I didn't say he didn't have the right to speak. I was just framing his comments with a bit more context.

Having the right to speak is not the same as having the right to not be called an idiot.

Context - what's actually on the rise in Scandinavia at the moment is Nazism. So far, the fight against it has been a rather ham-fisted attempt to suppress it in the news, rather than engaging it and letting people see for themselves what it is. OP apparently sympathises with the rise of the far right in his country.

That would be because a modern F1 car is subject to significantly tighter rules than a 2-3 year old F1 car. The RedBull RB6 was measured to peak at 5.8g lateral acceleration.

G-suits are designed to push blood out of the legs, and to the brain. F1 cars almost never (and never when they're working right) accelerate in a direction where that's useful. G-suits do almost nothing useful against lateral and longitudinal acceleration. Only vertical.

At much higher temeratures than -30C, your physical analog gauges will have frozen up, or started sticking and giving inaccurate readings. Inaccurate readings are worse than no readings.

Actually, GPUs do maths very inaccurately. They trade non-standard floating point implementations for speed.

To be fair, F1 cars accelerate at 3g, brake at 5g and corner at 6g. The g-forces are enough that the drivers can't breath for half the lap. They're getting really close to the point where g forces are a problem.

However... you forgot taxation, which makes the net income of that 51k family 28k (assuming 45% combined state and federal tax). So now you're talking about 57% of your entire income spent on a fancy pants car. Hint - the normal division that's suggested is 1/3 rent; 1/3 eating, drinking, being merry; 1/3 saving for the future.

$10,000 isn't close to enough to be saving for later life. You only (typically) get about 35 years of working life, and most of us will get around 30-35 years as a pensioner. That means that you're currently setting yourself up to be living on $10,000 a year (assuming investment keeps up with inflation).

Why did I read "KSC" as "Kerbal Space Centre"?

Not if you design your space plane right...

Actually, the reverse is happening. As we move to smaller, turbo'd engines, manufacturers are designing turbo charged engines that can operate at lower compression ratios. Take a look at for example VW's new 1.8 turbo engine - that expects 87-91 (R+M)/2.

No, super unleaded (higher octane fuel) will not get you higher milage. The difference is only how much you can compress the fuel before it explodes. This is important in high compression ratio engines (e.g. ones with turbo chargers), but completely irrelevant in normal car engines. In fact, most normal car engines will get slightly less far on higher octane fuel, due to it containing slightly less energy.

This article is talking about the UK. A 3 litre engine there is virtually unheard of. A 5 litre engine would be reserved for a tractor or heavy goods vehicle. Heck, even our top racing series (Formula 1) uses 1.6 litre turbos.

To be fair, Britain has orders of magnitude fewer stop signs than the US (we use give ways at almost every junction, stops are reserved only for blind, or otherwise dangerous ones). We also have significantly safer roads than the US. So yes, it does appear that in large part, stop signs are there to annoy skilful drivers like him.