Why F1 technical is the only news source you should trust.

[flynfrog]

CNN drops the ball
http://jalopnik.com/how-much-can-cnn-ge ... 1111423405

[flynfrog]

That should say CNN drops the ball then accidentally backs over it.... Twice

[turbof1]

That article...pure sarcastic awesomeness.

Let's break it down: "a standard engine is powered by a belt connected to the crankshaft," is a great start if the goal is to establish that reality and physics have no place in this article. "Powered by?" what's driving that belt that drives the crank? Probably raw horsepower, contained in a pressurized vessel, extracted from the finest Arabian horses, liquified, and kept at 50 PSI.

Just for reference, this was the original CNN article:
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/12/sport ... ?hpt=hp_c5

The manner it was written suggest the targetted audience is somewhere between toddler youth and dementical retirement age.

[GrizzleBoy]

That was a great laugh!

[wesley123]

Check 90% of the newssites and the same thing is happening, why? Because such talk invites people, it attracts viewers. Making it look like the best thing ever attracts readers, that is the only reason. You see the same thing happening about IT, medical stuff etc. etc. newssites only try to make it look as fancy as possible, and they wouldnt give a damn if the info would have been more wrong.

This is basicly the reason why I dont bother checking news sites on such "dedicated" article. We have a news site here in The Netherlands, called Nu.nl, it is absolutely nothing more than making stuff look as fancy as possible, making a guy in court look as bad as possible, because that is what they like to read.

[amc]

From the same reporter, Christina Macfarlane (trust me, it's almost as funny):
http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video ... e.cnn.html

"With its streamlined body and aerodynamic curves, it looks... like it could fly. It even has features known as 'wings'"

[Pup]

My understanding is that the main reason Ferrari never liked the turbo engines was because they siphoned off too much steam from the exhaust, which didn't leave enough for the driver to make a decent espresso. Of course, the ban on driver aids made that objection obsolete, thus Ferrari went along with the current rule change, albeit with reservations. I may have gotten that CNN, too. Or maybe Scarbs.

[CBeck113]

I may have gotten that CNN, too. Or maybe Scarbs.

You know that was either an Italian tabloid or Gary Anderson.

[CMSMJ1]

Impressive.. now if it was only April Fools day..

[WhiteBlue]

I love the Exhaust steam funnel and the Turbo unit.

That view has a long tradition:

[tim]

As funny as it is. This is just a result of the google age. Probably type in "whats the difference between turbocharge" and predictive added on "and super charged"

[stefan_]

This person clearly has no idea about how a car actually works. Sure, when one of those early turbos failed, coolant splashed around and hit hot engine bits and made all kinds of billowing steam clouds, but that is most certainly not "exhaust steam." There's no stoker crammed in the back of an F1 cockpit frantically shoveling coal into the boiler so the driver can perform a dramatic overtake on a turn.

)

[timbo]

Love the editor's note on the revised article