F you Bernie! from the USA

DaveKillens · Post 16 Jul 2007, 20:26

What was this topic about? Oh yea, Bernie sacking the USGP. Shame, the Indy race did contribute to the essence and history of GP racing. But Bernie made sure he has options, and if Tony Geroge could not be bullied to see things Bernie's way, then Bernie will take his toys home and find a more luctrative track only too willing to contribute to Bernie's assets.
Shame, bloody shame.

enkidu · Post 16 Jul 2007, 20:41

Lol whats up with an astra?? As I said its a cheap car and im not braggin. It will out handle any car of its class and beats many above it 0-100mph. Yes its not a BMW M3 but i don't earn that kinda money and I bet unless your on 60k+jobs you wont have a car faster thats newer. My mate even brought an old R33 GTE skyline and it beats that 0-60...

End of the day us english like cars that corner well... The US likes cars that are big and handle like a horse on ice. Australia are somewhere in between....

dumrick · Post 16 Jul 2007, 20:46

Ray wrote:CO2 is absorbed by trees in massive quantities. So CO2 output is a stupid point. Carbon footprint is a hippie and corrupt politicians term, they hold nothing for me and I will not reply to the absurdity that term brings. I also don't care what your car will do highly modifed or stock. It's your car. I like big loud belching V8's, and I sure as hell aren't going to be so arrogant as to say your country needs to change it's ways to match mine. The US has big cars and relatively cheap gas. So what? Should I also up the price of potato chips cause you pay more than me? You live there, I live here. I like what I like and you like what you like. Don't patronize someone for thier tastes, or preferences.

If you would keep the climate changes, hurricanes and natural catastrophes only in your playground over there, I really wouldn't mind reading this brainless crap...

Ray · Post 16 Jul 2007, 21:18

dumrick wrote:
Ray wrote:CO2 is absorbed by trees in massive quantities. So CO2 output is a stupid point. Carbon footprint is a hippie and corrupt politicians term, they hold nothing for me and I will not reply to the absurdity that term brings. I also don't care what your car will do highly modifed or stock. It's your car. I like big loud belching V8's, and I sure as hell aren't going to be so arrogant as to say your country needs to change it's ways to match mine. The US has big cars and relatively cheap gas. So what? Should I also up the price of potato chips cause you pay more than me? You live there, I live here. I like what I like and you like what you like. Don't patronize someone for thier tastes, or preferences.
If you would keep the climate changes, hurricanes and natural catastrophes only in your playground over there, I really wouldn't mind reading this brainless crap...

There is not ONE shred of proof from an independant group of scientists, that aren't government funded in some way that DEFINITIVELY proves climate changes are brought about by emissions output from cars. I haven't seen it anyway. Also dumrick, I never said you were brainless for what you believed you know. No one has proved beyond a shadow of a doubt climate changes have been CAUSED by people.

End of the day us english like cars that corner well... The US likes cars that are big and handle like a horse on ice. Australia are somewhere in between....

That's why I said you can't always compare the two. In Europe there are tight twisty roads for the most part. Here in the US, we have vast open spaces. Two different enviornments, hence two different styles of cars. Simple geography. We race stoplight to stoplight, and you race on twisty streets. Americans like big ovals and dragstrips, our cars mirror that.

1. American large capacity engines are great and produce enough torque to make the earth turn the other way but the chassis they sit in makes mockery of that effort.

There has not been a car from over the pond that beats a European car yet and i will not be holding my breath. Sorry buts thats the way it is!

Guess you've never heard of a C6 ZO6. Pretty much a super car killer from 'over the pond.' Laps the 'Ring faster than an F430, makes over 500 horses, and makes good miles per gallon for you tree huggers out there. What's not to like about that? Oh, and you never even mentioned in what arena the competition is. So what do you mean there hasn't been that beats a euro car. Racecar, production car? If you mean production cars, you're mostly right. If you mean racecars, you are completely and utterly wrong.

8.3 V10 SRT-10 4d = 500 bhp with 8.277L = 60.48 bhp per litre
Honda S2000 = 240 bhp with 2.0L = 120bhp per litre.

The 2.2l 4-cylinder S2000 engine produces 240 hp @ 7800 rpm and 162 lb.-ft. of torque @ 6500 rpm. that means, 162/2.0= 81lbft per liter.

The 8.3 liter V-10 Fro the Viper makes 525 lb-ft @ 4200 rpm and 500HP @ 5600 rpm. That means, 525/8.3=63.1lbft per liter.

Yeah, the S2000 has a higher torque per liter ratio. BUT it has that torque at 6500rpm, where as the Viper has more than that at about 1500rpm. Not to mention it's a bigger heavier and much faster car than the S2000 ever hopes to be

wazojugs · Post 16 Jul 2007, 21:22

the S2000 is a two litre

the accord type R was the 2.2

did you like the clip?!?!

Tp · Post 16 Jul 2007, 21:34

Ray, we find V8's a bit girly over here, we prefer 6.5-litre-V12-twin-super-charged-engines

Model: Mercedes-Benz CL65 AMG
Engine type: V12, 5980cc
Power/torque: 612bhp @ 4800rpm 738 lb ft @ 2000rpm
Transmission: Five-speed automatic, rear-wheel drive
Suspension: (front) Four-link, air springs, anti-roll bar (rear) multilink rear axle, air springs, anti-roll bar
Tyres: Front: 245/40 ZR19. Rear: 275/35 ZR19
Fuel/CO2: 19mpg (combined) 357g/km
Acceleration: 0-62mph: 4.4sec

......And it still beats the Pontiac for C02 emissions and MPG!!!!

(Don't ask for the price though)

wazojugs · Post 16 Jul 2007, 21:40

the best engine has to the pagani zonda c12 s

The Pagini Zonda C12S has a 7291cc V12 48 valve engine, which delivers a healthy 555 bhp. It offers a 0-60 time of 3.8 seconds, a top speed of 202 mph, but might cost less to insure than you would think. .

Pagini Zonda C12S Specification
List Price: £350,000
Engine Size: 7291 cc
Power : 555 bhp
0-60: 3.8 s
Top Speed: 202 mph

List Price bhp 0-60 Speed
Ferrari Enzo £450,000 650 3.3 220
Pagini Zonda C12S £350,000 555 3.8 202
Porsche Carrera GT £323,000 604 3.8 205
Ferrari 360 £103,275 400 4.5 183

Tp · Post 16 Jul 2007, 22:09

What about the Zonda F?

lol we're way off topic here

wazojugs · Post 16 Jul 2007, 22:24

maybe but i am drooling

enkidu · Post 16 Jul 2007, 22:31

Lol wished I could buy one.... What would my carbon footprint be then? best plant another tree to offset it

jddh1 · Post 16 Jul 2007, 22:37

Back to the topic (hopefully)...

I think that the USGP should have different venues each year -- say 3 or 4 that rotate with each other. And they should be a mix of tracks and streets (although I hate racing on street circuits).

However, I think it would be best if here in the US, F1 goes back to the old West and East GPs, and then, in addition, it rotates through various venues.

Yet, I find this idea will not conceive, not because of lack of US support or sponsorship, but because of the Asian countries throwing money at Bernie.

But I have come up with an idea to make Bernie irrelevant in a few years. I shall try to marry Bernie's daughter, have about 6-7 kids with her (a set of twins would be nice) and then take his fortress from the inside. After I assume control of his empire, I shall bring the F1 to the States. Other Asian countries will be considered, but only on a once-every-two-years type of scheduling.

Moreover, all new tracks will be urged to include some kind of elevation change. The points system will favor the winner more. (We know that it was changed only because Ferrari dominated that year, and now it is backfiring, just like Todt, Brawn, Montezemolo, et al predicted.) There will be designated test days and if one is caught testing in private a point penalty will result of the illegal action. For Friday practice, however, the track will be open from 9am till 6pm, with an hour lunch break, so that most of the "track-specific" improvements can be made on that same weekend, to reduce costs a bit.

If I come up with more ideas, I shall post them. But first, I'll have to get on with the plan to marry Bernie's rather plain looking daughter. Till then, let me just quickly say that the F1 vs Nascar argument is just silly -- just different kind of racing. Now I'm off to watching a recorded MotoGP race from Germany yesterday.

Spencifer_Murphy · Post 16 Jul 2007, 22:40

I'd love to see contempory F1 car's racing at the glen. I wasn't born when they were. but the footage I've seen looks just brilliant. If Bernie does plan to get a race at a different venue he has to hit it with a big name (a New York street circuit was touted as an option about a year ago wasn't it?) or a race at the Glen (or Indy - ironic eh?) other than that I can just see F1's already struggling stateside image dwindling further.

jddh1 · Post 16 Jul 2007, 22:47

Spencifer_Murphy wrote:I'd love to see contempory F1 car's racing at the glen. I wasn't born when they were. but the footage I've seen looks just brilliant. If Bernie does plan to get a race at a different venue he has to hit it with a big name (a New York street circuit was touted as an option about a year ago wasn't it?) or a race at the Glen (or Indy - ironic eh?) other than that I can just see F1's already struggling stateside image dwindling further.

Personally, I'd love to see F1 in these locations:

NYC -- I can just walk to the race. The marketing/sponsorship opportunities are enormous. Plus, they could host a sprint-type (1 lap) bicycle race open to the public right on the track on race day in the morning, where modest prizes will be awarded not only to the winner, but to whomever has the coolest looking bicycle. Drivers may enter this race for fun.
Las Vegas -- I don't know how they'll award points for this race, considering that what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas, or if you can wager them in a game of dice and instead of, say, 2 points at the end of the race, you'd leave with 14 championships points. But that's a discussion for another time. $\:D/$
Laguna Seca -- Quite narrow for F1 cars, but the challenge of the track itself would be great. Besides, after the racing line is established, no one generally dares to drive off of it anyway.
The Glen -- There's already some F1 tradition here. Needs improvement of the facilities and the track is narrow, but quite challenging.

dumrick · Post 16 Jul 2007, 23:01

Ray wrote:There is not ONE shred of proof from an independant group of scientists, that aren't government funded in some way that DEFINITIVELY proves climate changes are brought about by emissions output from cars. I haven't seen it anyway. Also dumrick, I never said you were brainless for what you believed you know. No one has proved beyond a shadow of a doubt climate changes have been CAUSED by people.

I can't even prove my existence without a shadow of a doubt, according to some philosophers...

Even if there isn't any study that convinces you absolutely about the role of mankind in global warming, as far as I know, any study that has concluded otherwise is far more questionable and ill-founded. That's a little like the debate between evolution vs. creationism: some people question the basis for one relatively logical theory, that has been demonstrated and has some very relevant evidence to support it, for what? To defend something for which there isn't any reasonable evidence at all.
According to that logic, since I've no absolute evidence that I would be dependent, I would prefer to believe that, if I did crack, I wouldn't, and try it. Apparently, that a very, very pleasant experience...

Furthermore, is the guilt factor relevant here? Even if it wasn't mankind to trigger the climate changes, the CO2 emissions (and the unbalance between emissions and its absorption by trees) is a factor that aggravates it. Given that (at least for the time being) we only have one planet and must live in it, and we prefer living comfortably and not be molested by the rise in sea levels, extreme meteorologic phenomena and other consequences of global warming, we should do something about it.

Back a bit more on topic, there's something that most of our european forum colleagues are sensible to, and that you are not. It's called efficiency. I find it a very beautiful concept. It lies on the notion that resources are scarce and that we must make the most out of them. That's why I'm far more sensible to the appeal of a Lotus little bomb with 600Kg and performances and cornering abilities that provide me with near-orgasmic joy that to a big V8 muscle car that is only good to race between red lights. For us, fun is not a straight line (and that's a bit like that that I prefer my women, also: curvy

).

And I apologize for the content of my previous post. You are right, that's not the way to reply in a forum (at least not in this forum)

Ray · Post 16 Jul 2007, 23:53

Once again, you are saying you are better than me. You arelready called me braindead, now you are saying that Euopeans are better than me and that I've never thought about efficiency. Yeah, you're right. We aren't efficient, and being so is completely foreign to us Americans. Our auto companies aren't striving to meet emmissions goals. If you guys are going to continue to chastise Americans about how we aren't smart enough to understand F1, or how our cars are no match in any form to yours, I'll quit writing replys. I don't call you guys stupid for liking one thing over another, or for your lack of something or anything. (Though I did say you guys were thickheaded, which I'm sorry for)

All I keep hearing in return is that most prefer a well handling car to a stoplight demon, and because we Americans like that kind of car it is inferior to European cars. Opinion is fact apparently. I don't care that your cars handle better, and that doesn't make mine inferior!! They are built for different evironments, stop beating a dead horse.

Though I do agree with conservation, and using the most of what you have. It makes no sense whatsoever to waste what you can conserve. That being said, I truly believe oil is a naturally occuring resource like trees. I believe it is produced in the upper crust of the earths surface. I was taught it came from dinsaurs when I was in school. Now that I'm older I don't believe that. And I don't want a neutered V8, or a high winding crappy 4 banger cause some liberal, America hating politician says I do, and the reason is because of global warming. Global warming my ass. They want to impose a 'carbon tax.' The biggest propreitor of this scam is Al Gore, who OWNS a damn petroleum company!!! It's a money making scheme to blame it on the human race. I don't deny that the earth is warming up, it has been on this cycle for thousands and thousands of years. To believe we caused any significant change within the space of less than 150 years, out of the life span of this planet so far, is absolutely ludicrous in my opinion. You can't take a hundred years or so of data, and out of thousands of years make a definite conclusion. Statistically not possible.

You CAN have V8's with power, efficiency, and low emissions. But it's so much easier to strong arm you into something you don't want or need.

BUT! I will say this. We need to plant trees like it's going out of style. We are cutting them down and not replacing them at an alarming rate.