• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Paul Walker dead

Page 12 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
who? said:
The Carrera GT reportedly will spin the tires in any and all gears which makes it hard to control. If the driver downshifted coming around a bend and spun the tires the weight of the engine could cause the car to slide sideways into a pole then a tree.
Click to expand...

As others have stated including myself, it's believed there was a mechanical malfunction possibly in the steering system.
 
EagleKeeper said:
Yet the physical damage looks much more than a 45mph crash.
Click to expand...

45 mph into a stationary object is pretty bad by itself…assuming there was indeed a malfunction with steering they may have tried to throttle steer.

This car is capable of hitting 60 in less than 4 secs. They could have went from 45mph to 60…in a blink.
 
Can the family of deceased sue Porsche for said "malfunction"?
Since the driver is familiar with that car it eliminates some "driver error" in his part. Paying that much one should expect it function the way you expected and safely too. :\

Memo (dated May 2004) from Porsche to dealership of how dangerous the car can be with the wrong driver and road surface it's driven on -->
http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdesk/tmz_documents/1202_carrera_gt_2.pdf

r10m.png
 
Last edited:
I find it hard to believe that the steering fluid cause that fireball. More like the car was just going to fast like a missile and hit the post , disintegrated and burn.
 
SKORPI0 said:
Can the family of deceased sue Porsche for said "malfunction"?
Since the driver is familiar with that car it eliminates some "driver error" in his part. Paying that much one should expect it function the way you expected and safely too. :\

Memo (dated May 2004) from Porsche to dealership of how dangerous the car can be with the wrong driver and road surface it's driven on -->
http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdesk/tmz_documents/1202_carrera_gt_2.pdf
Click to expand...

They wouldn't be able to sue because the car was dangerous in the hands of the wrong driver, however; if a critical system in the car failed due to manufacturing issues they would have a case.

That said, civilly you can pretty much sue for anything.
 
7window said:
I find it hard to believe that the steering fluid cause that fireball. More like the car was just going to fast like a missile and hit the post , disintegrated and burn.
Click to expand...

No one is saying the steering fluid caused the fire. However; it could have contributed to both a loss of traction and steering control evidenced by no skid marks nor swerving going into the crash by an experienced track driver.
 
SKORPI0 said:
Can the family of deceased sue Porsche for said "malfunction"?
Since the driver is familiar with that car it eliminates some "driver error" in his part. Paying that much one should expect it function the way you expected and safely too. :\

Memo (dated May 2004) from Porsche to dealership of how dangerous the car can be with the wrong driver and road surface it's driven on -->
http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdesk/tmz_documents/1202_carrera_gt_2.pdf

r10m.png
Click to expand...

I think you posted the wrong memo? That doesn't say anything about the car being dangerous, it's all about the car being fragile and expensive to repair.
 
News flash, extremely powerful supercar is dangerous if driven recklessly!

In other news water is wet and gravity makes stuff fall to the ground.
 
alkemyst said:
No one is saying the steering fluid caused the fire. However; it could have contributed to both a loss of traction and steering control evidenced by no skid marks nor swerving going into the crash by an experienced track driver.
Click to expand...

No matter how good (experienced) of a driver you are, when you are doing doughnuts and crazy 8 accident is bound to happen. The street is not wide enough for this stunt.
 
7window said:
No matter how good (experienced) of a driver you are, when you are doing doughnuts and crazy 8 accident is bound to happen. The street is not wide enough for this stunt.
Click to expand...

It's already proven that the donut marks were not from the Carerra GT.
 
TechBoyJK said:
IIRC it was said some of the damage was done by the fire dept trying to recover bodies. They had to tear it apart. So many of the photos are post-burn and post-extraction.
Click to expand...

Eh... I don't know about that. The fire department upon arriving would not cut the car apart to try to get the bodies out if they were obviously deceased (which they were). They would leave it intact so that law enforcement can do their investigation with as much evidence intact as possible. Only thing i could see the fire department doing is maybe causing a little damage while extinguishing the fire.
 
TechBoyJK said:
IIRC it was said some of the damage was done by the fire dept trying to recover bodies. They had to tear it apart. So many of the photos are post-burn and post-extraction.
Click to expand...

No, because there are photos with the bodies in place, covered with tarps, and the car has the same damage.

Also note that in the video just after the accident, a bystander says the car is split in half.
 
7window said:
Well I missed that one. Just looking at the scene that car ihas to be going at a high rate of speed. There is no way that is 50mph driving.
Click to expand...

A 50 MPH crash with an immovable object is like dropping the car from the fifth floor of a building.

Speed was a factor, but I doubt they were anywhere more than 60ish mph hitting that tree.

There is no evidence they had braked.

Hiting a tree at even 45mph is pretty damn serious.
 
alkemyst said:
A 50 MPH crash with an immovable object is like dropping the car from the fifth floor of a building.

Speed was a factor, but I doubt they were anywhere more than 60ish mph hitting that tree.

There is no evidence they had braked.

Hiting a tree at even 45mph is pretty damn serious.
Click to expand...

Not surprisingly there are few crash tests of Porches, or performance sports cars of any kind.

So here's a video of an A4 Cab hitting an offset barrier at 40 MPH.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...-crash-test-20032009/676195405001/6513160001/

Not saying that Porche wasn't doing 45 when it hit the pole, but if it was then it really is a deathtrap.
 
Markbnj said:
Not surprisingly there are few crash tests of Porches, or performance sports cars of any kind.

So here's a video of an A4 Cab hitting an offset barrier at 40 MPH.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...-crash-test-20032009/676195405001/6513160001/

Not saying that Porche wasn't doing 45 when it hit the pole, but if it was then it really is a deathtrap.
Click to expand...

Supercars like this just aren't built the same way as a traditional car like an A4. Most of them are designed to break in half during collisions. The body panels are usually nothing more than aerodynamic aids, so they are removed/mangled very easily and it always makes wrecks of them look really bad.

In my opinion the wreck characteristics aren't of a car traveling super fast. It looks like that is a 45 mph road, and I would guess they were maybe going 55ish. If they were going 100+ like some people seem to think then there is no way the car would've stopped where it did. It would've flown through the light post, tree, and landed well far away. It would've been airborne. But I'm no expert by any stretch of the imagination.
 
DougK62 said:
Supercars like this just aren't built the same way as a traditional car like an A4. Most of them are designed to break in half during collisions. The body panels are usually nothing more than aerodynamic aids, so they are removed/mangled very easily and it always makes wrecks of them look really bad.

In my opinion the wreck characteristics aren't of a car traveling super fast. It looks like that is a 45 mph road, and I would guess they were maybe going 55ish. If they were going 100+ like some people seem to think then there is no way the car would've stopped where it did. It would've flown through the light post, tree, and landed well far away. It would've been airborne. But I'm no expert by any stretch of the imagination.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that's true. I had a look on wreckedexotics and are six pages of smashed Carrera GTs, most from that same model era.

http://www.wreckedexotics.com/carreragt/index.shtml

So either they really are accident prone or a lot of idiots buy them... or both. Interestingly, here's one that hit a retaining wall at 150 MPH and killed both people inside. Looks better than the one Walker was in. Of course, not the same as hitting a tree, which will just rip you apart.

http://www.wreckedexotics.com/carreragt/carreragt_20050602_005.shtml
 
You have to remember too, Super cars are not made to be safe five star safety rating vehicles. Most are street legal race cars and made almost entirely of fiberglass, carbon fiber, and very light weight not so durable materials.
 
7window said:
Well I missed that one. Just looking at the scene that car ihas to be going at a high rate of speed. There is no way that is 50mph driving.
Click to expand...

If going over a speed bump will mess up a bunch of panels, then driving it through a telephone pole would presumably be a little worse.
 
wholesalestunna said:
You have to remember too, Super cars are not made to be safe five star safety rating vehicles. Most are street legal race cars and made almost entirely of fiberglass, carbon fiber, and very light weight not so durable materials.
Click to expand...

Carbon fiber is suppose to be a good thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top