Searching \ for '[OT] 0 - 60 !!!' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=
Search entire site for: '0 - 60 !!!'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] 0 - 60 !!!'
2005\02\16@193023 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
Some 0 - 60 mph times

       http://www.car-videos.com/performance/speed.asp?Speed1=0&Speed2=60

Subaru WRX 4.4s !!!!

McLaren F1 2.6 s :-)
The closest I'll ever get is that Bruce's mother used to live next
door to me.
(And I have some Champion Sparkplug cups he probably drank out of, and
his electric drum pump and ...)


       RM


2005\02\16@212149 by Robert Ussery

flavicon
face
Russell McMahon wrote:
> Some 0 - 60 mph times

Gotta love the '87 Yugo representin' at 15.4s... Still about 5 seconds
faster than my old '86 Plymouth Duster.

- Robert

2005\02\17@042819 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>Russell McMahon wrote:
>> Some 0 - 60 mph times
>
>Gotta love the '87 Yugo representin' at 15.4s... Still about 5 seconds
>faster than my old '86 Plymouth Duster.

Anyone get to see the Top Gear program from the week after Christmas? Jeremy
Clarkson drove the Atom (it is in the top left picture at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/ only the guy there is wearing a helmet). This
thing uses a Honda car engine, and a space frame construction, with no body.
Will do 0-60 in around the two point something seconds if you can change
gear fast enough.

But the highlight of the item was the way the air flow changed the face
shape of Jeremy, driving without a helmet.

2005\02\17@081911 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Alan,

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 09:28:16 -0000, Alan B. Pearce wrote:

> Anyone get to see the Top Gear program from the week after Christmas? Jeremy
> Clarkson drove the Atom (it is in the top left picture at
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/ only the guy there is wearing a helmet). This
> thing uses a Honda car engine, and a space frame construction, with no body.
> Will do 0-60 in around the two point something seconds if you can change
> gear fast enough.

Yes, an amazing (if fairly useless!) machine...

> But the highlight of the item was the way the air flow changed the face
> shape of Jeremy, driving without a helmet.

Indeed - reminded me of the early spaceflight films of astronauts in G training!

For what it's worth, my Rover 620ti (it's that little "t" that matters :-) does 0-60 in 7.  Which rather
surprises a lot of "hot hatch" drivers who aren't expecting to be left in the dust by what looks like a 4-door
family saloon... I've always liked "Wolf in Sheep's clothing" cars, and this has been the best.  

What the figures don't tell you are the performance higher up the speed range (I've never been a traffic-light
drag racer, and being front wheel drive it doesn't get a good start if you give it too much welly from
stationary).  For example, cruising along at 80 in 5th, someone comes past and you can pull out and be at
their speed before you reach the car that was previously in front of you.  *Very* handy for getting out into a
fast-moving lane when it's busy.  And according to the figures it will do 140-something (143 or 147, I can't
remember and who cares? :-) but that acceleration in the middle of its rev-band is really impressive, and
useful.  Annoying that they never replaced it when the x00 series gave way to the x5s - when this one finally
gives up (it's done 115,000, all but 11,000 with me) I really don't know what to go for next.  Top Gear really
rated the new golf GTi, but that's two-door, and I hate that with a vengeance...

Cheers,




Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2005\02\17@085018 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 09:28 +0000, Alan B. Pearce wrote:
> >Russell McMahon wrote:
> >> Some 0 - 60 mph times
> >
> >Gotta love the '87 Yugo representin' at 15.4s... Still about 5 seconds
> >faster than my old '86 Plymouth Duster.
>
> Anyone get to see the Top Gear program from the week after Christmas? Jeremy
> Clarkson drove the Atom (it is in the top left picture at
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/ only the guy there is wearing a helmet). This
> thing uses a Honda car engine, and a space frame construction, with no body.
> Will do 0-60 in around the two point something seconds if you can change
> gear fast enough.
>
> But the highlight of the item was the way the air flow changed the face
> shape of Jeremy, driving without a helmet.

Hehe, yup, I love that show. You Brits seem to have figured out how to
do that sort of show "right", Top Gear (and the one I like even more
"Fifth Gear") are FAR better then any equivalent show I've seen produced
over hear across the pond (there is a small Canadian show called
"Motoring 2005" which is very good, but the local station moves the time
it's run so much I barely catch it anymore).

Anyone see the 5th Gear episode where they investigated the question:
Who is the worse driver, one who is smashed, or one who is high? The
answer may surprise most. TTYL



-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\02\17@091036 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>For what it's worth, my Rover 620ti (it's that little "t" that
>matters :-) does 0-60 in 7.  Which rather surprises a lot of
>"hot hatch" drivers who aren't expecting to be left in the dust
>by what looks like a 4-door family saloon... I've always liked
>"Wolf in Sheep's clothing" cars, and this has been the best.

Or "Q-ships" as a motoring colleague back home used to call them.

First car I ever owned was an Austin 1300GT. Get me on the front line at the
traffic lights, and have a small Japanese motor cycle sidle up between the
cars. Lights go green and he would try to come in my lane only to find
something hard on his rear wheel that he wasn't expecting.

Best one I had though was a Triumph 2000 series 1 manual. These came with a
4 point something :1 differential, I suspect mainly because the 2 litre
engine wasn't that powerful, and it was perceived more as a businessman's
cruiser. After the engine did its big ends I had a 2.5 PI engine fitted,
with the 2000 carbs on it. With the high ratio diff it could really pull. Do
50 ->70 mph overtaking manouveurs without changing down, and a stack of
people in the car. Really brassed me off when a motor bike ran into the
front of it and wrote it off. He definitely came off worse for wear - drunk
as a skunk, flew over the car and landed on the road. If he hadn't been
drunk he would certainly be dead.

2005\02\17@091253 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Herbert,

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 08:50:16 -0500, Herbert Graf wrote:

> Hehe, yup, I love that show. You Brits seem to have figured out how to
> do that sort of show "right", Top Gear (and the one I like even more
> "Fifth Gear") are FAR better then any equivalent show I've seen produced
> over hear across the pond (there is a small Canadian show called
> "Motoring 2005" which is very good, but the local station moves the time
> it's run so much I barely catch it anymore).

While I like the presenters in 5th Gear (especially Vicky Butler-Henderson :-) I can't stand the camera work - they seem to have a cameraman or director who's trying to make a name for him/herself as an artist - all the quick jump-cuts, in-out-in-out zooms, swirling angles and so on may win an award from fellow artists, but it gets right up my nose when I'm trying to see the ***** car!  It looks like someone's home videos when they have just discovered the zoom and special-effects controls.  And that "phone this number for a chance to win..." thing annoys me too - they are jumping on the bandwagon of making a profit from the viewers on top of the advertising, and there's just far to much of it these days.

The thing I really like about Top Gear is that they do daft things as well as reviewing cars - such as the race from their studio in England to the ski slopes in Switzerland, car vs. aircraft, or the bloke who parachuted into a car moving atr 50mph (after a dozen or so attempts!).  Or the presenters buying a Porsche each for less than £1500 and seeing who came out best (I think Clarkson cheated by selling the parts of his as furniture! :-)

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England

2005\02\17@092205 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>Hehe, yup, I love that show. You Brits seem to have figured out how to
>do that sort of show "right", Top Gear (and the one I like even more
>"Fifth Gear") are FAR better then any equivalent show I've seen produced

Not sure if you realise the history of Fifth Gear - the presenters used to
do Top Gear, but couldn't get a resolution they liked when contract renewal
came up, and Channel 5 gave them an offer they couldn't refuse, so they
moved to Fifth Gear, lock, stock and barrel. I always felt that Fifth Gear
was a real good take on the name of the show they had come from.

Top Gear now having lost all its presenters hired back Jeremy Clarkson who
used to do Top Gear, but had left a couple of years earlier, to do the show
again, and at that stage the format changed to the one they have now where
it is all shot in an old airport hanger.

They do really work well as complementary shows, with Tiff Nedell and Vicki
Butler-Henderson having race driving pedigrees, and Jeremy Clarkson and his
co-presenters having a very laid back attitude to the whole thing.

2005\02\17@103232 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 14:12 +0000, Howard Winter wrote:
> While I like the presenters in 5th Gear (especially Vicky Butler-Henderson :-)
Yes, enough said! :)

> I can't stand the camera work -
> they seem to have a cameraman or director who's trying to make a name for him/herself as an artist - all the
> quick jump-cuts, in-out-in-out zooms, swirling angles and so on may win an award from fellow artists, but it
> gets right up my nose when I'm trying to see the ***** car!  It looks like someone's home videos when they
> have just discovered the zoom and special-effects controls.  
You know, I've never really been bothered by the camera work. Is it
possible I watching earlier or later episodes then you?

> And that "phone this number for a chance to
> win..." thing annoys me too - they are jumping on the bandwagon of making a profit from the viewers on top of
> the advertising, and there's just far to much of it these days.

Odd, I've never seen that, is it possible they strip it out when they
air it in North America?

> The thing I really like about Top Gear is that they do daft things as well as reviewing cars - such as the
> race from their studio in England to the ski slopes in Switzerland, car vs. aircraft, or the bloke who
> parachuted into a car moving atr 50mph (after a dozen or so attempts!).  Or the presenters buying a Porsche
> each for less than £1500 and seeing who came out best (I think Clarkson cheated by selling the parts of his as
> furniture! :-)

Yes, my favourite challenge was: what can get to the finish line first:
a rally car, or a bob sled? :) The bob sled won, by a fraction of a
second! :)

I like 5th Gear because they often crash/blow up/test something I'd
NEVER see on American TV. That pot smoking thing was one good example, I
can't imagine the FCC allowing something like that.
The head on offset crash they did at something like 70mph was
incredible.

TTYL

-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\02\17@103700 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 14:22 +0000, Alan B. Pearce wrote:
> Not sure if you realise the history of Fifth Gear - the presenters used to
> do Top Gear, but couldn't get a resolution they liked when contract renewal
> came up, and Channel 5 gave them an offer they couldn't refuse, so they
> moved to Fifth Gear, lock, stock and barrel. I always felt that Fifth Gear
> was a real good take on the name of the show they had come from.
>
> Top Gear now having lost all its presenters hired back Jeremy Clarkson who
> used to do Top Gear, but had left a couple of years earlier, to do the show
> again, and at that stage the format changed to the one they have now where
> it is all shot in an old airport hanger.

AHHH!! That would explain some things! I've only seen Top Gear episodes
that take place mostly in a hanger of some sort. Maybe that's why I
don't like it as much.

> They do really work well as complementary shows, with Tiff Nedell and Vicki
> Butler-Henderson having race driving pedigrees, and Jeremy Clarkson and his
> co-presenters having a very laid back attitude to the whole thing.

There's the other host of 5th Gear that I really find entertaining. I
don't know his name, but he always is very vocal about how beautiful or
ugly a car he's reviewing is. In a recent episode he was reviewing the
5xx series BMW, the segment started with him screaming and running
toward the camera yelling "run away while you still can"! :) Very funny.
I don't always agree with his asthetic opinion, but that's not a
surprise.

Another comment was when he reviewed the new Mustang he had a map
showing a very straight highway. He was saying how "great" the car would
be and then traced his finger toward a curve. He stopped, looked up at
the camera, and said: "What's that, a curve? In an American car?
AHHHHHHHHHHHHH", or words to that effect. Bloody hilarious! :) TTYL


-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\02\17@113334 by Alex Harford

face picon face
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 13:27:39 +1300, Russell McMahon
<spam_OUTapptechTakeThisOuTspamparadise.net.nz> wrote:
> Some 0 - 60 mph times
>
>         http://www.car-videos.com/performance/speed.asp?Speed1=0&Speed2=60

I can't seem to get to this page, I get a plain html file that says
"No web site is configured at this address."

Any ideas?  I'm curious to see how my Firebird does. :)

Alex

2005\02\17@120757 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>>
http://www.car-videos.com/performance/speed.asp?Speed1=0&Speed2=60
>
>I can't seem to get to this page, I get a plain html file that says
>"No web site is configured at this address."
>
>Any ideas?  I'm curious to see how my Firebird does. :)

Oh, I could get it, but cannot now. Hmmmmmmm Sorry, did not note a Firebird.

2005\02\17@124750 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Herbert,

5th Gear...

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 10:32:30 -0500, Herbert Graf wrote:

> On Thu, 2005-02-17 at 14:12 +0000, Howard Winter wrote:
> >...<
> > I can't stand the camera work -
> >...<

> You know, I've never really been bothered by the camera work. Is it
> possible I watching earlier or later episodes then you?

Yes, possibly, although I seem to remember the end of the first series was bad for this, and the second series
seemed worse!

> > And that "phone this number for a chance to
> > win..." thing annoys me too - they are jumping on the bandwagon of making a profit from the viewers on top
of
> > the advertising, and there's just far to much of it these days.
>
> Odd, I've never seen that, is it possible they strip it out when they
> air it in North America?

I imagine so - since you wouldn't have been able to phone a premium-rate UK number, and the closing date was a
few days after it was shown in the UK, it would be pointless showing it.  It was usually about half-way
through the programme, repeated at the end, and each "competition" ended on the Monday the week after it was
shown.  It was a 3-choice question, where two of the choices were so daft that nobody capable of dialling the
number should have got it wrong!

>...<
> Yes, my favourite challenge was: what can get to the finish line first:
> a rally car, or a bob sled? :) The bob sled won, by a fraction of a
> second! :)

They re-showed that recently - in fact it was just under two seconds, but I was rather surprised that it won
at all.

> I like 5th Gear because they often crash/blow up/test something I'd
> NEVER see on American TV. That pot smoking thing was one good example, I
> can't imagine the FCC allowing something like that.

I missed that one!  What was the conclusion?

> The head on offset crash they did at something like 70mph was incredible.

Top Gear had a car that was supposed to be really safe in a crash, so they crashed it into the side of another
at 30mph, with a real driver at the wheel!  None of the presenters would do it, so they got a stuntman in, but
it was pretty impressive all the same.  They made out that they hadn't asked the manufacturer (Fiat,
possibly?) before they did it...  I wonder?  :-)

Cheers,



2005\02\17@164858 by Jinx

face picon face
> The thing I really like about Top Gear is that they do daft things as well
> as reviewing cars - such as the race from their studio in England to the
ski
> slopes in Switzerland

James May's dry wit is so funny. When JC got nicked for speeding in that
race, JM points out on the map "Currently Jeremy is here, talking to un
gendarme. Very shortly he'll be here in ....." - finger moves slowly across
the paper - "Le Bastille". Richard Hammond chokes on his coffee in the
background trying very hard to stifle a huge laugh

Poor Richard. Hammond. Hypnotised by Paul McKenna into completely
forgetting how to operate or drive a car - "Oh God, but it's my living...."

Top Gear has been one of the funniest shows for years

As for the camera work, I've a friend who films a lot of car commercials
who (occassionally) is inspired by the inventiveness of some of the angles
and colouration. I don't find it particularly distracting

2005\02\17@170000 by Jinx

face picon face
> I like the presenters in 5th Gear (especially Vicky Butler-Henderson :-)

Last time I saw her after 5th Gear was in "Britain's Worst Driver". Are
some or all of those people for real ? Incredible if they are

2005\02\17@190947 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
0-60 mph and standing quarter times for about 2,000 manufacturers
stock moderls.

       http://www.albeedigital.com/supercoupe/articles/0-60times.html



2005\02\17@192132 by Alex Harford

face picon face
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 13:09:46 +1300, Russell McMahon
<.....apptechKILLspamspam@spam@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> 0-60 mph and standing quarter times for about 2,000 manufacturers
> stock moderls.

1991 Pontiac Firebird Formula 6.5 14.8

Close enough to my 89.  Thanks for the link!

Alex

2005\02\18@034417 by Hulatt, Jon

picon face

> > My car was officially times at 3.9 seconds to 60, and
> quarter mile in
> > 11.52 @ 121 mph :)
>
> OK. I'll bite.
> What's the car?
>

a '97 Nissan Skyline R33 GT-R V-Spec, not entirely stock though.
http://www.eventnova.com/skyline/

My current pic project is for the car. I'm creating a circuit/code which
can talk to the ECU, get Diagnostic Trouble Codes, and query sensor
parameters in real time. It then displays these on a Graphic LCD.
Currently got nice-looking bar graphs for 6 parameters simultaneously.
Currently using an 18f452 and a 128x64 KS0107/KS0108 based lcd.

I'm hoping to extend it with different views (maybe some graphical
versions of "analogue" meters, etc) and peak hold, and logging stuff.
And log data will be downloadable over USB to a PC.
http://www.eventnova.com/skyline/moving.mpg (mpeg video, 1.17Mb - of my
bargraph-on-graphic-lcd-by-pic stuff).

2005\02\18@042524 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>Top Gear had a car that was supposed to be really safe in a
>crash, so they crashed it into the side of another at 30mph,
>with a real driver at the wheel!  None of the presenters
>would do it, so they got a stuntman in,

I suspect that was more to do with liability insurance. At least a stuntman
is familiar with doing that sort of thing (presumably). I doubt the
presenter would get suitable insurance cover.

>but it was pretty impressive all the same.  They made out that
>they hadn't asked the manufacturer (Fiat, possibly?)
>before they did it...  I wonder?  :-)

IIRC it was a Renault, and the main reason for doing it was that it was the
first car to get a 5 star NCAP rating, so they set out to prove it had
really earned it. To my way of thinking, having such a prang done on TV is
worth more than any "rating" from any safety organisation.

Remember the advert that Volvo did many years ago where they sent a car of
the top of a multi-storey building to nose dive into the ground, to show how
the passenger section didn't bend - and that before such possibilities were
considered necessary for safety. Can still see that advert in my mind now,
and makes me want to buy a Volvo, even though practically every other car
can probably survive such a test in a similar manner these days.

2005\02\22@131555 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Jinx,

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 10:57:46 +1300, Jinx wrote:

> > I like the presenters in 5th Gear (especially Vicky Butler-Henderson :-)
>
> Last time I saw her after 5th Gear was in "Britain's Worst Driver". Are
> some or all of those people for real ? Incredible if they are

Sadly I think they were.  And having just been driven down the New Journey Turnpike (I wasn't counting the
cars, as in the song :-) I think they have company on the left side of the pond!  The level of dangerous
driving (for example fast multi-lane changes with no get-out space if it went wrong) was an order of magnitude
worse than I've seen anywhere else...

I liked the episode where they bought a boy-racer's hot hatchback from him, and blew it to pieces: "It's the
only way we could think of to save your life" said Quentin Williamson.  Personally I think they should have
done it with him still at the wheel, to save even more lives!  ;-)

I think most of the bad driving was due in large part to lack of responsibility - they pretty-much all had a
passenger who was continually giving them instructions (some of them patently wrong) and the driver delegated
responsibility to them as a result.  I think they should have drilled into them that they - they alone - are
responsible for the safety of their passengers, the car, and anything it may come in contact with! :-)  

This was brought out in the one where they had a wooden "wall" to drive towards, and on the first run they
were told to brake when the red light came on.  In the second run the red light didn't come on, and when they
ploughed through it they were told that they should have braked when they thought they were getting too close,
but this is unfair because they were following instructions, just as you do when learning to drive, and the
situation was similar to that.  They weren't told "You are ultimately responsible" so they did what they were
told, which most people would do (there's a psychological name for this, but I can't remember it).

I wish they'd let some of us who aren't bad drivers have a go at those tests - especially if we won a car as a
result!

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2005\02\22@131728 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Russell,

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 13:09:46 +1300, Russell McMahon wrote:

> 0-60 mph and standing quarter times for about 2,000 manufacturers stock moderls.
>
>         http://www.albeedigital.com/supercoupe/articles/0-60times.html

Strange - there's not a single Rover in that list.  There are lots of other British cars, so I wonder why?

Cheers,



Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2005\02\22@132409 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Oops!

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 18:15:53 +0000 (GMT), I blathered:

> And having just been driven down the New Journey Turnpike (I wasn't counting the cars, as in the song :-)

I meant, of course "New Jersey Turnpike" - funny how my fingers misheard what my brain told them to type...

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2005\02\22@140717 by James Newtons Massmind

face picon face

> This was brought out in the one where they had a wooden
> "wall" to drive towards, and on the first run they were told
> to brake when the red light came on.  In the second run the
> red light didn't come on, and when they ploughed through it
> they were told that they should have braked when they thought
> they were getting too close, but this is unfair because they
> were following instructions, just as you do when learning to
> drive, and the situation was similar to that.  They weren't
> told "You are ultimately responsible" so they did what they
> were told, which most people would do (there's a
> psychological name for this, but I can't remember it).


A classic example of "Obedience to Authority" as described in the book by
Stanley Milgram
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/006131983X/jamesnewtonspers

 ...Milgram's studies were done between 1961 and 1962 while he was at Yale;
they were all variations on a theme: a unknowing participant (the
subject-teacher) was brought to believe that s/he was participating in a
learning study. The other two main participants were a man who posed as the
student (the learner) and one who posed as the principal investigator (the
authority figure).

The subject-teacher was told that the learning would occur in this way: the
student would be hooked up to an electric shock generator while the teacher
would read a set of word pairs, which the student would repeat back. When
the student missed one of the word pairs, he would be shocked by the
"teacher" in increasingly higher shocks (the shocks increased in 15 volt
increments), up to 450 volts (which was marked, along with the 435 volt
mark, with XXX).

The basic goal of the study was to find out how far the "teachers" would go
despite the cries, pounding and eventual silence on the part of the
students. The frightening finding was that more often than not, the vast
majority of teachers followed through with the command to continue the
experiment, which was given by the man acting as the principal investigator
every time one of the "teachers" wanted to quit.

Most subjects shocked the actor past maximum voltage, to lethal doses; they
"killed" the actor. Or would have killed if the experiment was "real." They
were men, women, college educated or high school graduates, white and blue
collar workers from every possible background. The results were the same
almost every single time: People obey authority REGARDLESS of what the
authority figure is telling them to do, even if it is to injure another
human being.

Or in this case, to potentially injure themselves and cause damage to the
car and the wall.

---
James.



2005\02\22@142811 by steve

flavicon
face
> > Last time I saw her after 5th Gear was in "Britain's Worst Driver".
> > Are some or all of those people for real ? Incredible if they are
> Sadly I think they were.

It was also sad as a demonstration of the effects of aging. The guy who
won (?) was an ex helicopter test pilot and now he is task overloaded
driving a Transit van.

> I wish they'd let some of us who aren't bad drivers have a go at those
> tests - especially if we won a car as a result!

You mean the 99.9% of us that are above average ? :-)

Steve.



2005\02\22@151551 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> It was also sad as a demonstration of the effects of aging. The guy
> who
> won (?) was an ex helicopter test pilot and now he is task
> overloaded
> driving a Transit van.

The reward for being so bad suggests that his mind and capabilities
may in fact be still extremely good :-).


       RM

2005\02\23@191805 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Steve,

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:28:00 +1300, stevespamKILLspamtla.co.nz wrote:

> > I wish they'd let some of us who aren't bad drivers have a go at those
> > tests - especially if we won a car as a result!
>
> You mean the 99.9% of us that are above average ? :-)

No, just me!  :-)))

Cheers,



Howard Winter
St.Albans, England



'[OT] 0 - 60 !!!'
2005\03\04@060702 by Jinx
face picon face
> Anyone get to see the Top Gear program from the week after Christmas?
> Jeremy Clarkson drove the Atom (it is in the top left picture at
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/ only the guy there is wearing a helmet).
> This thing uses a Honda car engine, and a space frame construction, with
> no body. Will do 0-60 in around the two point something seconds if you
> can change gear fast enough

Supercharged Honda Civic R, 300bhp on a 500kg body -> 600bhp/tonne,
more than a Ferrari Enzo

> But the highlight of the item was the way the air flow changed the face
> shape of Jeremy, driving without a helmet.

That'd be this 'un

http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/joecolquitt/atom.html

Turned up on BBC World again last night. 80 second video (sorry all
I've got site room for)

2005\03\04@075917 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
>> ... Will do 0-60 in around the two point something seconds if you
>> can change gear fast enough

All my cars will do 0 - 60 mph in two point something seconds.
And without changing gear at all!
But only once each.


       RM

2005\03\04@080713 by Michael Rigby-Jones

picon face


>-----Original Message-----
>From: .....piclist-bouncesKILLspamspam.....mit.edu [EraseMEpiclist-bouncesspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTmit.edu]
>Sent: 04 March 2005 12:52
>To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
>Subject: Re: [OT] 0 - 60 !!!
>
>
>>> ... Will do 0-60 in around the two point something seconds
>if you can
>>> change gear fast enough
>
>All my cars will do 0 - 60 mph in two point something seconds.
>And without changing gear at all!
>But only once each.
>

Unless you lift them back to the top of the cliff...

Mike

=======================================================================
This e-mail is intended for the person it is addressed to only. The
information contained in it may be confidential and/or protected by
law. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must
not make any use of this information, or copy or show it to any
person. Please contact us immediately to tell us that you have
received this e-mail, and return the original to us. Any use,
forwarding, printing or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.
No part of this message can be considered a request for goods or
services.
=======================================================================

2005\03\04@092338 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>> But the highlight of the item was the way the air flow changed the face
>> shape of Jeremy, driving without a helmet.
>
>That'd be this 'un
>
>http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/joecolquitt/atom.html
>
>Turned up on BBC World again last night. 80 second video (sorry all
>I've got site room for)

Yeah, that is it. Subtitle should be "How to spook people" :)))

2005\03\04@134722 by Peter Johansson

flavicon
face

A friend of mine built a small dragster that was powered by compressed
air, in the same means that you launch a soda-straw wrapper.

The car has a 10 ft. piece of 4 in. PVC mounted to the undercarriage
which slides back onto a piece of slightly smaller cast iron mounted
to a 100-odd gallon compressed air tank.  The car only reaches speeds
of 45 mph, but you get there in a fraction of a second in a distance
of just 10 feet.  The only thing that comes close in terms of
acceleration was a magnetically-launced rollercoaster that claims 0-80
in under 3 seconds.

-p.

2005\03\04@140310 by Alex Harford

face picon face
On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 00:06:58 +1300, Jinx <joecolquittspamspam_OUTclear.net.nz> wrote:
>
> That'd be this 'un
>
> home.clear.net.nz/pages/joecolquitt/atom.html
>

Haha, that's awesome.

On a related note, there is a pretty cool car here in Vancouver:

http://www.napylon.com/Phantom.htm

Alex

2005\03\05@055040 by Mike Hawkshaw

flavicon
face
From: "Peter Johansson"
Subject: Re: [OT] 0 - 60 !!!

> A friend of mine built a small dragster that was powered by compressed
> air, in the same means that you launch a soda-straw wrapper.
>
> The car has a 10 ft. piece of 4 in. PVC mounted to the undercarriage
> which slides back onto a piece of slightly smaller cast iron mounted
> to a 100-odd gallon compressed air tank.  The car only reaches speeds
> of 45 mph, but you get there in a fraction of a second in a distance
> of just 10 feet.

Wow !!

Sounds like the steam catapults they use to launch fighters from air craft
carriers. Always did wonder what that felt like..

Cheers...Mike.

2005\03\05@061644 by Jinx

face picon face
> > The car has a 10 ft. piece of 4 in. PVC mounted to the undercarriage
> > which slides back onto a piece of slightly smaller cast iron mounted
> > to a 100-odd gallon compressed air tank.  The car only reaches
> > speeds of 45 mph, but you get there in a fraction of a second in a
> > distance of just 10 feet.
>
> Wow !!
>
> Sounds like the steam catapults they use to launch fighters from aircraft
> carriers. Always did wonder what that felt like..

Top Gear (yes, them again !!) used a movie-grade (either 10 or 20
tonnes) compressed air launcher to play car darts with stuffed cars
fired over a quarry cliff at a target. Just to make it interesting, in the
bull was the much-hated caravan. It got hit. Caravan Number 14
dies the death

You don't have to like cars to watch Top Gear - it's often nothing
like a car show

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2005 , 2006 only
- Today
- New search...