to a british audience maybe, but you have to remember those episodes have never been shown here...
if we pool our funds, can we sail the seas do piratey things? Build a mighty pirate fleet from captured vessels and terrorize the seas yaarrrrrggggggghhhhhhhhhhhh 
pirate:
pirate:just watched it. there is definitely still room for improvement, but all in all that was a very enjoyable way to pass time. I'm now sold that this little venture will turn out pretty damn ok.
Moonshine challenge was pretty awesome. Much better back and forth from the presenters. good production through most of it. still a few bits that feel incomplete, but it's to the point where I don't care anymore because I am enjoying the hell out of watching
Moonshine challenge was pretty awesome. Much better back and forth from the presenters. good production through most of it. still a few bits that feel incomplete, but it's to the point where I don't care anymore because I am enjoying the hell out of watching
I wouldn't call it either of those... surely having sex with someone means something, or no one would ever get rejected... and conversely, having sex is also not the be all, end all in a relationship, just because you have sex once doesn't mean you are gonna live the rest of your life with that person, or even that you necessarily love them at that moment.
But different people think on different sides of the spectrum, you just gotta find someone with a similar viewpoint to yourself, and have a good time, sex or no. And then move on if it's needed
EDIT: oh wait, there was another page. I think everyone is arguing the same points at eachother
Last edited by RiseAgainstMe!, .
Guys, for our sake, please stop being rational, nice people. This thread is so much less interesting to read
but seriously, +1 x2
I actually am too... 'bout two years now. was just making a funny
and ditto. Plus she'd probably kick my ass if she ever found them
that's what happens when nobody has girlfriends
no he said that being famous and carrying expensive stuff with you while being an 80 year old man means some scumbag is going to take advantage of you sooner or later. If you are 80, you shouldn't be carrying that much valuables with you without protection. easy target.
i thought that one could exist, it was just invite only...
well New Zealand is upside down like Australia, so that would make sense
you appear to have a bad case of car mirroring. The entire car appears as normal, except exactly backwards. Which explains why the outside wheels have lifted and why you are driving on the wrong side of the car
History Channel
that might be just a little bit of an exaggeration.
Top Gear USA [Spoiler Alert]
I could have sworn there was already a thread for this, but I can't find it... maybe on another forum.
first episode is already uploaded on final gear in torrent form if you haven;t seen it.
I would suggest not reading below this if you wish to watch the show without first reading my take on it.
Anyhow, here are my observations from the first episode and how it compares to the original. I did my best to be fair, but many things below are just my opinions:
1. not as polished as the original... yet. There were several awkward pauses and segments that were drawn out too long, but I expect this will be fixed .
2. Annoying use of speeding up the film to make the cars appear as if they are going super fast while they aren't in several cut-scenes. Probably the thing that annoyed me the most about the show.
3. The hosts: Did not try to be Clarkson, Hammond, and May. Very thankfully. They are their own people with their own personalities. Seemed uncomfortable at times in the role of presenting a TV show, but I have high hopes that they will improve. They each showed brief flashes of brilliance in the show. And equally all had awkward moments.
4. Tanner Foust: cannot drive in a straight line to save his life. The 2-time American Drift champion and rallycross gold medalist is true to form, putting everything in sight sideways and backwards. He definitely knows his sh*t though. Gained major kudos with me for describing the Viper as hard to drive and his knowledge of shifting from hearing a Lamborghini almost a mile away. An automotive purist with gasoline in his veins. Not comfortable as a presenter yet, he had several very awkward moments. However, he showed occasional brilliance that gives me hope he will grow quickly into that role. He will be the first to tell you that your million dollar baby is complete sh*t, but may stumble a bit on how to tell you that.
5 . Adam Ferrara: the comedian is the best presenter of the three. Had some genuinely funny moments, very smooth delivery most of the time. His interview of Aldrin started out well, but the second half got awkward. I would bet he has almost never, if ever, done an interview before though, I have high hopes he will pick up the skill quickly. Most likely to just sit back and enjoy the ride, but also most likely to make the viewers enjoy the ride.
6. Rutledge Wood: the one presenter that hasn't already started to carve out a warm fuzzy place in my heart. He's not all that bad a presenter. And he knows a bit about cars. I just found nothing to really connect with in the first episode from him. Maybe he'll grow on me, or he may become the one I always root against in challenges. Annoying at times, seemed somewhat uncomfortable presenting on the fly. Had some good moments though, creamsicle and bananorama was pretty good. Most Southern of the three, I actually thought he seemed too polished for his own good. A little more rough and tumble good ol boy would do him well.
7. American Stig needs more hype. He didn't really get a proper introduction.
8. I am a huge fan of the British Top Gear. I love the back and forth between the hosts. But there was a sense of familiarity about having American presenters for me that just felt good somewhere in my heart. I can only hope that the presenters will in time pick up the same level of simultaneous camaraderie and hatred that the Brits present.
9. Some technical difficulties. Cameras in car very vibrate-y. I heard that there were technical problems in the studio during the filming of the studio sections. Not really all that surprising and should be ironed out soon I would guess.
10. I hate commercials.
11. It's not British Top Gear. thank god. Or at British Top Gear's standard or really anywhere near it. yet. There are huge improvements to be made for sure. But I saw enough things that give me hope. I will definitely be watching this from now on, hopefully I will watch it progress quickly.
12. I don't expect the British/ other Europeans to ever like it as much as their own familiar version. And I expect many will bash it from the very start and never give it a fair chance.
13. Parts of it appeared way too scripted. I am absolutely certain the "chase" of the Viper was a whole lot of driving around at moderate speeds on roads with a Cobra helicopter following behind.
I could go on forever but my hands are tired of typing now.
So yeah did anyone else watch this? opinions?
first episode is already uploaded on final gear in torrent form if you haven;t seen it.
I would suggest not reading below this if you wish to watch the show without first reading my take on it.Anyhow, here are my observations from the first episode and how it compares to the original. I did my best to be fair, but many things below are just my opinions:
1. not as polished as the original... yet. There were several awkward pauses and segments that were drawn out too long, but I expect this will be fixed .
2. Annoying use of speeding up the film to make the cars appear as if they are going super fast while they aren't in several cut-scenes. Probably the thing that annoyed me the most about the show.
3. The hosts: Did not try to be Clarkson, Hammond, and May. Very thankfully. They are their own people with their own personalities. Seemed uncomfortable at times in the role of presenting a TV show, but I have high hopes that they will improve. They each showed brief flashes of brilliance in the show. And equally all had awkward moments.
4. Tanner Foust: cannot drive in a straight line to save his life. The 2-time American Drift champion and rallycross gold medalist is true to form, putting everything in sight sideways and backwards. He definitely knows his sh*t though. Gained major kudos with me for describing the Viper as hard to drive and his knowledge of shifting from hearing a Lamborghini almost a mile away. An automotive purist with gasoline in his veins. Not comfortable as a presenter yet, he had several very awkward moments. However, he showed occasional brilliance that gives me hope he will grow quickly into that role. He will be the first to tell you that your million dollar baby is complete sh*t, but may stumble a bit on how to tell you that.
5 . Adam Ferrara: the comedian is the best presenter of the three. Had some genuinely funny moments, very smooth delivery most of the time. His interview of Aldrin started out well, but the second half got awkward. I would bet he has almost never, if ever, done an interview before though, I have high hopes he will pick up the skill quickly. Most likely to just sit back and enjoy the ride, but also most likely to make the viewers enjoy the ride.
6. Rutledge Wood: the one presenter that hasn't already started to carve out a warm fuzzy place in my heart. He's not all that bad a presenter. And he knows a bit about cars. I just found nothing to really connect with in the first episode from him. Maybe he'll grow on me, or he may become the one I always root against in challenges. Annoying at times, seemed somewhat uncomfortable presenting on the fly. Had some good moments though, creamsicle and bananorama was pretty good. Most Southern of the three, I actually thought he seemed too polished for his own good. A little more rough and tumble good ol boy would do him well.
7. American Stig needs more hype. He didn't really get a proper introduction.
8. I am a huge fan of the British Top Gear. I love the back and forth between the hosts. But there was a sense of familiarity about having American presenters for me that just felt good somewhere in my heart. I can only hope that the presenters will in time pick up the same level of simultaneous camaraderie and hatred that the Brits present.
9. Some technical difficulties. Cameras in car very vibrate-y. I heard that there were technical problems in the studio during the filming of the studio sections. Not really all that surprising and should be ironed out soon I would guess.
10. I hate commercials.
11. It's not British Top Gear. thank god. Or at British Top Gear's standard or really anywhere near it. yet. There are huge improvements to be made for sure. But I saw enough things that give me hope. I will definitely be watching this from now on, hopefully I will watch it progress quickly.
12. I don't expect the British/ other Europeans to ever like it as much as their own familiar version. And I expect many will bash it from the very start and never give it a fair chance.
13. Parts of it appeared way too scripted. I am absolutely certain the "chase" of the Viper was a whole lot of driving around at moderate speeds on roads with a Cobra helicopter following behind.
I could go on forever but my hands are tired of typing now.
So yeah did anyone else watch this? opinions?
Last edited by RiseAgainstMe!, .
I can just imagine the size of the marshmellows that thing fires... truly terrifying stuff dawesdust.
I have one of these under my bed in case the Russians invade. Damn commies always trying to sneak up on 'merica, I won't have any of it!
http://www.motionpicturearmourer.com/rpg.jpg
http://www.motionpicturearmourer.com/rpg.jpg
brand new Girl Talk song/album (it's a 70 minute one song mash-up album) All Day 
soooo sick :headbang: I don't know if it's better than Feed the Animals yet, but he's certainly making a damn good attempt. Feed the Animals was the defining song/album of the last few years for me and my friends for sure.
free download straight from the man himself, if you can download it, the site's been overloaded all day:
http://www.illegal-art.net/allday/
soooo sick :headbang: I don't know if it's better than Feed the Animals yet, but he's certainly making a damn good attempt. Feed the Animals was the defining song/album of the last few years for me and my friends for sure.
free download straight from the man himself, if you can download it, the site's been overloaded all day:
http://www.illegal-art.net/allday/
ah but why do German cars break down so much? BMW Audi and Mercedes all have reliability issues according to Consumer Reports. So how can your machines be so expensive and "perfectly engineered" when they have average reliability at best? My guess is because Germans have no sense of cost vs. benefit vs. reliability analysis. They usually will go after benefit, cost and reliability be damned.
German engineering produces expensive cars with expensive parts that require expensive adjustments that can usually only be performed by expensive master mechanics at expensive dealerships or expensive service shops.
no thanks, not for me, though they may be wonderful to drive. American cars may be derided as shit to drive by others, but they are generally cheap and simple. And as of late, they have been getting very reliable. American engineers will usually look at cost first, trying to improve the profit margin as much as possible. If you can just build every car a little cheaper, you can save millions for your company. It got so bad in the 80s and 90s that reliability and function suffered badly, and people noticed. Recently there seems to be a shift to correct this problem and bring the reliability back up, which is good to see.
wildly different design philosophies, which is one reason DaimlerChrysler was never going to work out. Don't get me wrong, I love Germany, I have some pretty strong connections to the country. but the differences in our cultures are so large that it can be very tough for Germans to understand Americans and vice versa.
And I wouldn't say one or the other is necessarily better, there are strengths and weaknesses to both approaches. So you will likely never buy American, and I will never buy German.
German engineering produces expensive cars with expensive parts that require expensive adjustments that can usually only be performed by expensive master mechanics at expensive dealerships or expensive service shops.
no thanks, not for me, though they may be wonderful to drive. American cars may be derided as shit to drive by others, but they are generally cheap and simple. And as of late, they have been getting very reliable. American engineers will usually look at cost first, trying to improve the profit margin as much as possible. If you can just build every car a little cheaper, you can save millions for your company. It got so bad in the 80s and 90s that reliability and function suffered badly, and people noticed. Recently there seems to be a shift to correct this problem and bring the reliability back up, which is good to see.
wildly different design philosophies, which is one reason DaimlerChrysler was never going to work out. Don't get me wrong, I love Germany, I have some pretty strong connections to the country. but the differences in our cultures are so large that it can be very tough for Germans to understand Americans and vice versa.
And I wouldn't say one or the other is necessarily better, there are strengths and weaknesses to both approaches. So you will likely never buy American, and I will never buy German.
German engineering is shit too
My dad could do nothing but complain about how crappy Germans were to work with when he had to. He says the vaunted German engineering (ooooohh... ahhhhh) means 'hey! I know! let's make it more expensive and more complicated than it really needs to be'. Also, Germans are insufferable to work with because they do not understand when someone is joking and take offense to it (huh sound familiar?) cultural differences is all. But he likes the Italians that he works with/for now. mostly. they're chill brah.
Ok even now? yes? ok let's just hug and make up and at least our cars don't have doormats that kill people:ambulance
My dad could do nothing but complain about how crappy Germans were to work with when he had to. He says the vaunted German engineering (ooooohh... ahhhhh) means 'hey! I know! let's make it more expensive and more complicated than it really needs to be'. Also, Germans are insufferable to work with because they do not understand when someone is joking and take offense to it (huh sound familiar?) cultural differences is all. But he likes the Italians that he works with/for now. mostly. they're chill brah.
Ok even now? yes? ok let's just hug and make up and at least our cars don't have doormats that kill people:ambulance
As far as I know, it's just because there is no standard that everyone agrees on or has been forced on the manufacturers. And you can't really fix the problem, auto makers are from all over the world, it would take somebody forcing an international standard on the manufacturers. Which I certainly don't have the power to do, or I would. 
Same reason some gas caps are on the right of the car, though the left makes more sense (reverse for people who drive from the right). And the same reason a lot of people on this forum drive on the wrong side of the road. There just is no recognized standard.
Same reason some gas caps are on the right of the car, though the left makes more sense (reverse for people who drive from the right). And the same reason a lot of people on this forum drive on the wrong side of the road.
There just is no recognized standard.cool. thanks guys I understand it now
So if there's one thing I've taken from all of this, it's that handling is some sort of voodoo black magic but seriously, I actually understood the majority of that, and I guess I mostly got the answer I was looking for...
But tristan said something that got me to thinking ("Wider track will result in more grip at that end (or overall if both are increased) due to reduced load transfer")... It makes intuitive sense, but I can't figure out the math behind it... anyone have a concise explanation or a good link?
And also does that mean that older street cars, which generally have a narrower track, are at a distinct disadvantage when they race against their more beefy modern equivalents in club racing? as they do frequently, built to the same rules.
but seriously, I actually understood the majority of that, and I guess I mostly got the answer I was looking for...But tristan said something that got me to thinking ("Wider track will result in more grip at that end (or overall if both are increased) due to reduced load transfer")... It makes intuitive sense, but I can't figure out the math behind it... anyone have a concise explanation or a good link?
And also does that mean that older street cars, which generally have a narrower track, are at a distinct disadvantage when they race against their more beefy modern equivalents in club racing? as they do frequently, built to the same rules.
Car Width vs. Handling
So I just had a bit of a debate with my buddy at college, and well, now neither of us is really sure what the outcome was... And I can't find a good answer online.
We were talking about car handling, and he said something to the effect that making a car wider will make it handle better... I said that there shouldn't be any reason that that is true based on physics, assuming that you are not changing the center of mass and the weight stays constant... The contact patch should still be the same too. But it just seems right somehow that a wider car handles better, though I can't find any physical reason for it to...
Now if you widen a car and are able to move the center of mass lower because of this, it may handle better because it will have a lower center of gravity. That seems right to me.
We also thought of rotational inertia (yes, we are both studying to be mechanical engineers), a wider car would mean more rotational intertia as the car's body rolls... more weight to the edges, so it takes longer to transfer weight I think... but then why are many racing cars widened?
That fact leads me to believe we might be overthinking this, and it doesn't really make all that much difference in comparison with other factors like tire width, suspension geometry, and center of mass height? but I really dunno, that's why I'm asking.
We were talking about car handling, and he said something to the effect that making a car wider will make it handle better... I said that there shouldn't be any reason that that is true based on physics, assuming that you are not changing the center of mass and the weight stays constant... The contact patch should still be the same too. But it just seems right somehow that a wider car handles better, though I can't find any physical reason for it to...
Now if you widen a car and are able to move the center of mass lower because of this, it may handle better because it will have a lower center of gravity. That seems right to me.
We also thought of rotational inertia (yes, we are both studying to be mechanical engineers), a wider car would mean more rotational intertia as the car's body rolls... more weight to the edges, so it takes longer to transfer weight I think... but then why are many racing cars widened?
That fact leads me to believe we might be overthinking this, and it doesn't really make all that much difference in comparison with other factors like tire width, suspension geometry, and center of mass height? but I really dunno, that's why I'm asking.
I am 97.2% sure he didn't do it on purpose. If you watch the in-car view, he takes his hands off the wheel when he hits the wall like he is supposed to, the wheel jerks around as it bounces of the wall, and he catches it immediately after, but the wheel is upside down because the front wheels have turned due to hitting the wall... then suspension broken, he's just a passenger with a split second to avert disaster.... maybe he should have stepped on the brakes sooner or something, but he just took an impact, is likely a bit disoriented from spinning and hitting the wall, and only has a split second to realize that his car is turning into the track, which he doesn't know it's gonna do... And I really doubt he decided, yeah lets maybe throw my life away for the championship by getting t-boned by a f1 car. the risks are too great at those speeds for anyone to think that is a good idea, unless they are monumentally stupid.
"Well I never... someone appears to have enlarged my car so the tire is three feet tall. "
AND
the international version:
"Well I never... someone appears to have enlarged my car so the tyre is almost a meter tall."
AND
the rhyming slang version:
"Well I never... Someone appears ter 'ave enlarged me drinks in a bar so da tyre is almost a meter tall"
AND
the international version:
"Well I never... someone appears to have enlarged my car so the tyre is almost a meter tall."
AND
the rhyming slang version:
"Well I never... Someone appears ter 'ave enlarged me drinks in a bar so da tyre is almost a meter tall"
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG