Pirelli Has Some Explaining to Do After Last Weekend’s Azerbaijani Grand Prix Blowouts

by Gabrielle DeSantis

216 miles an hour is fast. Really fast. That number is how fast Formula 1 cars, shod in Pirelli rubber, get going down the main straight at Baku City Circuit. The main straight, along with the tight winding second half of the track is exactly what can make the Azerbaijan Grand Prix so dangerous. F1 is already a dangerous sport, and the track at Baku only contributes to that danger. Now, add to this unreliable tires that detonate under the high loads of Formula 1 racing, and you’ve got a recipe for a massive accident.

How Pirelli’s F1 tires work

Verstappen’s Pirelli-shod F1 car post-blowout | Resul Rehimov via Getty Images

The speeds seen at Baku and other fast tracks, like Circuit De Spa-Francorchamps, subject the tires of a Formula 1 car to massive forces. As the cars speed up, the rubber begins to literally pull itself from the wheel due to the centripetal force. And then there’s the heat. It isn’t uncommon for tires to only function above 212 degrees Farenheight.

When combined, these extreme speeds and temperatures call for a very durable tire. This is where Pirelli comes in. Currently, they are the sole supplier of tires in F1. The Italian company has been since 2011. Pirelli has been doing a great job, creating tires that last longer and withstand the extreme forces the tires are subjected to over a lap very well. But what if, suddenly, they didn’t anymore. What if those tires failed at speed?

What happened in Azerbaijan

Verstappen hangs his head at his broken Pirelli-shod F1 car
Max hangs his head in defeat after his Pirelli tires failed | Natalia Kolesnikova via Getty Images

This is exactly what happened to Aston Martin’s F1 driver, Lance Stroll on Sunday. On the 31st lap of the 51 lap race, Stroll’s Aston Martin shot into the concrete barriers at nearly 200 MPH. Just 10 years ago, a crash like that would have been fatal. Happily, Stroll emerged unhurt. However, even as the race continued to unfold, commentators and drivers alike were questioning Pirelli for the advice the teams were given ahead of the race.

Teams were told to increase tire pressures before the race by the manufacturer. Some teams are even saying this one psi change could have caused Stroll’s blowout, not debris like Pirelli say. Then came Max Verstappen’s crash. At over 200 MPH, Max’s tire failed, sending him straight into the concrete barriers on lap 47. Verstappen was leading not only the race, but the Driver’s Championship as well, leaving his rival, Lewis Hamilton to claim the win.

What it means for the championship

Lance Stroll's Aston Martin mid-crash after his Pirelli tires failed
Lance Stroll mid-crash after his Pirelli’s failed | Ozan Kose via Getty Images

Luckily for Verstappen, Lewis crashed out a lap later, due to a brake issue. This leaves the championship too close to call, with Max only 10 points ahead. But the championship battle wasn’t the headline for the day. The dichotomy between Pirelli’s claims of debris and team’s anger at Pirelli for poor performance has left some questioning the role the tire maker will play in F1.

Drivers have also complained that the newer tires are much heavier, with Lewis Hamilton saying that the tires are too heavy and slow for the cars. Add to that concerns over their durability, and Pirelli must quickly prove that debris was the cause. Big crashes like the ones at Baku are uncommon in F1, but with so little margin for error, they do happen. Now, Pirelli and the sport’s governing body, the FIA, must do all they can to prevent further tire issues.

RELATED: Formula 1: Miami Grand Prix Will Have 19 Turns

The post Pirelli Has Some Explaining to Do After Last Weekend’s Azerbaijani Grand Prix Blowouts appeared first on MotorBiscuit.

/by

What Are the Best Ways to Carry Luggage on Your Motorcycle?

by Gabrielle DeSantis

Whether you’re going camping on your motorcycle or for a simple long-distance ride, sometimes you need more than just your safety gear and some gas. But while some bikes have built-in storage areas, the available space tends to be limited. That’s why dedicated motorcycle luggage is a common sight on many bikes, especially touring and adventure ones. And while picking between the sheer number of available options may seem daunting, it just requires keeping a few things in mind.

Picking your motorcycle luggage is about more than carrying capacity

2009 Triumph Bonneville with saddlebags side 3/4 | Matthew Skwarczek

Riders buy motorcycle luggage so they can carry more things on their bikes at one time. But while adding storage space is theoretically as easy as attaching another bag, in reality, it’s a bit more complicated than that.

Firstly, just like cars and trucks, motorcycles have Gross Vehicle Weight Ratings, RevZilla explains. A bike’s GVWR limits how much weight it can safely carry. Exceed it, and you can crack a sub-frame or worse. So, even if you have large bags, the extra space is useless with a small GVWR.

Secondly, your motorcycle luggage options are limited by what mounting systems your bike accepts. Some bobbers, for example, lack rear fenders, eliminating fender-mounted racks from consideration. However, that doesn’t mean you can’t add a universal bracket or bag-specific adapter to your motorcycle. But before you do, check to see if your bike is compatible and that the adapter/mount doesn’t obstruct anything. Say, for instance, the exhaust pipes.

Thirdly, know what you’ll use your motorcycle luggage for, where you’ll go, and how often. Yes, towing a trailer with your motorcycle is a great way to carry more gear. But you wouldn’t want to take one on an overlanding route. Also, some luggage racks/mounts are permanent installs, while others are removable, RevZilla notes. If you only carry bags on your motorcycle a few times a year, the latter doesn’t leave you riding around with a bare rack the rest of the time.

Speaking of riding, that’s another point worth considering with motorcycle luggage. You need to be comfortable riding the gear-loaded bike. That means making sure the bags aren’t impeding your movement. And it also means distributing the weight evenly to keep your bike stable at all speeds, Motorcyclist explains.

Soft motorcycle bags aren’t the only or always the best luggage option

Although ‘motorcycle luggage’ often translates to ‘bags,’ that’s only one luggage category, Motorcyclist explains. And while rear-mounted bags are a common accessory on ADVs, they’re not the only kinds of bags available.

Motorcycle bags fall into two broad categories: saddlebags and tank bags. The former mount on the rear of the bike and/or on top of the seat, hence the term ‘saddlebag.’ Top-mounted saddlebags are also sometimes called ‘tail bags.’

Tank bags aren’t as large as saddlebags. But because they’re mounted right in front of the rider, they’re easier to access, RevZilla explains. However, if you want to refuel your bike, you’ll have to temporarily remove them. Luckily, some bags have quick-release mounts or are magnetic, making dismounting/remounting easier.

Whether saddlebag or tank bag, motorcycle bags also fall into ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ categories depending on their construction. Hard bags, made of composite, metal, or plastic, are easier to lock and secure. They also tend to be more weather-proof. However, they’re usually heavier and more difficult to remove if you need to transport them, Motorcyclist notes. Hard motorcycle luggage also tends to be more bike-specific, due to the clearance needs noted earlier.

A black Cortech Super 2.0 Tail Bag on a red 2012 Triumph Street Triple R
Cortech tail motorcycle bag on 2012 Triumph Street Triple R | Matthew Skwarczek

Soft motorcycle bags aren’t necessarily as durable as hard ones. However, even if they’re not waterproof, they often have rain covers to protect them from the elements. And because vinyl, rubber, fabric, and leather are more malleable than plastic, these bags are easier to mount. Instead of a rack, the tail bag on my Street Triple R uses Velcro and straps, for example. Plus, soft bags are expandable, while most hard ones aren’t, Motorcyclist points out.

However, if you’re not carrying much gear, or carry it infrequently, there is one more motorcycle luggage option: a backpack. A dedicated motorcycle backpack offers durable materials, weather-proofing and/or a rain cover, and an ergonomic design, RevZilla explains. Some also have reflective elements and helmet carriers. And while they’re not as roomy as some bags, they’re arguably more convenient.

Does it have to be expensive?

Buying motorcycle luggage won’t necessarily break your wallet, but certain features come with added costs. For example, hard saddlebags tend to be pricier than soft ones; lockable tank bags are more expensive than non-lockable ones. And as noted earlier, some bags require additional brackets or adapters. Though with some soft bags, you can get away with bungee-cording them in place, RideApart notes.

As a point of reference, I paid $125 for my Cortech Super 2.0 Tail Bag. A pair of soft saddlebags for my Street Triple R typically costs around $150-$200 if they don’t need racks. A waterproof tank bag can cost anywhere from $70-$250, depending on its construction, attachment method, and additional features. And if you want a proper motorcycle backpack, prepare to spend at least $100.

A red-and-white Honda Africa Twin with a black Nelson Rigg Trails End Adventure motorcycle tank bag
Honda Africa Twin with a Nelson Rigg Trails End Adventure motorcycle tank bag | RevZilla

It’s worth noting that not every rider needs every piece of motorcycle luggage. If you don’t bring many things on your rides, a backpack or a tank bag might be all you need. And pavement-only riders don’t need hard saddlebags. In short, the best ways of carrying luggage on your motorcycle are the ones that fit your lifestyle.

Follow more updates from MotorBiscuit on our Facebook page.

RELATED: The Best Motorcycle Boots Aren’t Just Ordinary Shoes

The post What Are the Best Ways to Carry Luggage on Your Motorcycle? appeared first on MotorBiscuit.

/by

Your Aston Martin DB5 Shooting Brake Will Cost an Arm and a (Gold) Finger

by Gabrielle DeSantis

There are three, maybe four cars that every person recognizes, car enthusiast or not. Of course, the VW Beetle stands tall. As does the AMC Delorean. So too, does the VW Bus. But there is no car more recognizable to any human being than the Aston Martin DB5. It’s the James Bond car, and will always be an icon of the Silver Screen. However, it would appear that Mr. Bond’s child support has caught up to him, leaving him no choice but to get practical.

Aston Martin’s DB5 is a legend

The legendary DB5 in coupe form | Dan Kitwood via Getty Images

First, it’s time for a little history lesson. The DB5 as it appears above, in coupe form, was first introduced in 1963. The car was intended to be a Grand Tourer, in the heyday of the activity. Grand Touring consisted of wealthy Europeans driving cross-continent from say, London, to Monaco or some such other destination for a weekend. The hitch was, Grand Touring was done as fast as possible, inspired by races that did the same.

The DB5, of which only 1,059 units were made, was designed to get wealthy Europeans from one end of the continent to the other in comfort and style. Of course, this isn’t what the car is known for. It has been James Bond’s iconic ride since its debut in “Goldfinger” in 1964. Some convertibles were also made, but the coupe was the most well-known because of the film. Still, fewer shooting brakes were made, and now, one of them is up for auction at R.M Sotheby’s.

A long tradition of Shooting Brakes

The wagon-shaped rear of the DB5 Shooting Brake
1965 DB5 Shooting Brake | R.M Sotheby’s

Aston Martin does have a history of making the odd shooting brake, one that continues to this day. The Zagato-designed Vanquish Shooting Brake continues that tradition. But why not just call it a wagon? There is a subtle difference between the two terms, if not just a technicality. Think of a shooting brake as a dressed-up station wagon.

The term was used for wagons that accompanied hunters on trips, carrying guns, and hunting spoils. It’s certainly a term suited to the Bond-associated brand. This DB5 shooting brake is certainly special enough for Bond, as one of only 12 factory-manufactured Shooting Brakes build by Aston Martin. The one up for auction now is also a spectacular example of the model.

What about the money?

The front of the silver DB5 shooting brake
1965 DB5 Shooting Brake | R.M Sotheby’s

This particular DB5 Shooting Brake is about as pristine as it gets. The car has a matching numbers motor, meaning all major parts are original. Coachbuilder Radford assisted in the production of this model, built for David Brown, the company’s owner. According to Sotheby’s, Brown wanted something for his hunting dog to sit in, and this was the result.

That’s not all that makes this DB5 (as in David Brown) special. This model is an exceptionally rare left-hand drive version, uncommon in the UK, where most cars are right-hand drive. Now, on to the subject of money. The car has sold for a massive $1.7 million. Moreover, if the owner is stateside, they will have to pay a 2.5% importation fee. That fee alone is $44,125, almost the cost of a new Toyota Supra. Big money for a very special car. If a Mr. Bond is the owner, he’ll at least have something to cart his illegitimate children around in now.

RELATED: The Aston Martin DB5 Continuation Lets You (Almost) Play Bond for Real

The post Your Aston Martin DB5 Shooting Brake Will Cost an Arm and a (Gold) Finger appeared first on MotorBiscuit.

/by

GM Eliminating Stop-Start Feature On Pickups and SUVs: But Why?

by Gabrielle DeSantis

GM’s fuel-saving stop-start feature turns off the engine when the vehicle is not moving. But a whole list of trucks and SUVs won’t carry the feature anymore because of the global microchip shortage. Those pickups and SUVs with either the 5.3-liter or 6.2-liter V8 engines and 10-speed transmissions built after June 7 will cease to be equipped with the GM stop-start system. 

Those GM vehicles on the list include the 2021 Chevy Tahoe and Suburban, GMC Yukon and Yukon XL, Cadillac Escalade and Escalade ESV, and light-duty Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra pickups. “By taking this measure, it will enable us to continue production of our high-demand full-size SUV and pickups as the industry continues to rebound and strengthen,” GM said in a statement.

Eliminating the stop-start feature reduces fuel economy in V8 engines

2021 Cadillac Escalade offers a 3.0L inline-six turbodiesel and gets an EPA-rated 23 MPG combined (2WD) | GM

Of course, the downside will be reduced fuel economy from those thirsty V8 engines. GM will give back $50 to offset the change. Unfortunately, the stop-start feature can’t be added later once microchip supplies return to normal. 

But GM does plan on adding it back into production once chip supplies strengthen. It also doesn’t expect that removing the feature will affect overall corporate average fuel economy numbers. 

This will now be the third year in recent years where fuel economy numbers will drop overall. In 2019 the number was 22.5 mpg, which was down from 23 mpg in 2018. In 2017 the EPA gave credits for complying with federal CAFE requirements. 

Besides stop-start GM also dropped active fuel management/dynamic fuel management

A 2021 GMC Sierra 1500 parked in a field
2021 GMC Sierra | GMC

According to Automotive News, GM already dropped the active fuel management/dynamic fuel management module back in March. This affected pickups with the 5.3-liter EcoTec3 V8 engine and either the six-speed or eight-speed automatic transmission. It reduced fuel economy in those trucks by one mile per gallon. 

This change was expected to run through the end of 2021 production which normally ends in August or September. It is unclear how long vehicles will be manufactured without the stop-start feature. “We routinely monitor our fleet for compliance in the U.S. and Canada, and we balance our portfolio in a way that enables us to manage unforeseeable circumstances like this without compromising our overall (greenhouse gas) and fuel economy compliance,” said spokesperson Michelle Malcho at the time. 

Microchip supplies have somewhat improved as we enter the summer. But shortages are expected to linger through the rest of the production year. GM has been careful to shield big truck and SUV production from interruptions in production. It has stopped production for crossovers and vehicles like the Camaro which do not sell in the same numbers. 

As you can tell GM is doing everything it can to keep the assembly lines rolling for its full-size pickups and SUVs. 

RELATED: The 2021 Ford F-150 Is Struggling With the Chip Shortage

The post GM Eliminating Stop-Start Feature On Pickups and SUVs: But Why? appeared first on MotorBiscuit.

/by