Henri Toivosen onnettomuus korsikalla

[Ayrton-Ana]

how could the S4 appear to exit the road, I'm talking about the "falling" moment, from right to the left?

The car hit a tree heavily bottom first, the impact point being directly underneath the driver's seat. This impact with the tree stopped the car's forward momentum in an instant, and then threw it down and slightly back towards the direction it had come from. This is why the car is travelling from right to left as it appears into view in the video, as it has already received the fateful impact with the tree.

It's important to remember that the car was in mid-air when it hit the tree. Here's a heavy crash from a Finnish rally that has somewhat similar accident dynamics when it comes to a heavy tree impact in mid-air and then car falling down after that. The difference here is that the car hits a tree nose first, and not bottom first. But just like in Toivonen's case, the tree stops the car's forward momentum in an instant and then throws it down and slightly back towards the direction it had come from.

 

[Henri Toivonen]

The car hit a tree heavily bottom first, the impact point being directly underneath the driver's seat. This impact with the tree stopped the car's forward momentum in an instant, and then threw it down and slightly back towards the direction it had come from. This is why the car is travelling from right to left as it appears into view in the video, as it has already received the fateful impact with the tree.

It's important to remember that the car was in mid-air when it hit the tree. Here's a heavy crash from a Finnish rally that has somewhat similar accident dynamics when it comes to a heavy tree impact in mid-air and then car falling down after that. The difference here is that the car hits a tree nose first, and not bottom first. But just like in Toivonen's case, the tree stops the car's forward momentum in an instant and then throws it down and slightly back towards the direction it had come from.

i see what you're saying, but imho it's not what happened. Imho the car went off the road in the point where, with the flame still burning fully, there's some dust at the right side of the road (a point that I've always believed to have dust only because of the truck that rescue the crashed frame, but the dust is there when the S4 is still burning). To me the car left the road when the car regains direction in the opposite of the countersteer by Toivo, went off only in this moment, when there's the effect of the front left tyre to address the car to the "ravine". To me the frame we have show the car exit in the direction he finally went off the road, the movement of the car don't feel to me as a car who had frontally crashed and bounced back, and the 2 major damage of the frame occurred from this moment, the car hit the bottom, than crashed upside down on the roof.

So the mystery is 1 why the car approached the corner with that line (and this is the most relevant thing of all, because is the very reason of the fatal crash, whatever had it been the fatal crash starts there), 2 what happened from the moment the S4 did shoot the dust in the air (probably after the rear right tire went off in the "greenish" zone? or maybe the right side of the road next to the ravine, being far from the ideal line and, as a consequence wasn't "clear"... but the dust in the air did form a big cloud, it's very hard to believe that wasn't the result of some tyre outside the asphalt of the corner... but had it been this way, still no signs in the grass).

 

[Ayrton-Ana]

To me the car left the road when the car regains direction in the opposite of the countersteer by Toivo

We have already covered in this thread that the car is actually visible in the very first frame of the accident video, while it was still on the road. And its back is facing the camera in that frame, consistent with a heavy oversteer angle right before it left the road.

Also, the tyre marks on the road don't match your theory. The right rear tyre mark leads off the road and the mark of the left front tyre disappears suddenly while it was still on the middle of the road. This is consistent with the left front wheel suddenly losing contact on the road surface, as the rear dropped over the edge and the car started to roll. I have marked the left front tyre mark, the trajectory of the front of the car and the tree it struck in this picture. The most likely scenario is that the car had time to do a three quarter of a roll on the edge of the ravine, before striking the tree bottom first.

As for the cause of the accident, I think it's completely open. Five years ago I still thought that mechanical failure was an unlikely reason and that the most likely reason was a driver error or a misunderstanding with the pace notes. There's also evidence available from the previous stage that suggests they may have had an intercom problem.

But after studying all the different evidence very carefully some years ago, I'm not so sure anymore. I would now say there is at least a 50% chance that something failed in the right rear of the car in the middle of the corner, causing the accident. There's not a one piece of evidence that alone proves a mechanical failure, but when you put all the little bits and pieces together, it does raise quite a big suspicion.

 

[Henri Toivonen]

We have already covered in this thread that the car is actually visible in the very first frame of the accident video, while it was still on the road. And its back is facing the camera in that frame, consistent with a heavy oversteer angle right before it left the road.

Also, the tyre marks on the road don't match your theory. The right rear tyre mark leads off the road and the mark of the left front tyre disappears suddenly while it was still on the middle of the road. This is consistent with the left front wheel suddenly losing contact on the road surface, as the rear dropped over the edge and the car started to roll. I have marked the left front tyre mark, the trajectory of the front of the car and the tree it struck in this picture. The most likely scenario is that the car had time to do a three quarter of a roll on the edge of the ravine, before striking the tree bottom first.

As for the cause of the accident, I think it's completely open. Five years ago I still thought that mechanical failure was an unlikely reason and that the most likely reason was a driver error or a misunderstanding with the pace notes. There's also evidence available from the previous stage that suggests they may have had an intercom problem.

But after studying all the different evidence very carefully some years ago, I'm not so sure anymore. I would now say there is at least a 50% chance that something failed in the right rear of the car in the middle of the corner, causing the accident. There's not a one piece of evidence that alone proves a mechanical failure, but when you put all the little bits and pieces together, it does raise quite a big suspicion.

correct me if I'm wrong, you did copy a Frame of another pic and paste in the video of the crash. To me when you see the car at first in the video, first of the frames in the post, you are seeing the right side of the car, front 3/4 view. Given that the car "did" in some way the corner from the previous straight you can think that, was the throttle stucked or not, were the brakes not operative or not, was the note from Sergio wrong (or Misunderstood from Toivo) or not, the car has already had a reduction in terms of speed.

Had the car have had a complete 360 before going out
1 the marks on the road should have been way different and "strong"
2 the speed with whom the car seems to going off is imho totally compatible with a front side straight exit

as for the front left marks, given that we could mark two different lines at least, with weight transfer you simply don't have to have "dark" marks on the ground forcedly, remember that the weight of the car push on the right side (as I said the car experienced oversteer, but not a 360) right tyres, in fact my theory is that front left marks the ground the max the moment, having the car reacquired traction, the counter steer fatally and tragically direct the S4 in the rovine direction


This said, in a 1986 Italian rally magazine it's reported that in between of many testimonies they did collect two that are important and relevant above all of them: one is of a policeman that was at the top of the Col d'Ominanda which saw the S4 going in the previous section of the course "looking normal, without seeing the car exiting from the corner, thinking of a mechanical problem but then hearing an explosion and the black smoke", the second is of a reported assistant of the French tv, who did see the crash even if from a very long distance and having a video of the accident, reporting that he had the impression of Toivo making "strange movements with the harm, as he was trying to expel an insect from inside the car"

I think that if one day this video comes to the light we'll know if our personal theories about the crash are right or wrong

 

[delorean]

But after studying all the different evidence very carefully some years ago, I'm not so sure anymore. I would now say there is at least a 50% chance that something failed in the right rear of the car in the middle of the corner, causing the accident. There's not a one piece of evidence that alone proves a mechanical failure, but when you put all the little bits and pieces together, it does raise quite a big suspicion.

Something to this... First thanks for editing all these pic and videos for this topic... Excellent analysis but in my mind, there is something else. I don't think that something happend in the middle of the corner which cause that accident. If you watch those skid marks from tires you can see that Henri's car was about 2m off from optimal race line. If you try to get fast to that next righthander, you suppose to be in totally different line... If he enters that corner with correct speed and correct line, car must be way more inner line than those skid marks shows. And all 4 of those skid marks are all quite similar. So if something brokes, tire blow, wishbone or suspension fails etc, someone of those skid marks should be differrent... Now all of them looks similar and that they just slides off, all tires in correct position and angle... So if something brokes, in middle ot the corner, when speed and race line is correct, those skid marks should start much more inner line than they are now, and also, someone from those skid marks should be differrent than the others. That's the reason why I don't think it happened...

There is only one reason that causes Henri's line be that much off from correct line, and that is speed...

My opinion is that Henri enters that corner so high speed that there was no any possibities to survive... And there is three possible reason for that.

1. Communication problem. Pacenote was wrong or Henri didn't hear it, or just miss that, or Sergio misses the note, or told the wrong note what ever reason. Speed was just too high for some reason... We don't know.
2. Oldest theory. Gas pedal jammed on the floor. Henri lifts the pedal but engine just pushing because throtle was open... There is no chance to brake without brake booster against high rev, full boost Lancia engine...
3. Brake failure. Henri lifts gas but brakepedal hits the floor... No chance to slow down...

Any of those reasons causes that entering speed was too high, and Henri couldn't turn in to the apex, or brake early enough. Thats why car was so far from optimum race line and all that Henri could do was turn in and hope for the best...

 

[Henri Toivonen]

Something to this... First thanks for editing all these pic and videos for this topic... Excellent analysis but in my mind, there is something else. I don't think that something happend in the middle of the corner which cause that accident. If you watch those skid marks from tires you can see that Henri's car was about 2m off from optimal race line. If you try to get fast to that next righthander, you suppose to be in totally different line... If he enters that corner with correct speed and correct line, car must be way more inner line than those skid marks shows. And all 4 of those skid marks are all quite similar. So if something brokes, tire blow, wishbone or suspension fails etc, someone of those skid marks should be differrent... Now all of them looks similar and that they just slides off, all tires in correct position and angle... So if something brokes, in middle ot the corner, when speed and race line is correct, those skid marks should start much more inner line than they are now, and also, someone from those skid marks should be differrent than the others. That's the reason why I don't think it happened...

There is only one reason that causes Henri's line be that much off from correct line, and that is speed...

My opinion is that Henti enters that corner so high speed that there was no any possibities to survive... And there is three possible reason for that.

1. Communication problem. Pacenote was wrong or Henri didn't hear it, or just miss that, or Segrio misses the note, or told the wrong note what ever reason. Speed was just too high for some reason... We don't know.
2. Oldest theory. Gas pedal jammed on the floor. Henri lifts the pedal but engine just pushing because throtle was open... There is no chance to brake without brake booster against high rev, full boost Lancia engine...
3. Brake failure. Henri lifts gas but brakepedal hits the floor... No chance to slow down...

Any of those reasons causes that entering speed was too high, and Henri couldn't turn in to the apex, or brake early enough. Thats why car was so far from optimum race line and all that Henri could do was turn in and hope for the best...

Given all of our theory for the way the car went off and crashed, I think I agree with you, the tragedy did occur because, for some reason, the S4 left the straight with much more speed than what was right to do the corner.

The mystery, anyway, remains:

given your points
1was a communication problem, whatever he was? the car did the straight without problems, and the same for the brake after it (no signs). The ipotetically misnote arrived way before doing the corner, the "strange" oversteer signs are way before the point in which the corner get tighter... Henri imho, was a misnote the problem occurred, should have had the time to understand that was way faster, being a top class level driver. And, imho, he did understand because the oversteer should have been occurred for the speed, but could possibly be a precise monouvre of the driver, understeer being a off the road going for sure.
2 Had he experienced the gas jammed as has been commonly said during the year when did Henri understand of the problem? he maybe had discovered on the previous straight, the moment when you must release the gas, break, down change gear. Was it the case Henri could have turned off the General Electric switch, and break dramatically, and imho it's a scenario in which he could had have space to recover the situation in some way. But there is no evidence of a desperate breaking.
3 yes, this is fully compatible with the accident, imho. BUT... no sign previously of the corner entry? The witness (the policeman) said the car seems to be ok, having zero deceleration is imho something it's impossible not to note, and imho the car should had fall in the rovine without doing the corner at all, S4 was capable of doing 0-200 in less than 400 meter, I don't know how long is the straight before the corner but I think top speed was somewhere from 100 to 150 km/h, and even if Henri tragically failed to complete the corner wasn't so distant to do the miracle of saving his crew.

 

[Henri Toivonen]

Don’t remember if it has already been discussed

i was watching This video

the Moment before you the car is going down you can see something that seems to fall/jump with a little left to the right/down line.

could it possible be the driver jumping or falling out of the car?
https://files.fm/u/bvjfjfyjz (if anybody is more capable than me in editing details…)

 

[AnttiL]

1. Communication problem. Pacenote was wrong or Henri didn't hear it, or just miss that, or Sergio misses the note, or told the wrong note what ever reason. Speed was just too high for some reason... We don't know.
2. Oldest theory. Gas pedal jammed on the floor. Henri lifts the pedal but engine just pushing because throtle was open... There is no chance to brake without brake booster against high rev, full boost Lancia engine...
3. Brake failure. Henri lifts gas but brakepedal hits the floor... No chance to slow down...

4. It was just "a normal racing accident" but the combination of the ravine and the fire made it lethal.

 

[Henri Toivonen]

34:28

 

[spotter90]

Animated reconstruction of Toivonen's accident. He was ill and told, that car was very unstable and not suitable for twisty corsica roads. We'll never know the real cause, but was it a minor driving error or a pace note fault?

 

[simc]

2 what happened from the moment the S4 did shoot the dust in the air (probably after the rear right tire went off in the "greenish" zone? or maybe the right side of the road next to the ravine, being far from the ideal line and, as a consequence wasn't "clear"... but the dust in the air did form a big cloud, it's very hard to believe that wasn't the result of some tyre outside the asphalt of the corner... but had it been this way, still no signs in the grass).

The dust cloud has been noted many times but I think that it has never been given a second thought. The concensus is that the car pulled and scratched the cloud when it somehow both spun and went off the road at the same time. But such a vast cloud. Where did all the dust material came from?

Panorama composed from the accident video and the dust cloud on the first frame of the video:

The Corsican road banks are typically covered by grass and other vegetation. The road side where the car went off is deviously steep and the car had plenty of speed. There are no clear marks that the tyres would have digged the dust or sand from exactly that place.

Picture at Alamy:
https://www.alamy.com/henri-toivonen-fin-sergio-cresto-usa-lancia-delta-s4-grb-...

Little back on the right there's a wider area with gravel and small pebble stones but it is several meters away from the tyre tracks. The inside corner looks too small and narrow to house any significant amounts of sand either. A reduced quality screenshot from a picture on this web site:

The road has since been reconstructed, perhaps several times, and the road bank of the preceeding straight had plenty of sand when Google street view filmed it. But that wasn't in 1986. Enlargement from the picture of this forum page 67:

Sure, sand dust it is most likely. And tyre smoke also but there are no signs of breaking or accelerating. The car did spun on the edge of the road. It's evident from the sand and dirt patches on the road from the accident video. But is that enough to explain all the dust?

 

[Henri Toivonen]

Animated reconstruction of Toivonen's accident. He was ill and told, that car was very unstable and not suitable for twisty corsica roads. We'll never know the real cause, but was it a minor driving error or a pace note fault?

This video is 100% fantasy

 

[Henri Toivonen]

The dust cloud has been noted many times but I think that it has never been given a second thought. The concensus is that the car pulled and scratched the cloud when it somehow both spun and went off the road at the same time. But such a vast cloud. Where did all the dust material came from?

Panorama composed from the accident video and the dust cloud on the first frame of the video:

The Corsican road banks are typically covered by grass and other vegetation. The road side where the car went off is deviously steep and the car had plenty of speed. There are no clear marks that the tyres would have digged the dust or sand from exactly that place.

Picture at Alamy:
https://www.alamy.com/henri-toivonen-fin-sergio-cresto-usa-lancia-delta-s4-grb-...

Little back on the right there's a wider area with gravel and small pebble stones but it is several meters away from the tyre tracks. The inside corner looks too small and narrow to house any significant amounts of sand either. A reduced quality screenshot from a picture on this web site:

The road has since been reconstructed, perhaps several times, and the road bank of the preceeding straight had plenty of sand when Google street view filmed it. But that wasn't in 1986. Enlargement from the picture of this forum page 67:

Sure, sand dust it is most likely. And tyre smoke also but there are no signs of breaking or accelerating. The car did spun on the edge of the road. It's evident from the sand and dirt patches on the road from the accident video. But is that enough to explain all the dust?

your post is very informative and discuss about one of the most strange part of the mystery. If you follow the tyre marks it's quite impossible to explain that big dust cloud, which imho is totally unmatchable with a complete 360 back to the front spin, it's impossible and you don't have matching marks on the asphalt. Given the pic we have about the point at its days imho the only explaining is that the car did pass throught the dust/terrain/greenish portion of the road that you can see in this pic, on the external right side of the point
Harri-Toivonen-1-F86-accident-site-e1462390182102.jpg

but... the mystery returns, because there wasn't any mark of the wheels in that point, so the only reasonable explaining is the that big dust cloud is the result of the S4 touching the little portion of the grass (and the terrain below) near the exit point, when the tyre marks touch the green (you can see some changing in color here, a pic who has been previously posted in this topic, the green becomes yellow. It's very very strange just the same, because that dust cloud is very big, but we are at the starting point again, because if you imagine the car touching the dustier portion of the road than, as we said, you don't have marks and you can't explaining the marks you have instead. In this pic you can see some other mysterious blackish dark terrain marks in correspondence with the starting of the right rear tyre mark)


as for another unclear thing, the terrain in the actual point in which the car went off, and its direction, the only explaining I can see is something I've already written here, imho the S4 went oversteer (or, for some reason, exit the road with a left to the right direction, which is could be matched with the car pointing opposite direction after a countersteer, and could be matched with the strange "right to the left" direction with whom seems to fall after it went off the road). Tyre marks are compatible with a 4 wheel oversteer after handbraking also, because with the differentials of their time, and given high speed, car shouldn't had block rear wheels only.

The most easy explaining of the crash, the car exiting following the straight marks (going off and falling with his right side) is imho totally incompatible with the video which shows the car with a from right to the left to down line, and the terrain mark in the point where the car is supposed to fall down.

this said, your reconstructed full view of the scene is great, it would be great, with someone who can use graphics in a proper way, trying to do a "google maps look-alike" reconstruction that could be turned and moved in 3d, so you can see where the car is in a clearer way.

 

[jjx]

your post is very informative and discuss about one of the most strange part of the mystery. If you follow the tyre marks it's quite impossible to explain that big dust cloud, which imho is totally unmatchable with a complete 360 back to the front spin, it's impossible and you don't have matching marks on the asphalt. Given the pic we have about the point at its days imho the only explaining is that the car did pass throught the dust/terrain/greenish portion of the road that you can see in this pic, on the external right side of the point
Harri-Toivonen-1-F86-accident-site-e1462390182102.jpg

but... the mystery returns, because there wasn't any mark of the wheels in that point, so the only reasonable explaining is the that big dust cloud is the result of the S4 touching the little portion of the grass (and the terrain below) near the exit point, when the tyre marks touch the green (you can see some changing in color here, a pic who has been previously posted in this topic, the green becomes yellowNäytä liitetiedosto 3417. It's very very strange just the same, because that dust cloud is very big, but we are at the starting point again, because if you imagine the car touching the dustier portion of the road than, as we said, you don't have marks and you can't explaining the marks you have instead. In this pic you can see some other mysterious blackish dark terrain marks in correspondence with the starting of the right rear tyre mark)


as for another unclear thing, the terrain in the actual point in which the car went off, and its direction, the only explaining I can see is something I've already written here, imho the S4 went oversteer (or, for some reason, exit the road with a left to the right direction, which is could be matched with the car pointing opposite direction after a countersteer, and could be matched with the strange "right to the left" direction with whom seems to fall after it went off the road). Tyre marks are compatible with a 4 wheel oversteer after handbraking also, because with the differentials of their time, and given high speed, car shouldn't had block rear wheels only.

The most easy explaining of the crash, the car exiting following the straight marks (going off and falling with his right side) is imho totally incompatible with the video which shows the car with a from right to the left to down line, and the terrain mark in the point where the car is supposed to fall down.

this said, your reconstructed full view of the scene is great, it would be great, with someone who can use graphics in a proper way, trying to do a "google maps look-alike" reconstruction that could be turned and moved in 3d, so you can see where the car is in a clearer way.

Voiko olla mahdollista, että vain LR ja RR on Henrin auton jäljet ja LF jälki onkin Markun/ Sabyn/ nolla-auton jälki. Tämä tukisi teoriaa, että Henri on ajanut mutkan Flat Left ei Bad left. Jotenkin väittäisin, ettei jälki LF voi mitenkään edes teoriassa olla Henkan autosta, koska jälki jatkuu vasemmalle jatkuvasti kääntyen. Entä jälki RF, onko se ralliautosta, vai siviiliautosta?....

 

[Henri Toivonen]

imho no, just because at some point the Front left mark seems to direct right (countersteer?), and if you carefully see the lighter mark it ends just in the point where there's terrain, the point where the car is supposed to eventually fall down from the road.

 

[Ayrton-Ana]

The dust cloud has been noted many times but I think that it has never been given a second thought. The concensus is that the car pulled and scratched the cloud when it somehow both spun and went off the road at the same time. But such a vast cloud. Where did all the dust material came from?

Yeah you do get the impression that the dust cloud originates earlier on the road than where the tyre marks go off the road. The car must have literally just went on the grass when the video starts, but there seems to be already a big dust cloud in the air that originates out of frame from the left. Which leads us to the next question, is it just dust? Or is there also smoke hanging in the air from something that has gone wrong earlier in the corner (mechanical problem)?

But it's also important to note here, that when Henri had his accident, all the sand and grass would have likely been much drier than it looks in the photographs that are taken soon after the accident. And this could have possibly created more dust than looks possible in the photographs. It started to rain almost immediately after the accident, so everything looks probably a bit more green in the photographs than it looked in the accident moment. I don't know, but it crossed my mind.

And how much rain did the accident scene exactly receive in the minutes after the accident is still a bit of a mystery to me. But at least a few kilometres down the road, at the famous bridge junction at Ponte Castirla, the rain was pretty heavy. Mr. Antti Syvälahti was waiting for the cars at that point and he was talking about a heavy rain passing the area:

Here's a clip from that place where Mr. Syvälahti was located, taken 20 minutes after the accident, and it sounds like it's raining quite a bit.

In this Videostyle clip from the same junction the rain has already passed the area, but you can see some spectators with wet clothes and wet hairs, indicating that a pretty heavy shower has just passed the area:

I don't know how much rain the accident scene had received in the days leading up to the accident, but at least half an hour before the accident the weather was sunny and beautiful down in Corte:

But yeah, even if it was more dry than the accident scene photographs suggest, it still wouldn't explain why the dust cloud seems to originate so early in the corner. And why it seems to be hanging so high in the air already when the footage starts.

 

[DC]

Voiko olla mahdollista, että vain LR ja RR on Henrin auton jäljet ja LF jälki onkin Markun/ Sabyn/ nolla-auton jälki.

Saby tuli mutkan ilmeisesti ihan kisavauhdilla, mutta Markku ei mutkaan asti koskaan päässyt ollessaan viidentenä autona reitillä. Nolla-autona oli N-ryhmän Opel Kadett.

 

[Henri Toivonen]

Yeah you do get the impression that the dust cloud originates earlier on the road than where the tyre marks go off the road. The car must have literally just went on the grass when the video starts, but there seems to be already a big dust cloud in the air that originates out of frame from the left. Which leads us to the next question, is it just dust? Or is there also smoke hanging in the air from something that has gone wrong earlier in the corner (mechanical problem)?

But it's also important to note here, that when Henri had his accident, all the sand and grass would have likely been much drier than it looks in the photographs that are taken soon after the accident. And this could have possibly created more dust than looks possible in the photographs. It started to rain almost immediately after the accident, so everything looks probably a bit more green in the photographs than it looked in the accident moment. I don't know, but it crossed my mind.

And how much rain did the accident scene exactly receive in the minutes after the accident is still a bit of a mystery to me. But at least a few kilometres down the road, at the famous bridge junction at Ponte Castirla, the rain was pretty heavy. Mr. Antti Syvälahti was waiting for the cars at that point and he was talking about a heavy rain passing the area:

Here's a clip from that place where Mr. Syvälahti was located, taken 20 minutes after the accident, and it sounds like it's raining quite a bit.

In this Videostyle clip from the same junction the rain has already passed the area, but you can see some spectators with wet clothes and wet hairs, indicating that a pretty heavy shower has just passed the area:

I don't know how much rain the accident scene had received in the days leading up to the accident, but at least half an hour before the accident the weather was sunny and beautiful down in Corte:

But yeah, even if it was more dry than the accident scene photographs suggest, it still wouldn't explain why the dust cloud seems to originate so early in the corner. And why it seems to be hanging so high in the air already when the footage starts.

your hypothesis could relate to something real, because the dust cloud is very very large and, as I said, could be compatible only with the car going in the dust portion on the right side of the corner entering. Or SOMETHING ELSE. But we've already seen that we have no marks of this hypothetical passage. And, important, the witness policeman told that the car seemed to have done the straight previous of the corner and the corner entering looking "no problem"

 

[Magnum2300]

Nolla-autona oli N-ryhmän Opel Kadett.

Sillä ei saisi noin pitkää mustaa viivaa asfalttiin edes täydestä vauhdista lukkojarrutuksella.

 

[Freak]

Sillä ei saisi noin pitkää mustaa viivaa asfalttiin edes täydestä vauhdista lukkojarrutuksella.

Jos tässä tarkoitetaan kuvan tummaa ja ohuttaa viivaa, niin N-ryhmän Kadett on juuri sellainen auto, jonka oikea takarengas vois tehdä tuollaisen viivan kovassa kaarreajossa. Opelissa on yhdystukiakselisto takana ja korin kallistuessa kovasti sisempi takapyörä irtoaa maasta ja ulompi kallistuu ulkokantille, jolloin vain renkaan nurkka ottaa tiehen ja piirtää ohuen tumman viivan luistaessaan. Kaasun nosto ja jarrutus siirtää painoa lisäksi eteen ja helpottaa siten perän irtoamista ennen mutkaa.