Also note that the car before the 45 (too blurry for me to read) was MUCH higher than the 45 (or Stewart) even was.

I understand the concept, but I think as many are saying: the poorly lit dirt track, horrible visibility out of the car (especially to the side), and the fact that the person who was struck approached a moving car on a race track might make the negligence case a little more difficult to make than the average driver of…

This is golden. I'm not sure what makes me giggle more: that these people think there's a weather controlling device, with that kind of accuracy - or that they think billions were spent to combat our international foes with the insurmountable force of... a spot of rain.

I honestly think a civil suit will involve more parties than Stewart. I think there may be a pretty good case for some form of negligence on the part of... whatever governing body techincally is in charge of these races. Visibility is atrocious, lighting is awful, handling is purposefully difficult and evasive…

I dunno. If Smoke got out of his car and walked right up to a car on an active race course - I'd be thinking it was an unfortunate bad decision, too.

Stewart's back end stepped out because of the human body underneath the right rear tire.

What could one expect to pay to insure it?

"I try to ignore my phone as much as I can, but the reality is that you will have to take the occasional phone call on the road. Bluetooth will make that so much better."

I'd be more willing to imagine that millions and millions have flowed into the accounts of his label and producers than his own pocket. He's an artist - and I'm not surprised if he can't exactly afford renting a massively expensive private jet, complete with crew, himself... not for very long. A music star may have…

But seriously - could someone explain what I'm missing? Why would we petition the President about modifying a Congressional Act? The best he could do would be to ask congress to make it a priority — which writing to congress would achieve more directly.

Should probably hit Congress's desks, besides, if I remember my 5th grade social studies.

Shouldn't we write to congress? They make and change laws, right? Shouldn't one write to the legislative body that enacted the act when seeking to reverse it?

I don't mean to be a jerk and go on about a point - but to put it in way fewer words than I did before:

Oh! Derp. You meant six months of driving not on a cross-country trip. Sorry. I read that completely wrong. Point well taken. The equivalent of six months wear.

I feel like you misunderstood what I meant by "control." I mean experimental control - like the ability to manipulate and measure it - knowing what that "imperfection" is. Treating a test track like a lab, you could add certain incremental amounts of, for example, water (or mud, or gravel of various size, etc.) on the…

I just don't understand it from an engineering standpoint. If you want to test the car's reaction to a turn at a given speed and radius/bank angle - I'd figure you could do more in your controlled test track (i.e., telemetry, high speed video analysis, manipulation of the surface with gravel/sand/water, and whatever…

It's really become obnoxious. It's as if manufacturers are afraid to say their car wasn't optimized on the Nurburgring. It's as much marketing as anything, clearly, if a LR is spending "development" time on it. What, pray tell, can engineers learn from the 'ring that they can't learn on any other test track?

Cue the spit jokes.

Yes. This was quite possibly one of the stupidest things I've ever read.

1) I'm from STL too, cheers.