Latest Headlines on OCRegister.com
[x] Close
Auto Motion ~ Car news, reviews and events

Archive for the 'Weird news' Category

Bugatti Veyron lands in lagoon after driver is distracted by … a pelican?

November 13th, 2009, 12:47 pm by Matt Degen
YouTube Preview Image

As a car lover, this is something you just cringe at the thought of: A Bugatti Veyron, one of the world’s most expensive and fastest production cars, going out of control and landing in the thick muck of a lagoon.

This was the sad case on Wednesday in Texas when such a car, valued at $2 million, went off an interstate near Omega Bay and ended up in a saltwater lagoon.

According to the Galveston County News, the male driver of the 16-cylinder, 1,001-horsepower supercar was looking for real estate in Galveston when “a low-flying pelican distracted him.”

From  there the driver, who did not identify himself (would you?) “jerked the wheel, dropped his cell phone, and the car’s front tire left the frontage road and entered a muddy patch, which foiled his attempt to maneuver away from the lagoon,” reports the County News.

The real kicker for us car nuts is this sentence in the article: The Veyron’s powerful engine gurgled like an outboard motor for about 15 minutes before it died.

Oi.

While the driver was not hurt, the precious car had to be towed out of the lagoon. We can’t even imagine the damage done to this automotive wonder.

In other news…

‘Millennium Mercedes’ is alive in O.C.

November 13th, 2009, 10:49 am by Matt Degen

Earlier this week I wrote about a real gem here in Orange County, the Mercedes-Benz Classic Center in Irvine, where you can see dozens of vintage M-B’s in pristine condition, and get parts for just about every Mercedes ever made.

What I didn’t get around to sharing in that past story was that the center also houses arguably the most unique Mercedes-Benz on the planet: The “Millennium Mercedes.”

This one-of-a-kind car has the body of an SLK 230 roadster and the chassis of a G-Series wagon, Mercedes-Benz’s military-grade off-road vehicles.

Read the rest of this entry »

The 3 Best Cars for Cougars?

November 11th, 2009, 11:32 am by Matt Degen

2010panamera

MotherProoof.com, an automotive site geared for women, knows there are many “cougars” on the prowl these days, and that these ladies need worthy wheels in which to get around. With that in mind — and citing TV shows such as “Cougar Town” and “Desperate Housewives” — the site has named its top three cars for these older women who are on the hunt for younger guys.

Do you agree with MotherProof’s three choices for 2010?

1) Porsche Panamera. “Truly the coolest Porsche we’ve seen,” the site says of the car, pictured above. “This four-seater combines the legendary Porsche reputation for quality with great looks and a driving style even the most finicky Cougar-thusiast will appreciate. We liked the opportunity to select multiple sport modes as well as the exhaust amplifier button.

2) BMW Z4. “This roadster makes anyone look and feel sexy driving it! Bolstered seats and racy road-feel cater to the most assertive class of Cougars.”

3) Jaguar XF: “This fanciful feline may be the purrrrfect fit for the queen of all cougars. Completely new styling and tons of luxurious features will appeal to even the most expert couture lovers.”

See MotherProof.com’s complete article on cars for cougars.

Did you miss?

Watch a Volkswagen Touareg pull a 747

November 10th, 2009, 4:42 pm by Matt Degen
YouTube Preview Image

Yes, you read that headline correct. The video above from the U.K.’s “Fifth Gear“  has been around for a couple of years now, but I just recently saw it and was utterly amazed at what Volkwagen’s V10 turbo diesel engine could do.

I’ve been test-driving a Touareg 2 with the new  turbo diesel V6, and even that engine has a mighty amount of torque — 406 lbs-ft, to be exact.

And then there is the diesel V10. When it was available in the U.S., it put out a stellar 553 lbs-ft. Just what can you do with that much torque?

Pull a jumbo jet, apparently.

Also check out:

2009 Chevy vs. 1959 Chevy: Which is more crash-worthy?

October 26th, 2009, 5:26 am by Matt Degen
Please enable Javascript and Flash to view this Brightcove video.

Think older, bigger cars are better when it comes to surviving a crash? It turns out to be just the opposite, according to some startling results from a recent test performed by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

As part of its 50-year anniversary, the non-profit institute measured today’s safety standards vs. those of half a century ago by crashing a 2009 Chevy Malibu head-on into a 1959 Chevy Bel Air.

From the photos below and video above, you can see that no, they really don’t make them like they used to. And in terms of surviving a crash, that’s a good thing, says IIHS spokesman Russ Rader.

“They weren’t designed to crash like today’s vehicles are,” Rader said of cars from decades past. “We did the test to demonstrate the advances in auto safety over the least 50 years. Some are obvious, like safety belts and airbags in all cars today. Then there are things that are less obvious, like collapsible steering columns. And we have more crash-worthy designs.

“Vehicles today are designed to crash and protect people,” he said. “That is clearly demonstrated in this test. A 2009 Malibu that we used did a very good job of keeping the occupant compartment in tact and (lessening the effects of) crash forces. The Bel Air just collapsed.”

What’s surprising for a lot of people in seeing this is just how crumpled the older car was compared to the newer and one, even though the older one had a slight weight advantage. After all, weren’t these old cars built like battleships?

“People think of the cars back then as being these big, heavy tanks, but in fact in this match-up the Malibu and Bel Air – even though the Malibu is somewhat smaller – they are very close in weight,” Rader said. “The Bel Air weighs 3,629 pounds. The Malibu weighs 3,452. They weren’t very far apart in weight but they were very far apart in how they were engineered structurally.”

Oh, and Rader added that he wanted to cut off any naysayers at the proverbial pass when it comes to one particular issue about this test:

“There are always people online that like to act as experts,” he said. “It looks like the Bel Air did not have an engine in it. The Bel Air was drivable and equipped with its engine. The only (mechanical) alteration was, as we do with all these cars, is take the gas and other fluids out.”

“We wanted to choose a vehicle that was popular at the time,” Rader adds. “This one was in good, original condition. The only alteration was it was reupholstered and have some minor trim changed.”

When asked what kind of safety advancements we might see in cars in the next 50 years, the IIHS has some interesting predictions. We’ll get to those in another post.

For now, check out the photos below (click to enlarge) of the IIHS crash test — and make sure this doesn’t happen to you by keeping safe out there on our highways.

2009-malibu bel-air-before
bel-air-crash2 bel-air-crash3 bel-air-crash4
malibu-interior bel-air-interior
malibu-after bel-air-after

More from the Auto Motion blog:

What a $3.4 million breakdown looks like

October 19th, 2009, 5:19 pm by Matt Degen

If you think you’re having a bad day, whoever was driving this thing can probably trump it.

According to Jalopnik, this is what happens when a Caterpillar 797 mining truck rated to carry 363 tons attempts to carry 600 tons. Yeah, not a pretty sight.

The truck, by the way, costs $3.4 million and puts out a whopping 3,370 horsepower via its massive diesel engine.

(In case you’re wondering, and I know you are, top speed is an impressive 42 mph.)

How in the world they are going to fix this thing will be task even bigger than this 1.375-million-pound machine (gross operating weight).

In other odd news: