The Technical Questions Thread

[NSXType-R]

Is this complete bull crap or is there any truth to Porsche developing their own motor oil for their older cars?

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98VZnXtRzvY"]Porsche Classic Motoroil - YouTube[/ame]

I mean, classic Porsches have been running even before they developed their own stuff.

[RacingManiac]

Well I am sure they have market for them...

[Magnum9987]

Is this complete bull crap or is there any truth to Porsche developing their own motor oil for their older cars?

Porsche Classic Motoroil - YouTube

I mean, classic Porsches have been running even before they developed their own stuff.

Its undoubtedly the best motor oil for the cars, being developed with a very specialized additive package, BUT so doesn't any other commercial motor oil. I'm sure any motor oil is more than adequate, but this stuff is probably good for that dude with the 965 that has 600,000 miles on it.

[karabiner98k]

Hello Guys,
What is the difference between Accelerating and decelerating slalom? (as said in car magazine tests)
What do they mean by Path Accuracy?

[RacingManiac]

I am guessing its is meant by gate spacing. If the slalom cones are getting closer the further you go into to it, you will be slowing down as you navigate it. If its getting wider apart then you'll be accelerating out of it. I am guessing the accuracy is how close you can keep to the cones.

A decelerating slalom will increasing front tire load as you go in, at the same time possibly unloading the rear if its abrupt and you'll get into a fishtailing situation if its unstable or just terminal understeer if you just saturate the front grip.

[karabiner98k]

Thank you a lot!

Here is the entire article if it helps:
E36 M3 - Best Handling Car

What I don't understand is that why most cars have higher speed in decelerating slalom (When their speeds are decreasing)?
It should be vice versa! Because they are accelerating (increasing speed) in Acceleraing Slalom.

[Kitdy]

What a dope line up of cars. Somehow, the 90s was the best decade in the history of humanity. How I yearn for a unipolar world. And Bill Clinton. And CRTs.

[RacingManiac]

Thank you a lot!

Here is the entire article if it helps:
E36 M3 - Best Handling Car

What I don't understand is that why most cars have higher speed in decelerating slalom (When their speeds are decreasing)?
It should be vice versa! Because they are accelerating (increasing speed) in Acceleraing Slalom.

Reading the piece, the key seems to be in the 3rd page. I am not sure how they start the slalom test. If they were going in a straight line and the enters the slalom, if the car can keep the speed they carry into it they'll average faster speed even in a decelerating slalom. In the accelerating slalom you'll need to slow down more to enter them and they while your speed is increasing, its unlikely you'll reach the same speed as you would in a straight line. It would also make sense since in an acclerating slalom, you are unlikely to be at WOT since that unloads the front more resulting in more understeer, where as in a decelerating slalom while you are "slowing down" the steer axle is loaded to allow you to turn.

Interesting noting as they noted that in their older test for sub 30k car, the cars were faster in accelerating slalom. Under power car(which I am assuming sub 30k cars were) usually can do slalom at WOT since their relatively lack of acceleration means you are not unloading the steer axle as much. A much faster cars in this test will likely transfer way more weight going full throttle and reduces steering response in an accelerating slalom..

[RacingManiac]

What a dope line up of cars. Somehow, the 90s was the best decade in the history of humanity. How I yearn for a unipolar world. And Bill Clinton. And CRTs.

That's just stupid...

[karabiner98k]

Great Explanation!
I couldn't find anything about decelerating slalom by surfing the internet.
You are a very sophisticated and experienced man! You know about everything.

What do you think they mean by 'Path Accuracy'? (it is in the rating table)
Is it related to stability in a straight line?!

[RacingManiac]

Seems like a subjective measure. Not sure what the standard is. I don't think its related to slalom in particular, but maybe just a general how well the car can follow the intended path of the driver without correction...

Most of this is guessing. Slalom just happens to be something I do a lot for autocrossing...

[Kitdy]

That's just stupid...

Tongue was firmly in cheek, but there were merits to the 90s.

[Ferrer]

Tongue was firmly in cheek, but there were merits to the 90s.

There are only three decades where motoring nirvana was achieved.

The 30's, 60's and 80's.

Fact.

[Kitdy]

Philistine. I refer not only to cars, but to human history on balance. The 90s were a time of impeccable style, grace, and Jheri curls. What's not to love? It's also the decade when human beings started to become sexually attractive again, after the 1980s where everyone was inexplicably ugly for 10 years. How I was conceived in that decade I shall never understand.

In the New World, the 80s was not a good time for cars, as we have discussed. It was the Malaise Era, as The Truth about Autoblopnik has so elegantly dubbed it. I am of the belief that cars mostly sucked in the 80s in Europe too (hello, rust!), but homologation specials and yuppies gave us some fun to remember isht. 037, QV, TR, LDIHF, and various other acronyms. Cars that had "DOHC," and "fuel-injected," badging as a point of pride. Good times.

The 90s and early 2000s - when I was a wee lad - is a period that stands out to me, and for good reason. Things never seem the same as when you were a kid.

Somewhat grudgingly, as much as I complain about rose-tinted glasses and the recency effect, I can be a bit of an apologetic for modern cars and basher of unreliable crapbuckets from back in the day. I can also complain about how heavy, space inefficient, and visibility impaired new cars are. But I'm a contrarian. There are some very cool contemporary rides, and some dopeass old ones. Which is to say I've just said nothing.

I am not a big pre-war dude to be honest, but I can cede you the 30s in an attempt at subjectivity. The late 50s blend into the 60s, and I'll tip my cap to the last pre-emissions US cars in '70 and '71.

For myself: 1955-1971, 1989-now. OPEC and questionable styling ruined 18 years worth of cars. Not really eras so much as two giant blocks of time, but those are generally the years the street cars I find myself interested in are from. You can very clearly see how that fits in for a product of the Baby-Boom Echo. We are not Millennials. That is the dumbest word maybe of all time.

TBH, I'll take a look at tons of cars between 71-89 as well. There are just fewer that I like.

I hope you have enjoyed reading this incoherent blabber. Ferrer, you clearly like the 80s as you were something like 35 years old in that decade.

[Ferrer]

If you like the 90's you just have to watch this.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlF9Uz6hhIY"]MotorWeek | Throwback Thursday: 1993 Sports Car Comparison - YouTube[/ame]

Having said that, for me the best thing about the 80's is the blend between uniqueness and competence. That means that while you still could tell cars apart easily most of them would start at first; that is the most annoying bugs had all been ironed out.

I occasionally get to drive a late 80's Mk 2 Polo GT Coupé. Now, it certainly isn't one of the great iconic drives, but one of the things I like most of all when driving it is the mechanical connection between driver and machine. And at the same time when you put the key in the ignition it starts at the first turn.

(I once had the opportunity to sample briefly a 1987 Golf GTI 16v, and it has to be said it's an entirely different beast to the Polo)

You argue that most of the cars on your side of the pond were rubbish, which is entirely possible, but here as we've often discussed there were plenty of great cars. You can even forget about the homologation specials which are just a small fraction of this (altough I agree that the excesses were fun and "Turbo" and 16 valve" badging excellent), there was greatness even in bread and butter cars.

The only part where I will agree cars from the 80's were lacking is styling. The angularity of the 80's cars simply doesn't work as well as the voluptuosity of the 60's or the sculptures of the 30's.

Speaking of which, this is the biggest asset of (late) prewar cars for me. I do not need to drive them in order to both enjoy and admire them. That is because they are not really cars, what they are is rolling suclptures; they are art. And art had no other reason other than itself.

As for the 60's, well once we discovered that cars had an actual utility, this decade possesses the best looking cars ever made. So it has to be admired for that.

Of course, always a pleasure to read interesting blabbering and discuss ethereal subjects like whether it's better to turn the wheel of Renault Clio Williams or to admire the beauty of a Studebaker Avanti.