Letters: We forgot about the Mercury Cyclone

Wheels reader Kieth Carter loves his Mercury Cyclone Spoiler.

Re: Edsel Ford’s Mercury cars became hot rodsMark Toljagic, June 12

As much as I enjoyed your article on Mercury cars, I am also disappointed.

You made no mention of Mercury’s most successful car used in NASCAR racing – the Cyclone and Cyclone Spoiler. It was considered Mercury’s most potent musclecar.

I happen to be one of the Mercury Cyclone Spoiler’s lovers. I own one made in its last year, 1971, with a ram air 429CJ four-speed in Competition Gold. But I guess you are to be excused, as even die-hard Ford fanatics have no idea what my car is when I take it out and about. There were only 1631 produced in 1970, and just 353 in 1971.

I just had to write – us Merc guys always seem to be forgotten in the world of hemis.

Kieth Carter, Creemore

Off-peak hydro can be used to make hydrogen

Re: Clarkson knows nothingYour View, June 12

I am glad you published the letters critical of Jeremy Clarkson, as it shows what misconceptions are out there.

Let me rebut just one comment.

First, I am doing research at Ryerson University into dispatchable hydro-electricity.

The question is, what to do with the surplus energy that will be available from time to time when the grid does not need topping up?

Make hydrogen, of course! By electrolysis. With energy from water. No carbon emissions or air pollution. Pure “green” energy!

No need for natural gas turbine plants either, and possibly in time no nuclear either.

The hydrogen can be used in fuel cells or directly as a substitute for gasoline (both BMW and Daimler already have experimental cars operating on fuel-injected liquid hydrogen). Hydrogen can also be used as a feedstock into making agricultural fertilizer.

I guess the future may be arriving faster that some can believe. The trick is to always look forward, not backwards!

John Banka, Toronto

I feel bad for Mr Turnbull, et al, getting angry like that. They obviously aren’t familiar with Clarkson’s writing style, take him far too literally, and are oblivious to the tongue-in-cheek modus operandi. Clarkson knows many things, but primarily, he doesn’t expect to be taken too seriously.

Hydrogen can be produced by methods other than electrolysis. In fact, electrolysis is so inefficient that it’s only an option if pared with renewable energy sources. Many teams are working on methods using silver iodine, algae, or even biomass (factory-sized prototypes are already operational).

Margaret Thatcher invented climate change? The sentence was so obviously absurd, I can’t believe it was a point of contention.

Regarding the “modern layout” of the Austin 7. You can easily hop into a 7 and drive. Clarkson was referring to the layout of the pedals and steering wheel.

The Model T required controlling the spark advance amongst other things; it did not have the pedal layout that became standard, and you cranked it to start it. On Top Gear, Clarkson and company pointed out that it was actually the 1916 Cadillac type 53 that was the first modern car (having electric start, standard pedals, shifter in the middle of the car, etc.). But the 7 was the first high-volume, mass-produced car to copy that layout.

The current electric hybrids are, indeed, nonsense. Diesels are actually more efficient. In Europe, where diesels are more accepted, the Toyota Prius is behind six or seven other cars, all clean diesels and non-hybrids. This point was probably the only serious one he intended.

If he gets under your skin (which is one of his goals), you either need to read more of his articles (and get in on the humour) or read none of it (a mistake). Writing an angry letter about Clarkson only illustrates that the Star is getting return on investment and that people do read his columns.

As a fan of Clarkson, I would like to thank his detractors for ensuring that the Star will continue to purchase his diatribes.

Justin Laflamme, Toronto

It would seem that Jeremy Clarkson has few fans in this city, having read some rather scalding comments made on June 12. These criticisms centred on his historical accuracy, his writing style and his vocabulary.

As readers of this paper, and as members of the shrinking global community, we must appreciate Mr. Clarkson for who he is: a British entertainment automotive journalist. For anyone who is familiar with his show Top Gear or his writing, he never claims to be an engineer, a researcher or a linguist.

Quite the opposite in fact – he delivers media designed to be entertaining, thought-provoking and controversial. Once we understand that, then you can appreciate “Jezza” and his writing for what it is.

Clearly, judging from the reaction he received, he is a success.

Andrew Baskerville, Toronto

Write to wheels@thestar.ca, or mail to Your View, Wheels, Toronto Star, One Yonge St. Toronto, Ont. M5E 1E6. Include full name, address and phone number. Letters may be edited for length.

More videos from Wheels.ca and our partners