RIP Paul Walker - killed in a CGT's passenger seat

[southernstar]

Perfectlap, you say sorry for your loss - and sorry that they were driving the car at incredibly inappropriate speeds for that particular area. You also say that they should be thankful that they didn't also kill a pedestrian.

[Frodo]

Originally Posted by jdlmodelt

So, what about Ferrari, Lamborgini, etc...they all fall into this high HP low car weight category and require an extremely experienced driver to stay out of trouble. Do we need to stop making all exotics? What about the guys hopping up the Nissans and Hondas, etc....It was an unfortunate accident.

I've responded to accidents at much slower speeds with fatalities. **************** happens sometimes. I don't understand why a whole bunch of Porsche owners think Porsche was irresponsible to make and sell this car? I'm quite sure motorcycle accidents are far more prevalent than exotic car accidents. I think people just start to think they are invincible and consequently, take risks that they can't control.

I tend to agree. Whatever happened to the fundamental concept of: If you do dumb, highly risky stuff, be prepared to pay dearly for the pretty predictable consequences. And I hate to say it (he seemed like he was a genuinely good guy), but this can even be applied to Walker. You know if he had said, "SLOW DOWN, this is dangerous!" the driver would have done so.

[Timco]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

^ no they can keep selling exotics all day long. But don't conflate a $200K Ferrari or Lamborghini specifically designed for road car use with a flat out racing car that was never intended to be a road car and only became a road car when Porsche was not allowed to race the CGT afterall. Worst of all, when the decision to sell a racing car as road was made, they ignored their own well researched conclusions about what could keep the driver alive or keep that novice driver from taking out a bunch of other motorists in a highly flamable configuration. A driver getting into one of these racing cars veiled as a road car isn't just risking his own life, he's putting others at risk as well.
That is to say I have no issue with a guy putting himself in a coffin because he overestimated his talent and skill. Easy come easy go. But what do you say to the family of the driver pinned in his $20K car and subsequently burned alive because the CGT driver lost control, plowed into him with his $300K car and they both become a fire ball within 60 seconds of the impact? ooops? Or maybe for the sake of everyone on the road that $300K car should have had some stability management or fire mitigation required for road car use. If you want to jump without these parachutes on the track that's entirely a different matter.

The car is crash tested and of course meets highway safety standards for crash and fire standards. It's not like it's just a shell and engine. I'll bet I could drive that thing all day long under 100 mph. Any one of my AR15s can kill a lot of people if the right idiot gets his or her hands on it. Otherwise I use it safely all the time and it sits inert in a cabinet.

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by southernstar

Perfectlap, you say sorry for your loss - and sorry that they were driving the car at incredibly inappropriate speeds for that particular area. You also say that they should be thankful that they didn't also kill a pedestrian.

I wasn't reffering to the Walker or Rodas families. I was referring to a hypothetical situation, which may not be so hypothetical in real life, where these two took out another car an its occupants.

Originally Posted by Timco

The car is crash tested and of course meets highway safety standards for crash and fire standards. It's not like it's just a shell and engine. I'll bet I could drive that thing all day long under 100 mph..

Those standards aren't very high. Look at the annual worst cars lists when the crash tests are reviewed. But those tiny econo box cars aren't packing big power in the first place so their rates of speed at impact are much lower than a 600 HP street missile designed to break apart at impact and consequently spill all manner of highly flamable liquid all over the accident site. All it takes is one spark from dragging metal to BBQ anyone in the car or a completely innocent motorist minding his own bees wax, in his own lane, under the speed limit. And if you're sitting in a ball of fire a mere 60 seconds after impact then I'm guessing those fire standards are a pretty low bar. Certainly when unlike the econo box car, you factor in 5x's more power and thus an inherently higher possibility of a crash and or fire.

[Frodo]

Well, maybe it's those low standards that need to be addressed. That's really not Porsche's role though.

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by Frodo

Well, maybe it's those low standards that need to be addressed. That's really not Porsche's role though.

The CGT in this tragedy held up well in a typical highway speed incident-- the tub was in tact and the occupants were still strapped in. So obviously Porsche didn't wait around for the Federal government to tell them what was adequate as far as crash worthiness.

As for the fire, again, that seems to be a very different matter. I don't think there's anyone on this or any Porsche forum that's going to think twice about getting into the passenger seat of that car knowing how quickly it became a roasted marshmallow in this particular tragedy.
After watching thousands of hours of sports car races over the years I can hardly think of many crashes where the driver's car was a ball of fire so soon after an impact -- all at much higher rates of speed than this public street accident. The Dale Jr. incident at Sonoma in the Corvette comes to mind but really if this was a racing car for the road, it did very poorly as far as fire is concerned.

[thstone]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

but wouldn't this fairly routine data collected from Porsches already be out there though? I'm no race engineer but I'm thinking privateers must need access to equally if not more in depth telemetry than what would be needed in a road car traveling under triple digits. Or do the privateers have to install third party data-logging hardware for every relevant element..braking, acceleration, g's, throttle, etc. without any access to the onboard stuff rom Porsche? I guess these would be a good question for BGB who raced without factory support.

At any rate if the data Porsche used is too complicated to show and far too proprietary, then that sounds like it wasn't a simple matter of seeing a printout that showed the speed at impact but actually involved some guesstimating by Porsche in order to arrive at the 100+ mph figure.

Here are the basics of automotive event data recorders; Event data recorder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And here is Toyota's official press release on the subject; Toyota Clarifies the Facts About Event Data Recorders | Corporate

And here is a good Road & Track overview; Event Data Recorders - Road & Track

Since the EDR only operates in an accident situation, it is not useful for racing data analysis. Instead, privateer's spend a lot of money on third party data collection and recording systems. Usually this means collecting some data from the ODBII or CANBUS on the car, having a GPS subsystem (position and speed and g's), and adding individual transducers for measuring things like braking, throttle, etc. These data logging systems can be quite expensive.

[stephen wilson]

You're comparing apples to oranges, race cars rarely have trees and poles to hit. I can't imagine engineering a car to make 100+ MPH impacts with a tree, on the driver's door, survivable.

[Timco]

Originally Posted by stephen wilson

You're comparing apples to oranges, race cars rarely have trees and poles to hit. I can't imagine engineering a car to make 100+ MPH impacts with a tree, on the driver's door, survivable.

Agreed. Give it a break. Our 986 would be AWFUL in the same accident. Gas tank right over your knees?

It's not the fault of Porsche or the car that some dip**************** hot shot drove too fast for city streets. Privilege? Can anyone here imagine driving ANY car 100+mph on that street? Are you going to tell me that 600 hp sent him from 35 to 100+ by accident?

He was being reckless. Get over it. Porsche didn't make the highway safety standards, they just met them.

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by stephen wilson

You're comparing apples to oranges, race cars rarely have trees and poles to hit. I can't imagine engineering a car to make 100+ MPH impacts with a tree, on the driver's door, survivable.

I think you misread my post, I'm not talking about the crash worthiness or side impact protection. I'm talking about how quickly this car caught fire.

Originally Posted by Timco

Our 986 would be AWFUL in the same accident. Gas tank right over your knees?

would be? Our 986 has ALREADY been destroyed in countelss numbers of incidents very similar to this one where someone put it into a pole, tree, wall or even off a bridge in one incident I recall. Auto wrecker sites are full of pictures of mangled Boxsters that look like crumpled sardine cans impacted from every possible side, rollovers, etc. all with full gas tanks.
Yet after nearly a decade on this forum and others I can't think of one incident where a 986 charbroiled the occupants, let alone within 1 to 2 minutes after the impact..

And I'm not sure why you're conflating the issue of responsibility for the accident, with the merits or weakpoints of this car following a crash. They are two separate discussions. Whether a car spins out of control because of driver error or equipment failure, is not germaine to this second issue of how prone this car is to explosion and fire.

[BYprodriver]

CGT wheels are magnesium if I recall correctly. Interesting that they seemed unaffected by the crash or fire. All this talk about negligent vehicle design got me thinking about using magnesium for the wheels.

[Nine8Six]

Originally Posted by BYprodriver

CGT wheels are magnesium if I recall correctly. Interesting that they seemed unaffected by the crash or fire.

You may be re-enforcing PL's understanding of a "very weak" vehicle there. I have used Marchesini's forged (100%) magnesium wheels for years on all race & practice superbikes that I've owned. They are ultra light & stable, but incredibly brittle. One crash and they simply explode in pieces.

Thinking of it, I am also extremely surprised that those wheels held up better than the carbon fiber

[thstone]

Reading through all of the recent posts, I guess the question is:

Should high performance cars be held to a higher standard of safety?

Should a car capable of extremenly high performance be required to withstand impacts at the likely higher speeds at which it will be driven?

Is it time to stop pretending that no one is going to exceed 65mph on the street in these cars and actually set crash standards for 75mph or 100mph?

[Perfectlap]

^ for crash worthiness? I dont' think so. You take your chances with your own life. I would let the free market take car of that. A high income buyer is hopefully educated enough to buy the car he's most likely to walk out of in a 65-100 mph crash.

But when we're discussing fire? That's another matter as fire can engulf more than one car.
These kinds of cars should absolutely have a higher level of fire-protection/mitigation.
And some form of stability management if the risk of fire is determined to in fact be higher than a smaller engine car.

I'm very skeptical that the impact killed both of these guys. Unless they had the terrible luck of both of them colliding directly in the path of one light pole... then at least one had surviveable injuries but the fire finished them both. The coroner indicated that there wasn't much soot in the trachea, but I'm sure the expert witness for the family will probably argue that this was likely due to the fire ball/explosion suffocating one or both guys before first responders could perform CPR to get them breathing again after the initial crash.

[Nine8Six]

Originally Posted by thstone

Reading through all of the recent posts, I guess the question is:

Should high performance cars be held to a higher standard of safety?

Should a car capable of extremenly high performance be required to withstand impacts at the likely higher speeds at which it will be driven?

Is it time to stop pretending that no one is going to exceed 65mph on the street in these cars and actually set crash standards for 75mph or 100mph?

Should anyone driving a car with over 400 horsepower have an enforced special driving license/training?

(not applicable in this case I know. But If I'd be the dept of Transport's top politician this is what I would slam those "public" Go-Fast machine owners with

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by Nine8Six

Should anyone driving a car with over 400 horsepower have an enforced special driving license/training?

such a requirement would probably kill Porsche's sales in the U.S.
I think the 991 S is over 400 HP standard now. Ditto for the C7
I don't think you can realistically mandate skills for expensive cars in this country.
There are simply too few buyers and even fewer who know what they're doing.
My buddy bought one of the first Vipers, he'd just graduated med school and had zero training behind the wheel. At the time I was stunned that they would just slide the keys over to this nutter without a least a little autocross session in a lot somewhere.
He ended barely driving the car, I suspect he feared it.

[BYprodriver]

One of the official reports I read said the car skided into the 1st pole/tree hitting the drivers door & killed the driver, spun around & hit next tree on passenger door leading to death of passenger.

Pre ABS & stability control Viper is the scariest new vehicle I have driven. Most uncomfortable too.

Initial US mass delivery of the GT2 RS was conducted @ the former USMC airstrip were the PCA OC region AutoX. There a couple dozen buyers were paired with their GT2RS & the best instructors Porshe could bring for introduction of how to drive the fastest street car ever made by Porsche.

[Perfectlap]

Originally Posted by BYprodriver

One of the official reports I read said the car skided into the 1st pole/tree hitting the drivers door & killed the driver, spun around & hit next tree on passenger door leading to death of passenger.
.

TheStone must be right then, the statiscal probability of this pin-ball style game chain of events must have been 1 in a million.

Also, I thought they initially determined that Walker's injuries at this second impact where life-threatening but he did not die instantly? However without oxgyen, on account of being trapped in a fireball, would definitely be quickly fatal. Roger Williamson all over again.

[BYprodriver]

Originally Posted by Perfectlap

TheStone must be right then, the statiscal probability of this pin-ball style game chain of events must have been 1 in a million.

As Monk always says: Ok here's what happened, CGT was used as a display/R&D vehicle to promote their business. Not to mention a nice tax "writeoff". During the party they decided to engage in some grassroots marketing/showoff. No one bothered to check psi of the tires which were offroad only race "slicks. Incident occured while LA weather had turned colder, thereby lowering temps & tire psi. Unpredictable handling at 100+mph= OH $-hit!!

Also, I thought they initially determined that Walker's injuries at this second impact where life-threatening but he did not die instantly? However without oxgyen, on account of being trapped in a fireball, would definitely be quickly fatal. Roger Williamson all over again.

Ok_______. Coroners report states Walker died nearly instantly from initial impact! :ah:

[woodsman]

Fire issue aside, I wonder what Walter Rohrl knows when he states that the CGT is the only car within which he experienced fear while driving. When one imagines all of the ill- handling road, pre- production/ prototype, road race and rally cars that man has pushed to and beyond there limits, it really makes me wonder what would scare him.