Monday, July 1, 2013

I wonder what goes through the mind of an F1 driver?

I'm always amused and entertained by the pit radio transmissions when watching F1 races. Kimi Raikkonen's recent "Leave me alone, I know what I'm doing". Lewis Hamilton's "I can't drive any slower". Mark Webber (after losing the end plates on the front wings) "I guess we figured out how to make the car faster". More entertaining is when the race engineer calls the driver and says things like "push push push". Because the driver's didn't realise they were racing?
So I often wonder what goes through the driver's minds when they are racing. Alonso, for example, at the beginning of this season had a relatively minor first-corner scuffle that deranged his front wing. Yet instead of coming in at the end of the first lap - something I'm sure his pit crew told him to do - stayed out, and on the main straight the wing folder up under the car, lifting the front wheels off the ground resulting in him crashing in the first corner of the second lap.
A few years ago, Hamilton was in desperate need of a tyre change at the Chinese GP, and it was raining, but he stayed out one extra lap and then crashed trying to get into the pit lane when his tyres gave up.
I'm in the camp of F1 fans that believe it's always the team, the car and the driver that win races - I don't subscribe to the theory that you can put a shit driver in a great car and get wins (Scott Speed proved that when he joined Red Bull and failed to finish a single race). Conversely, you can't put the world's best driver in a sub-standard car and expect wins. Witness Schumacher in the Mercedes team for the previous few years. So yes - the drivers very much do know what they're doing. However, if your race engineer radios you to tell you you need new tyres, or you've blown a wing, or part of the bodywork is flapping about, despite the temptation to stay out, precedent would tend to suggest that coming in when the pit crew tells you to is a good idea.
In the grand scheme of things I actually wish they'd bring back in-race refueling and multiple tyre manufacturers. Having all the teams on the same tyres is beginning to make F1 more and more like American racing series where all the cars are identical (thus removing one of the team/driver/car variables). Having a single tyre manufacturer is just the FIA's latest attempt to slow F1 down by having the manufacturer deliberately make sub-standard tyres to force pit and conservative driving. Pirelli have said as much - they're perfectly capable of making a tyre last the entire race but they're not allowed to.
So maybe the thought on their minds is this - "Why the hell do we have such crappy tyres this year?".
Good news on that front though - Alonso proved in Spain this year that the philosophy of "screw the tyres - just drive it like you stole it and daddy's paying the bill" works wonders.

Monday, June 24, 2013

A tale of three rental cars.

As I'm still waiting for my new car to be delivered, I've been driving rental cars a lot over the last couple of months. Most recently I got to drive three different rentals within four days of each other and the differences were quite a surprise. Before I go any further, a quick diversion to talk about the first big difference: the rental companies. I don't know what the hell is going on over at Hertz but their customer service sucks now, and their cars are in terrible condition (the one we rented had over 75,000 miles on it) - I switched to Avis a couple of years ago but two weekends ago I had to deal with the big yellow H and it was a miserable experience. But anyway - the cars themselves.
The first one I had was a Nissan Maxima 3.5 V6. That was a strange beast. The driver's seat has a distinct bucket shape to it that you can't tune out through adjustment, meaning you sort of fall into the car, and then it always feels like the car is higher up than you are. Even with the seat on it's highest height adjustment I felt like I was having trouble seeing over the hood (and I'm over 6ft tall). The drivers view was sort of fun though - with the hump in the middle of the hood and the two flared quarter panels it was like looking out of the batmobile. Sadly that's largely where the fun stopped. For a Japanese car, it's clearly been built for the US market. The power steering was massively over-sensitive which made it exhausting to drive because it would follow every minor imperfection in the road on it's own so I spent the whole time trying to steer it in a straight line. The engine was super lazy, responding as if I'd sent the accelerator commands via the postal service, and the CVT - whilst a fantastic idea in principle - seems to have been implemented in the strangest way in this car, to the point where it was quite unpleasant to drive. It was like permanent turbo lag - only the engine never caught up with the throttle input. Driving at 30mph was OK but then if you put the boot in, there was no real 'downshift' or change of ratios in the CVT. It was like a 6th-gear low-speed roll-on - quite slow and lazy. The interior was a bit drab and I wasn't a fan of the keyless entry - more on that in a later blog post - but I suppose I'm going to have to get used to it - my new car will have it.
The second car was a total surprise - I had a Chevy Cruze. Long-time readers of this blog will know I pretty much despise most American cars. But the Cruze was oddly enjoyable. The version I had was an LTZ which I think is about as top of the line as they come - it seemed to have everything from nav to bluetooth audio, USB inputs, flappy-paddle gearbox, power everything - the works. The steering was firm and at speed it felt like I was actually steering the car instead of stirring milk (ahem - Nissan?). The interior had some properly decent fabrics and touch-friendly plastics (not like the scratchy, rattly old crap they used to use) and the transmission was very responsive. The car I drove had 36,000 miles on it but felt like it was a lot newer. There were a couple of things I didn't like though; as with most American cars, there was silver/chrome bling inside, which is utterly pointless on a sunny day because you just end up dazzled by it (not what you want when you're driving). And I didn't like the positioning of the heated seat/AC controls low down on the centre stack - the left one was exactly where my knee falls when I rest my leg against the console when driving. Oh - and the keyless entry system again.
The third car was a current-generation Subaru Impreza. My problems here started with the design. We owned two Subarus in the early 2000's when the design was still distinct and clearly a Subaru. The current Impreza looks like a Daewoo, or any other generic far east box. It's truly terrible and there's no longer anything unique or edgy about it. Things got worse inside - the interior was essentially exactly the same as the one I owned 10 years ago, and it was dated even back then. Hard squeaky plastics, smooth controls that are hard to grip, cheap-feeling steering wheel, cheep-feeling fabrics, and a central dot-matrix display straight from the early era of videogames, that made Space Invaders seem high-res. This one was similarly loaded - like the Cruze - but nothing seemed to work. The bluetooth wouldn't connect to my phone, the nav didn't work (could never find the satellites) and the power seat had about 2mm of adjustment in any direction. The CVT transmission was - not to put too fine a point on it - shit. Oddly, it had flappy paddle gearbox controls, which makes no sense given that CVT transmissions have no gears. That might explain why the paddles didn't do anything. The steering was connected to the front wheels via bush telegraph, the accelerator was like pushing on a poorly-baked sponge cake, the brakes had no feel and the whole package drove like it was always 3 seconds away from a crash. Now I don't know if this is the car itself or because of the mileage - this was the one with over 75,000 miles on it. But if you'd blindfolded me and taken me for a drive in the Subaru, I would have guessed it was a mid 70's American land yacht from the way it behaves.
So I guess I've found an American car that I like now - the Cruze - which is a total left-field thing for me because if you'd asked me to pick a US car that I'd want to drive, the Cruze would have been pretty much last on the list.

Monday, June 17, 2013

Guest post : Restoring a Mustang?

So you have a vintage Mustang that's been sitting in your garage for years? Well why not get that puppy up and running again with a quick little restoration! No, this isn't a how-to guide, more of a mini motivational blog post.
Now I'm not talking a paint job and a new license plate here. I'm talking the motor and other inner workings to get your Mustang back on the road and making you the talk of the town again.
You can either do the restoration by yourself, or work with a restoration shop. If you do it on your own, you're going to need to find a great place to get your Mustang parts. Even though you might want to do it by yourself, having a restoration shop do it can really help you out. Remember - they do this every day where you're doing it once. They're also better able to advise you based on the current state of the car is, as well as what parts it needs.
But if you do choose to do it by yourself, there are many guides online that will offer a how-to and tips on the parts you need and the things to do with them. The satisfaction of restoring a Mustang on your own is a great feat and who knows? Maybe you’ll pick up a new hobby!

Monday, June 10, 2013

An entertaining little look at tread depth.

A short post this week. I found this video on tread depth and thought it was informative and cute at the same time. Enjoy:
>Henry the hedgehog talks about tyre safety

Monday, June 3, 2013

Guest post : 6 Tips on What To Do When Buying A Second Hand Classic Car

By Samuel Jones
I recently came across this interesting website which is actually sort of like a network portal for buying and selling second hand items. It's loaded with all kinds of interesting things for second hand junkies like me who love idea of saving cash, restoring, and recycling. So my first deal breaker that I intend to do with this site is to acquire a second hand classic car. Here are 6 of the basic things to keep in mind if you want to buy one too.
1) When buying second hand classic cars online it's just better on your pocket if, for starters, you think it through beforehand. What exactly is the purpose of the purchase? Will I be using the car daily or only on weekends? Will it be an investment or an unnecessary expense? If I do decide to sell it later how much profit will it make? Based on your answers to cons and pros involved you'll get a pretty good idea of where to start as far as which car and which model you are aiming to buy.
2) After thinking it through, the next step would be to research it. Get advice from friends, relatives, or family who have experience with or own classic vintage cars. Folks who own vintage imported cars are usually more than happy to share the know with you. And rightly so! Learn from them which are the good and bad points of owning a classic car, which models are best, and the care and cost that is usually involved. Do an online research of the car that you are interested in as well and get a good knowledge of it. If you are buying the car as an investment, everything should be as close to original as possible, if not then at least try to find a model that can be restored to its perfect condition.
3) Take into consideration that the price of the car will most of the times reflects the quality, but not always the look. The quality of the car is not always equivalent to the body being in a perfect shiny new condition.
4) Do your homework on where the car is coming from. You don't want to purchase a car that later turns out to have been stolen and then sold. Run a used vehicle history report on the car that you want to buy and make sure that it has not been stolen. You could also do a check on how many people owned the car before you. Again, purchasing any vintage classic cars online or off is a huge investment so make sure that you are prepared. Having a vehicle appraiser appraise the car before the buy is also a good way to find out the working condition of the car, whether it has been in any accidents and the engine, transmission, and other components have been changed from their originals. If any pieces have been changed then the value of the vehicle will drop.
5) Take a spin around the block for 20 minutes or so. If there are any serious problems with it you will be able to tell by any noises that are abnormal. Decide if you like the way the car maneuvers around corners and how it rides over speed breakers and bumps. This will tell you if the suspension needs to be changed. If the car is old, chances are that it will need a lot of repair. Again, this will add to the cost of your investment, so be wise and calculate it first. Also, have the car examined by a specialized car mechanic. They can give you a better idea about the quality of the car.
6) Will the car suit your location? If it was previously registered in a location that was dry and cool and yours is humid, the body may start to corrode and show signs of rusting. Make sure that the climates of imported cars match as close as possible. Higher valued cars are usually those that have never been exposed to intense weather changes. So if you are going to purchase these, be sure to match the quality of care that was given by the car's previous owner.

Monday, May 27, 2013

The electric car divide

Some weeks ago, a colleague of mine spotted a Tesla Model S in the wild. It sparked a debate because he is already driving a Chevy Volt, and I'm in the camp of not being willing to make concessions in order to own an electric car.
The problems are multiple, as I see it. For less than $20,000 I can buy a turbodiesel VW that can easily do 700 or more miles on a tank, and at the end of that range, be refilled in 3 minutes and do another 700 miles. Or for $70,000 I can buy a Model S that - as much as Tesla don't want it to be, is a fashion-statement boutique car. Yes it's a good commuter car and yes it's good for use around town or other low-mileage jaunts, but would you really blow that much money on a commuter-scooter?
Tesla make interesting claims about their range but again you're making concessions to get to that range. IF you only have one person in the car, IF the weather is just right, IF there are no traffic jams, IF you don't use the radio, IF you're not driving at night with the lights on, IF you can find a charging station, IF it has a fast charger, IF you can make it there in the first place and IF you have an hour to waste recharging it. IF you don't want to travel further than 250 miles. IF you don't mind turning AC or heating off when you're running out of range. IF, IF, IF. Too many concessions.
The Tesla S controversy sparked by the NYT reporter in February this year is the tip of the iceberg. Tesla told the reporter to drive a very specific route under very specific conditions. He didn't - he deviated a little - as you might do when you're driving - and the weather didn't cooperate (it wasn't "optimal" for the car). The reporter ended up stranded. Motor Trend's long term Model S struggles to get 235 miles to a charge - considerably shorter than the 300 mile range it's quoted as having. These are known problems with batteries and have been for decades, nay centuries. Altering the load, duration of load, or environmental conditions all have big impacts on battery life. In a regular car I don't need to worry about running out of range because I'm running the heater or the A/C .....
For electric cars to be acceptable to the masses, they need to overcome the biggest single problem - recharging. Sure you can pay money and have a charging station put in at home and yes you need to remember to plug it in every night. But when you're out and about, you will need to charge it at some point and that's where the problems start. Nobody has an hour to spare nowadays - least of all hanging around some sketchy filling station. Those are the last places you want to spend any time (it's why pay-at-the-pump is such a blessing. You can fill up without ever having to go inside the filling station). But with an electric car, you're destined to be stranded at a filling station for at least 30 minutes - more if you need a full charge or if the few charging points that they have are already occupied. There have been proven technology demos of cars with swappable battery packs (www.betterplace.com) - that's an awesome solution because you drive up, the robot changes the spent battery pack for a charged one, and you drive off. The problem there is that none of the car manufacturers can agree on a standard battery pack so that doesn't look like it's going to go anywhere.
Some proponents of pure electric cars argue that companies like Tesla will put in free charging stations. They won't. Remember the old adage about something seeming to good to be true? Why would Tesla motors eat the (considerable) cost of charging all their customer's cars for free? They're a publicly traded company, meaning they're run for the benefit of the shareholders, meaning you're not ever going to get anything out of them for free. Don't kid yourself. Elon Musk's primary goal is not to make you feel good - Tesla are in the business of keeping their shareholders and hedge funds happy (which it seems they do partly by reporting VINs registered rather than numbers of vehicles sold - Tesla's claimed 4,750 sales figure for Q1 2013 actually turned out to be 3,125 in reality). Look to Europe if you want to see the electric car charging future. Charging posts in parking lots and roadside stalls, that you either pay a monthly subscription to use, or simply swipe your credit card through to use them. Trust me - it's not free now, and it'll never be free in the future.
Electric car manufacturers are very keen (and proud) to point out that their vehicles 'zero emissions'. That's PR doublespeak. No, your car itself doesn't emit any pollutants, but the car is absolutely not 'zero emissions'. It needs charging, right? So a power station, somewhere, is creating electricity to charge the car. In the US that means either coal or oil (because people here are frightened of nuclear, and we have no federal renewable energy policy to speak of). So whilst your car might not be emitting pollutants locally, you are still contributing to the plume of unpleasantness that comes out of the smokestacks of power stations. There is one caveat though - if you're smart enough to have solar panels or a wind farm on your property, and that power is used to charge your car, then and only then can you properly be in smug mode about zero emissions.
Speaking of the electricity generating and distribution infrastructure, think about this for a moment. Right now we suffer rolling blackouts and a crumbling system of decades-old power plants and HV lines. Imagine that now we add all the extra demand to that system to charge millions of electric vehicles. How's that going to work out? What happens when you have a days-long power cut - that's not uncommon even in America. Your car is dead, you have no electricity to charge it - you're screwed. Protagonists will point out that "millions of electric vehicles" aren't suddenly going to appear overnight, and that as they gradually do take to the roads, the power infrastructure will grow to meet demand. Reality check; in the last ten years, the US hasn't built many (if any) new power stations. We have, however shut a few down. We haven't had a new nuclear station here since 1979! Demand is up, supply is down. How's that going to change just because people are now driving electric vehicles? If you don't think this is an issue, again look to Europe. Barely anyone has electric cars in the UK yet now the government want to mandate "smart" home appliances that can be remotely turned off when peak demand is too high - Mandatory remote appliance control.
The only realistic short-term solution to electric cars is to have some other mechanism in the car of supporting the electric load. Hydrogen fuel cells or small petrol or diesel generators are the best bet. But they need to be uncoupled completely from the drivetrain so that the only function they perform is battery charging. Volvo's 2007 ReCharge technology demonstrator was the best option - four in-wheel motors and a diesel generator. It removed all the complexity of the gearbox and transmission (and for the most part, the brakes too) which in turn made the car considerably lighter.
My views on electric cars tar me with the brush of being a luddite to a lot of people. I prefer to think of myself as a realist. I'd buy a diesel-electric vehicle in a heartbeat as long as it was normally priced. But nobody makes one and nobody is planning one. Given that premise, I have actually investigated the all-electric Fiat 500 and all-electric Ford Focus as in-town commuters (because I have a real car for real-world stuff) but two things put me off - (1) you can't easily buy them in America (virtually zero dealer inventory) and (2) the price is an absolute joke - $43,000 for a Ford Focus with less an 80 mile range? Are you bloody kidding me?
Pure-electric vehicles, whilst they may be our future, are currently still an extremely niche market for (probably) rich owners who don't mind owning compromised vehicles. Until they're down to normal prices, with a full infrastructure of charging stations or battery-swap stations, with an upgraded national power supply grid, they'll continue to be the wet dream of hedge funds and investment bankers. Which is odd because electric cars have been available to the mass market for 7 years now and we're still waiting for the prices to come down.....