Paul Walker from Fast and Furious died in a wreck...

Reminds me of another crash with speed and old tires a few years ago that killed 3.....Rodas was responsible for the car and his driving..im sure some ambulance chasers will be on this asap....
http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/northwest/194678-just-heard-about-ferrari-crash-pierce-county.html

 

When they performed the tire inspection I wonder if they just did a visual and adjusted pressures. If they would have used a Durometer they would have probably seen some high numbers (hard) and replaced them. This is a race shop after all, and this should be a commonly used tire tool already.

Is there a documented procedure for the tire testing on these cars? ....and if there is, is durometer testing called for by Porsche or Michelin? and not performed if called for, then would that be shop negligence?

 

well it's pretty easy to just look at the date codes on the tires, even if you don't have a durometer...

 

Interesting, in adrivers forum like this we all gravitate to the tires. Out in the genreral public this is not even an issue, its all about speed.

We do know that the CGT has had a propensity to spin once the limits of the chassis are hit, from leno to any number of other incidents. This is attributed to it being essentialy a Lemans car but running street tires ie relatively low grip and little downforce. Its probably also not setup to easily recover to enhance where the limts are.

Now throw in hard tires, the car easily goes over the limit and after that they were along for the ride. If you ever stepped over the limits in somethign like a single seater then you know the feeling.

Not to say the A CGT is treacherous, my one drive in a freinds car was more than enjoyable and it didnt seem twitchy to me on frsh rubber. But like a jpanese superbike the throttle cannot juts be buried. the motor is a real gem and the power comes on hard and fast. There isa reason why lambos are awd and most moderns have esp, civillian brains are not calibrated to deal with power that overcomes grip like that.

There werte a few Mclaren F1s that went of the road in a similar vein, the head of NW went througha field in one and Rowan atkinson just got his back on the road after bending it in two.

Yeah the speed in the accident killed them. But while I dont know the road so could be totaly wrong, 90 in a 45 zone should not necessarliy lead to loss of control in a high perfopmance car, I mean how fast have you taken an off or on ramp posted at 45.

Putting traffic rules aside, this accident to me looks like old concrete tires, a lot of power put through those tires, and a twitchy chassis which lest go once the limts are breached, and wilth old tires that is probably pretty easy to do.

 

False.........he died from rapid deceleration

 

as as consequence of speed. But yeah youa re technicaly correct.

 

I agree with you. The driver just lost it from excessive speed but somehow we always want to find another "reason" that doesn't have to do with simple human stupidity.

2 people are dead because this guy wanted to show off. Tragic, and also stupid.

 

That's exactly what people need to understand, and that's why the media is strongly emphasizing speed as the cause of their deaths. The reason why they lost control is technically irrelevant as any hazard could be present on any public road. All owners of higher powered cars try to justify these deaths by blaming the tires to silently excuse the reality of the speed. It's no different than swerving to avoid a child crossing the street.

Cars are not designed to withstand 100mph impacts into rigid narrow stationary objects like trees. Slicing cars open is nothing new. This instance was just better televised than others.

It would be untruthful for any owner of any powerful car to claim they never exceed the posted speed limits. We all have done it and many will continue to do so. Some by larger margins than others. The only safety net on the street is recognizing the reality of the danger when on public roads and knowing it can happen with any lapse in judgment.

 

It first it cornered very well, but then 4 days in the handling went away. When I returned it to the loaning garage I complained and they said "Now you know what it means when they say a car is tire senstive." So I got the message, that Porsche feels that when they sell a high performance sports car you are expected to maintain the tires at proper tread depth, inflation pressure etc. This car I drove had probably been tested earlier by magazine testers and the tires not replaced so by the time I got it, it only took 4 days fo driving to wear the tires down until they weren't up to the standards of what Porsche AG expects owners will adhere to--when the tires get worn to a certain point they expect the conscientious owner will replace them. All I can say is they don't know Americans who will drive a car until the wire mesh shows at times, buying the car only for the looks. And that early Boxster has probably 1/3rd the horsepower of the Carrera GT.

Also I think the tendency at a group event is to show off. I see it at the Cars 'n Coffee , one in particular where attendees gather in a crowd at the exit and urge each person leaving to "nail it." Even when a cop is parked in sight, some drivers do it. It's an irresistable urge,.

Finally someone who sells exotic cars told me they hit a gas main that nobody talks about, an above ground one. I have seen these in industrial areas. I don't know if that's true but anybody doing research on this accident should see if that is, because that's all the more reason one can't just pick any location to drive a car to its limits--there might be hazards that warranted the 45-mph speed limit.

 

This. +12,000.

They were going too fast for the conditions. It doesn't matter if those conditions were water on the road or a dog in the street or sand or __________. They were going too fast on a public road. The tires were old but to armchair quarterback it and say that was the REAL reason they crashed is pointless and speculative. I have seen lots of professional racers with perfect equipment (even with fresh tires!) go off the track. The difference is that there aren't a couple of posts and trees near the edge of the track to kill you. Unless it's Le Mans and you are driving an Aston Martin.

It was a bad decision to go around that corner at over double the posted speed limit. Very sad all around.

 

PS, this talk of litigation makes me ill. You want to sue someone because you didn't change your tires? Because the guy before you didn't change the tires? Because the shop servicing your car didn't hold the car hostage until you consented to change the tires? Because the Porsche is way to fast to even be sold to civilians? Come on. Are we auto enthusiasts or limp wristed whiners looking for an excuse?

Both of these dudes had been around the block enough times to know the risks of going fast. Their families knew of their passion for cars and speed and you don't have to be a rocket surgeon to know that there are risks with going fast.

 

One thing came to mind when I heard that the owner hadn't changed the tyres on a 9 years old car.

He certainly didn't take his car out very often if it didn't need a new set of tyres in 9 years!

I would be curious to know what mileage was on the clock.

Another case of under-use of a brilliant car?

 

IIRC, he had just purchased that CGT.

But still, he should have know that the tires were old esp since he owned a race shop!

 

Even with new tires the driver still would have driven the same most likely still had a crash or maybe just a spinout. Either way, yeah, the responsibility falls upon the driver.

 

If you are referring to my comments - I am not promoting the idea of any lawsuit. I am simply curious how many sets of hands - owner's or technician's - have had the opportunity to consider replacing the tires in the past 5 years. The driver had only recently purchased the car - it had bounced around a lot:

Porsche Carrera GT in Walker crash had six owners in its cross-country life - Autoweek Racing car news - Autoweek

>8^)
ER

 

Very doubtful.

The already inherently twitchy/nervous nature of the Carrera GT platform was, in this case, almost certainly exacerbated (hugely) by the nine-year-old HARD, grip-challenged tires. That's what most likely turned it into a deathtrap (i.e. either in the curve itself, or when applying power on exit).

NOTE TO ALL CARRERA GT OWNERS: As a matter of course, change ALL FOUR tires no less frequently than once every TWO YEARS (i.e. irrespective of the fact that said set of tires may not have accumulated many miles, nor appear very worn out, etc.).

 

I totally agree - this was of course poor judgement, but those old tires played a HUGE role in the results here. We also had a weather change to about 10° lower temps that day which would not have helped.

Does the two year interval still apply with the newer tire that Michelin certified for the Carrera GT? I thought that was supposed to have calmed things down a bit?

Newly developed tires for the Porsche Carrera GT

>8^)
ER

 

we can all agree that new tires does not fix the nut behind the steering wheel

 

Whoever was/were the owner(s) during the 9 years of the car's existence cannot have used it very much not to need a change of shoes on a Carrera GT.

It makes you wonder why people buy these cars if they don't use them.

 

It is my understanding that oxygen, ozone and sunshine kill tires. For a high performance car that is going to be driven in a high performance manner, two years would be an appropriate time to switch tires.

 

That's basically what the report says. Sure, the tires were old but that doesn't excuse the driver going twice the speed limit.

 

It never ceases to amaze me what nonsense gets talked about the Carrera Gt .
" inherently twitchy/nervous nature of the Carrera GT " and " calmed things down a bit " for example , how completely and utterly ridiculous .

 

We need more owner input on the CGT's actual handling and behavior, not assumptions based on myths and magazine reviews.

 

Certifying a new tire for a vehicle that was that far out of production is not really a common occurrence in the automotive world. You don't have to look too far to read plenty of owner/driver experiences that rated the handling of the CGT as tricky/scary/dangerous etc, even in this very thread. Experiences like those are far too prevalent to be classified as "nonsense" even if you do happen to love the challenge.

You also won't struggle to find owners heaping praise on these new Michelin Pilot Super Sport tires for offering a noticeable improvement in the car's handling and overall grip compared to the Michelin Pilot Sport PS2 tires the CGT was supplied with originally. One owner writes:

Still completely and utterly ridiculous...? If so, please let Futch know he hasn't a clue what he was talking about.

>8^)
ER

 

Spot on. Old tires or new tires, i think the driver was silly and reckless to be doing that sort of speed on public roads. I can only hope people will learn from this. A very painful lesson, but still a lesson, nevertheless.