Merc was stopped in the outside/fast lane just after a bend.
WTF...
Lack of damage to the Merc shows the relative strength of an old-school German metal vs old-school French cheese.
Quite amazing really... that said, I remember back in the '80's my dad crashed into the back of Golf GTI in his Ford Sierra
(he was too busy watching the planes take off from Heathrow rather than watching for the car stopped ahead) and the front of the Sierra caved in... wasn't a scratch on the Golf apparently... the woman just laughed at the state of my dads car, then drove off.
robbieduncan said:
Unfortunately the front and rear bodywork along would cost about £5000 (in unpainted, unfitted form).
You know, considering the existing damage, if you get creative with a jigsaw and a Dremel, you've essentially got a
Lotus 340R on your hands.
Lord Blackadder said:
True. Engineers take great pains to eliminate all noise from the cabin, and then take further pains to reintroduce "desirable" noise to the cabin.
It reminds me of Lotus's experiments with noise-cancellation in their cars back in the '80's, there's certainly an argument that with todays technology, an active-noise effect would perhaps be a more preferred balance, rather than as you say the engineers attempts to engineer out all undesirable noise only to keep or even reintroduce the desirable sound.
There're times when I'd prefer no audible engine noise at all, like a recent 200 mile run up the M1 in a less than sonorous 4 cylinder for instance, that was tiring
especially on the ears, but it would've been equally tiring in a V12.
Equally there are times when I'd miss the noise, a country lane, B road thrash for one, where the sound of the engine is more than just an aural accompaniment, and is of far more use than a rev-counter
(an entirely pointless and superfluous instrument in modern motoring if ever there was one).
Lord Blackadder said:
Good point. There are good "vrooms" and bad "vrooms". Besides, "vroom" isn't everything, and a good "buzz" might be just dandy.
I remember reading a road test of the Audi e-tron concept in the end of year
Autocar from a couple of years back, and the Audi guy said that Audi were hoping to make theirs sound more industrial-turbine like, less like a fridge.
Industrial-Turbine sounds like it's got potential to me.
Lots of potential.
In many ways, I suppose it'll be similar to driving a car with straight-cut gears, the whine of those often dominate the engine too.
Lord Blackadder said:
I think that the physical experience of the internal compbustion engine in cars is so ingrained in our car culture that it will never, ever disappear entirely - BUT when electrics do become ubiquitous your average driver won't miss it.
I don't think it'll ever disappear entirely, but two, three, four hundred years in the future I can't imagine they'll be anything other than a curiosity.
robbieduncan said:
As a side note does anyone else wonder why cars have such huge tyres today? Does a basic Ford Focus really need 215 section tyres all round? Consider that the S2 Elise was originally specified with 175 section front tyres (yes it's lighter but also much higher performing).
Increased weight
more weight, requires more contact patch. And of course
the all important... they make you car look faster/more powerful/cooler etc.
When you think about about it, thinner tyres are less likely to aquaplane, are better in the snow, decrease rolling resistance & increase MPG, and like you said
the Elise wasn't exacty a tardy handler because of its
relatively skinny boots.
robbieduncan said:
I personally think that the style obsession with larger alloys and wider tyres has killed ride and handling in a lot of cars. I'm possibly in the market for a E46 M3 (as my Elise is going to be written off) and I'd prefer to buy one with the smaller, non-optional wheels as it'll ride and handle better...
Sell the optional alloys and buy a set of smaller ones? you might make yourself a few quid in the process too.
