Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (5)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I have to disagree with you. CN-7 was a technical marvel built to stronger tollerances than a fighter jet of it's day. The tail fin was needed not because the car was unstable as it was exhaustably windtunnel tested as stable. It was needed because the salt lake beds in Auatrailia were so mushy that the car slid around alot. If it had had a good dry lake to run on it would have hit 475 M.P.H. without the tail fin......Waldo Stakes

  • A great car right enough, but somewhat flawed in original conception. The added tailfin made all the difference to the stability. If the original car had had one it would not have crashed for the reason it did.

  • Come on BBC you have all these file upload them

  • The book barely covers the '64 record attempt, and is full of typographical and editorial errors- a great shame :-(

  • @MikeandEllie That's a shame. A great car and a great driver.

Loading...
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more