quarter mile at a time.” Street racing is a pretty stupid game since the Fast and the Furious franchise made it so mainstream. Chancing life, limb, finances and the law isn’t my cup of tea. “Street cred” is not worth it!
Speaking of “street cred,” I get really frustrated when people decide to rebadge their cars into something that it isn’t. This can include a whole myriad of things like putting “type R” paraphernalia on a Camry or even keeping within one marque and putting M3 badges on a 328i. This type of behavior only attracts real car guys and doesn’t gain you any “street cred.” The real cars guys are the ones that care about things like type R, AMG, M division, etc and they will know that you are a poser. The worst of the worst can be seen in the video above.
I’m sure you’ve all seen this hanging in the most ill-suited cars to transport a child. I think it’s a slap in the face to all the drivers around it. To me it says “drive extra careful because you are around my child who will one day discover a vaccine for death.” It’s almost as if that proud parent thinks everyone else drives horribly and needs a reminder about how to operate a vehicle. This especially irritates me when the owner of this placard can’t stay in their own lane and is chain smoking. It’s ok though! They have a baby on board that is very distracting and stress-inducing.
This last one infuriates me. It doesn’t matter whether the passenger or driver is doing this. It’s equally stupid, dangerous, and terrifying. Let’s count the reasons.
>Before I begin to write about the topic at hand, I’d like to address FPH’s apology to the readers on Saturday. The apology is a bit preemptive but due to various events and projects, the first of which was Kyle Swift’s wedding (Congratulations, buddy!), myself and fellow contributors will be busy with things outside of the blog and may post at a lower frequency for the next two weeks. I hope you won’t miss me too much. Actually no, I hope you miss me to death and can’t wait for me to be back.
Now that that’s out of the way, let’s talk about cars. So last week, a friend of mine sent me an IM telling me check out a comment from “wheatieboy” that was posted on a BMW 1M Coupe article written by Mike Spinelli of Jalopnik.
This is what my friend thought about the comment, “He’s like the loser that says let’s all stop trying.” There is merit to that. After all, mankind created the microwave, solid-fuel rockets,
the Concorde, the Eurostar, and the birthday cake. Yes, cake! Moreover, Bugatti gave us the 1,001 horsepower supercar that can be used everyday. Finally, according to Futurama, the future promises large pneumatic tubes that shoot humans across the city. None of this would ever be possible if the human race decided to stop trying. And in my friend’s ideal world, a bigger birthday cake is what every human being on Earth should always strive for.
His belief caused two thoughts to materialize. Let’s start with model bloat and something I call driver bloat (you’ll understand when you get to it). With every redesign for the next gen “game-changer,” every dimension is stretched just so. The car will provide a little more headroom, a little more legroom, a little more weight, a little more “style,” a little more kilowatts in the stereo, wheels that are a little larger, an extra gear in the new transmission, a little more power in the engine with a little more performance and a little more mpg. Oh, it’ll cost a little more too. Thanks to a whole decade of “a little”, the latest Accord is now anything but.
This isn’t exclusive to Japanese midsize sedans. The Germans have been waging their horsepower wars for many years too. BMW’s V8 E39 M5 was replaced by an incredible V10 along with what some considered one of the most technologically advanced engine computers and what others consider pure, undiluted, indescribable frustration. Benz’s 55 AMG engine was replaced by a supercharged 6.2 liter and another 6.5 liter. Audi uses the same V10 engine found in their sister company, Lamborghini, for its S6 and S8. Yet strangely, after all these years, top speeds are still electronically limited to 155 mph. What’s the point?
Wheatieboy’s comment addressed 0-60 times specifically, so let’s sum model bloat here by discussing two anomalies– the 2012 Nissan GTR and 2011 Porsche 911 Turbo S. These cars didn’t bloat incrementally, but catapulted themselves into the very fringe of what a car could do. Both these six cylinder twin turbo sports cars can blast through 0-60 in less than 3 seconds, and reliably clock in low 3s under almost any surface and temperature condition. They’re identical in horsepower, both all wheel drive, both have launch control, and both have a trick transmission instead of a conventional manual.
But at what cost? The majority of my gripe involves all the digital interference. Ideally, everyone is a proper race car driver behind the wheel and all the aids allows us push the car that much more quickly and safely. However, the reality of it all is when engineers create a new traction control system that’s a little more responsive and AWD that’s a little more advanced with every new model, the result is “driver bloat.” Drivers get a little more lazy, a little more overconfident, and a little more showoffy with every new car they drive. Imagine that sort of driver bloat behind the wheel of a current BMW M5, iDrive infotainment system and all. Oh no.
The second thought came in the form of a question on evolution: why does the majority believe that incremental gains equal improvement in the first place? Does an increase in size or power guarantee a car to be better than its predecessor? Does evolution of the automobile mean that new cars should be made to be faster than old ones?
Evolution is often misused. Evolution doesn’t necessary mean enhanced, it’s simply the ability to adapt– to better suit itself to changes in the environment. The past decade has been a roller coaster for the automotive industry and from the volatility, we’ve been given everything from Escalades on DUBs to crossovers to Toyota Prii.
Large SUVs being the “it” thing five years ago went away to Cash for Clunkers just as quickly. Horsepower must now take a back seat to efficiency as car owners struggle to live within their means when gasoline is more expensive than ever. Let’s not forget about stricter CAFE standards either.
During a chat on the phone with Chin two days ago, I told him of my idea for this post and we inevitably asked ourselves what manufacturers should focus on for future vehicles. The answer is desperately obvious and it came to us the moment we formed the question. Weight will be the next big push in future automotive development across the board, no matter the body type. If a vehicle weighed less, then there’s less mass to carry, delivering better fuel consumption as well as quicker acceleration and deceleration. Safety is still without compromise and will even be enhanced with clever application of carbon fiber, magnesium, and boron steel. Hell, with less mass and less weight transfer and improved mechanical grip, a car will be nimble enough to minimize collision in the first place. Let’s also note that mechanical grip feedback is infinitely more honest to the driver than the artificial sensations of traction control.
These thoughts took a bit longer to convey than I expected and all of you deserve awards for reading this far… or at least deserve a conclusion. I guess my conclusion is, if there’s one at all, cars in the future can provide a little “more” if only they could just weigh a little less!
Happy thirsty Thursday day everybody!
>With the summer travel season approaching, many people are keeping track of how much a barrel of oil costs. Having just paid $4.25 for a gallon of premium, worry is definitely settling in about how much fuel will cost after Memorial Day. However, crude oil prices don’t just affect fuel costs but also the life blood of our cars’ engines, motor oil.
Being a good auto enthusiast, I run full synthetic and change it every 5000 miles which means I’m due for my tenth change very soon. Over the years, I’ve heard a lot of debate about this. Some still change at 3000 mile intervals, as was taught for ages. Others, like myself, follow their car’s manual. Better still, the new breed of car can tell the owner when to change their oil based on algorithms that take into account temperature and rpm amongst other things.
A company called Lubricheck is looking to change all this guesswork and maybe put an end to all the heated debates. It’s as simple as checking your oil which you should be doing anyways. I’ll let them tell you how it works.
If they can get this to market for $30 as they say, it would pay for itself in a very short time period. Using my car as an example (2008 Mazdaspeed 3), it would only take about 2500 miles of extra oil life to cover the cost of the Lubricheck device. Here’s how it breaks down:
That extra 2500 miles is definitely achievable over the life of a car. For instance, I just attended the wedding of FPH’s very own Kyle Swift.(Congrats!) That trip to Philly in addition to day trips to Cape Cod and New Hampshire covered about 900 miles with air temperature ranging between 50 and 70 degrees. The interstates had the tachometer between 2500 and 3000 rpm in top gear. This is hardly straining the motor.
The only problem that might arise would be the ability to reuse the device. How can the old oil be cleaned off to allow for a proper reading of the next sample? If a new test strip needs to be inserted like a blood glucose meter, how much would these strips cost? If these questions can be solved with a cost effective solution, Lubricheck will definitely have a winner on its hands.
