Coming this direction, the tunnel makes it feel like you are going slower than you are due to the lack of passing references (trees, etc.). It's also downhill, so you are going faster than your foot/throttle angle makes it feel.
There is zero straight once you exit the tunnel; the turn begins immediately, and it is every so slightly off-camber; there is also, iirc, a little swell that unloads the weight just a little, which can be enough to matter. You need to stand on the brakes a couple of seconds before exiting the tunnel to get down to a navigable speed. The road surface is a little rough there; it's not lumpy or bumpy, but it's not butter smooth either.
Btw, it's not a 'concrete' wall, in the sense of something man-made: it's the granite face of the mountain formed as a result of cutting the roadway itself. It's easily visibly in Google Maps with satellite view enabled (keywords: Angeles Crest Tunnels).
411, my work buddy was riding his '24 Gold Wing around the forest (for the first time, based on my briefing) that afternoon and got stopped (coming from the ascending/opposite direction) by the road closure just a few hundred meters from the accident site as LEOs and Emergency responders had just secured the area.
¹- I rent sports cars through Turo a few times a year and take them up there for fun. Among this year's choices were a 2024 BMW M2 (6-speed) and a 2024 Corvette C8. [edit: formatting]
Going downhill is usually when I'm most conservative. The margin for error is a lot lower than when you're driving uphill. Get a little loose and gravity makes the whole situation much worse instead of helping bleed off speed.
That seems to be a more recent thing. There is now a concrete barrier in front of the rock face.
Nodding thx for the correction. Understandably, I am not scanning the outside shoulder in this or any other technical section in the Angeles National Forest roadways. "Eyes on the road" is not just something your Dad would say when driving at speed on these (or any other) fast, twisty roads.
It’s not a race track.
Broke ass (mentally poor is also a thing) motherfuckers driving rental supercars or daddy’s Ferrari at 100+ mph.
Imagine having millions of dollars and not being able to afford track day. Cheap ass, broke ass, losers. The whole lot.
I settled for a much more sedate pace after that. And decided to focus on buying slower fun cars that aren't so inherently capable. Harder to get them up into that area of the physics equation where one unexpected variable becomes life threatening.
Thank you to Vince Zampella and everyone else who worked on that game for those memories.
Rest in peace
However, I really stopped playing big titles since then. Are there any good “woah” games that took it another step further?
Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice (the original, I haven't played the sequel) was crazy good. Gameplay-wise it's fine, but story wise it is one of the most emotionally intense games I have ever played. I recommend going into it spoiler-free. Look it up and see if it's something you're interested in, and if you want to play it, stop reading and play it.
RIP.
The world lost a titan. No pun intended.
3 kids, days before Christmas, passanger bopped too and DIAF while risking other road users for nothing.
Keep speeding to the tracks, reaper only knocks once.
Technically it isn't designed to handle someone fumbling it into a concrete barrier well beyond the speed limit.
RIP Vince
TL;DR take it to the track, where the road surface is well maintained.
Every track day I've attended required the cars to have been inspected for leaks and loose components. And they were quick to clean up any debris or oil.
Not that tracking cars is the safest hobby, but if someone is gonna drive like that regardless its far safer at a track than on public roads.
His games were a significant part of my teenagehood, as I'm sure they were for many others. Thank you for all the memories Vince.
https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/video-game-develope...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_296
(shared for context around vehicle power and dynamics likely leading or contributing to the event)
Just one such example (1983):
https://www.nytimes.com/1983/06/10/business/corporate-triump...
> CORPORATE TRIUMPH, THEN DEATH IN A FERRARI
> The young president of a successful new computer company died Wednesday afternoon in a car crash in California's Silicon Valley, hours after his company had sold its stock to the public for the first time and he had become a multimillionaire.
A habit of speeding is created from a lack of consideration, it's an ignorant and dumb thing to do.
Working from home has forced me to be more deliberate with my free time and how I get away. I tend to choose exercise and am rarely in rush to where I'm going anymore.
If you are even slightly interested in celtic and germanic mythology and modern psychology, go for it.
A Ferrari 296GTB sprints from 0-100mph in 4.7s. The 1983 Lamborghini Countach I had a wall poster of as a kid, took 12.1s (and a relatively leisurely 5.4s to get to 60mph). The Ferrari is pulling well over 1G longitudinally during this time, enough to induce tunnel vision in some people and warp your perception of speed and distance.
Compare someone accelerating at full throttle through that tunnel in the Countach versus the 296. The 296 would reach 2-3x the speed the Lambo did by the time they reach the curve where he crashed. Human brains can't process and react to surprises 3x as fast as they could in 1983. Even if they could, at 2x the speed your braking distance increases 4x. No amount of traction control or electronic nannies can make up for this. Nor can the electronics bypass the laws of physics - I think for many they provide a false sense of security.
And while there have been huge improvements in passive safety too, they are tested at speeds like 40mph, not the 90mph+ it is estimated Vince's car was going. This is why Teslas have the highest crash safety ratings there is, while also have the highest rate of fatal accidents.
Not to take away from the tragedy that is Vince's death. I enjoyed many hours playing MoH and CoD as a youth and this is extremely sad news. But as a car enthusiast, I am using this as a sober reminder of how quickly things can go wrong at speed.
The only equation that really matters here is KE=.5mv^2
The difference in danger between two arbitrary speeds is not linear. It is quadratic.
The main problem with traction control etc is that they are ridiculously capable… until they aren’t. Minor things will cause you to lose it in a 1983 supercar that a modern car will just quietly fix. But nothing will save you if you floor it in the wrong place. Even a Miata without TC can have problems.
(I dailied a McLaren for a while, and at some point turned TC fully off on a track and promptly spun it at maybe 40 mph)
https://www.thedrive.com/news/37353/driver-turns-off-tractio...
Having owned a few Miatas I can attest that they spin if you're not careful on slippery surfaces. :) TC/DSC is a lifesafer particularly when driving at normal speeds.
Driving my NA (pre-TC) was a pleasure in part because it had so little grip and so little power, that it would let go progressively and at low enough speeds that I could always catch it and not risk a serious crash. Between the squealing of tires and the immense body roll, I always knew how much grip I had left to play with. I now drive a 911, and stability control stays on permanently because I'm not confident I'd always catch it if I accidentally give it too much power (or lift off too quickly) in a turn.