Cloud Hosting

If you grew up in the 1980s, then an iconic scene from classic teen movie Ferris Buellers Day Off is probably etched in your memory; the one where a red Ferrari gets airborne while the title theme to Star Wars provides the soundtrack. This cinematic moment stars a Ferrari 250 California Spyder on a full-throttle joyride around Chicago. The Prancing Horse used during filming, however, was actually a fiberglass replica based on a humble MGB. The faux California Spyder Im testing, though, is rather different.

The latest Revival project from GTO Engineering, following its replica 250 GT SWB we drove earlier this year, is an inch-perfect, toolroom copy of the Ferrari original. Even Enzo himself might have struggled to spot the differenceunless he got behind the wheel. It turns out that this reborn 1960s supercar, which uses the identity of a scrapped classic Ferrari for legal purposes, has a few hidden secrets.

GTO Engineerings replica of the Ferrari 250 GT SWB California Spyder.Photo by Barry Hayden, courtesy of GTO Engineering.

As its name suggests, the Ferrari 250 California Spyder was designed for the US market, specifically the Golden State. Just 105 were made between 1958 and 1962, the first 50 with a 102-inch wheelbase (LWB), followed by 55 with a shorter 94-inch wheelbase (SWB). Today, both versions count among the rarest and most expensive Ferraris of all, as attested to by the fact that James Coburns California Spyder sold for $10 million in 2008, and few are ever seen outside of museums or private collections.

I wont attempt to get all four wheels off the ground today, yet I do plan to drive as il Commendatore intended. After all, the Revival may cost $1 million plus taxes, but its still a bargain compared to the real thing. Sadly, Im about 5,400 miles from California and the weather here is decidedly more British. Yes, its raining. Did I mention the car has no roof?

A birds-eye perspective of the toolroom copy.Photo: Courtesy of GTO Engineering.

Even through a mist of morning drizzle, the California Spyder replica looks jaw-droppingly gorgeous. The original was styled by Pininfarina, its hand-rolled aluminum body combining timeless Italian elegance with head-turning Hollywood glamour. A Ferrari with tail fins really shouldnt work, yet somehow it does. Other 250-series models, such as the Testa Rossa, LM and GTO, are more exciting, but theyre not as achingly beautiful.

Frankly, few cars sound this exquisite either. The naturally aspirated, triple-carb Colombo V-12 is built in-house by GTO Engineering and offered in three states of tune: a stock 3.0-liter Ferrari spec with 280 hp, a 3.5-liter with 320 hp, or a 4.0-liter with 350 hp. With the middling 3.5-liter motor and just 2,315 pounds to shift, this example hits 60 mph in 6 seconds and has a hair-tousling top speed of 150 mphyet it feels faster.

Originally made for the US market, the Ferrari 250 GT Spyder featured a left-hand-drive configuration, replicated here on the recreation.Photo by Barry Hayden, courtesy of GTO Engineering.

After a few steady miles to let the oil warm through and the manual shift to loosen up, I finally get a chance to let rip. The V-12 wakes up at 3,000 rpm, then piles on speed with dizzying intensity. Dont forget, this is an engine that won Le Mans multiple times, and its racing roots are still readily apparent. Hearing its metallic war cry in the open air is a privilege that makes getting wet seem totally worthwhile.

The cars naturally aspirated, triple-carb Colombo V-12 is built in-house by GTO Engineering.Photo by Barry Hayden, courtesy of GTO Engineering.

On hedge-lined lanes strewn with deep puddles, Im initially reluctant to push too hard. However, despite a live rear axle, skinny Michelin tires and complete lack of driver aids, this car has a chassis that quickly breeds confidence. The Revivals reinforced sills are much stiffer than those of the 1960s Ferrari, which adds accuracy to the slow-paced steering and sharpens its neutral yet eminently throttle-adjustablecornering attitude. Its straightforward, old-fashioned fun.

As for the lack of a roof, GTO Engineering founder Mark Lyon says the company can create one, but he thinks the Spyder looks better without it. Also, he reckons most cars will find homes in hotter climes, including California, where clinging, rain-soaked jeans are rather less likely. At least my Mazda has heated seats for the long drive home.

While Ferraris original model has reached eight figures at auction, the GTO Engineering replica costs $1 million.Photo by Barry Hayden, courtesy of GTO Engineering.

Some Ferrari purists dislike the idea of replicas, no matter how faithful to the original. But when the genuine article is too valuable to drive, these cars recreate an experience that is otherwise out of reach. Whether youre blasting along country lanes in southern England, cruising Stateside on Pacific Coast Highway or simply watching it drive by, the Revival offers an experience to savor. Its a car to seize the day and live in the moment. I think Ferris Bueller would approve.

Learn more aboutRobb Reports 2022 Car of the Year at the event taking place in Napa Valleyhereand in Boca Ratonhere.

Originally posted here:

First Drive: GTO Engineering Recreates One of the Most Beautiful and Coveted Ferraris Ever Made - Robb Report

In recent articles, I have summarized lectures at CELS (Conference on Engineering in Living Systems) that described an engineering model for adaptation and explained how adaptation derives from organisms internal capacities (here,link).Now I will summarize another CELS lecture that expanded upon these themes by outlining a second complementary engineering model for adaptation.

Standard evolutionary theory assumes that genetic variation expands throughDNA mutating or otherwise altering randomly. Concurrently, natural selection and other processes transform species over time gradually throughnumerous, successive, slight modifications. The results are unpredictable, and in different subpopulations they can vary greatly.

In stark contrast, the presented engineering-based model assumes that organisms adapt to the environment using the same engineering principles seen in human tracking systems (here,here). More specifically, they continuously monitor the environment and track pre-specified environmental conditions. When the right conditions occur, internal mechanisms induce pre-determined responses such as targeted genetic changes, physiological adjustments, and/or anatomical alterations. These adaptive processes are directed by irreducibly complex systems that consistently include three components:

The resulting changes are targeted, rapid, and often reversible. They are also predictable and repeatable. And their magnitude can range from minor alterations to dramatic transformations, but changes are bounded and predefined.

Over the past few decades, every facet of the engineering model has been increasingly affirmed by everyone from mainstream biologists to third-wave evolutionists to leading creationists (here,here,here,here). The strongest supportive evidence comes from studies of what have been termed natural genetic engineering (NGE) and phenotypic plasticity.

NGE refers to genetic alterations that are not random. Instead, they result from cells employing highly complex machinery to direct targeted DNA modifications. Leading researcher James Shapiro describes the processes in a2016 review article:

Combinatorial coding, plus the biochemical abilities cells possess to rearrange DNA molecules, constitute a powerful toolbox for adaptive genome rewriting. That is, cells possess ReadWrite Genomes they alter by numerous biochemical processes capable of rapidly restructuring cellular DNA molecules. Rather than viewing genome evolution as a series of accidental modifications, we can now study it as a complex biological process of active self-modification.

He further elaborates on the editing systems in a2017 review article:

Like all classes of cellular biochemistry, NGE DNA transport and restructuring functions are subject to control by regulatory circuits and respond to changing conditionsNGE activities typically affect multiple characters of the variant cell and organism. Consequently, major phenotypic transformations can occur in a single evolutionary episode and are not restricted to a gradual accumulation of numerous, successive, slight modifications.

One could contest Shapiros claims about what NGE accomplished in the past, but his general description clearly matches the engineering models central features. The regulatory circuits that respond to environmental conditions correspond to sensors integrated with logic mechanisms. And the transport and restructuring functions correspond to specified output responses. In addition, the DNA modifications are targeted, rapid, and bounded as the engineering model expects.

NGE has been identified in all domains of life from the simplest to the most complex. Yeast cells respond to nutrient starvation by increasing themutation rates at specific locationsreferred to as mutational hot spots. And the remarkable diversity in dog breeds is not the result of completely random mutations, but it also results from mutational hot spots that allow for increases in targeted genetic variation that can drive rapid adaptation. BiophysicistsJohn Fondon and Harold Garner noted:

The high frequency and incremental effects of repeat length mutations provide molecular explanations forswift, yet topologically conservative morphological evolutionWe hypothesize that gene-associated tandem repeats function as facilitators of evolution, providing abundant, robust variation and thus enabling extremely rapid evolution of new forms.

Equally striking, plant genomes contain DNA segments known as transposable elements (TEs) that can move to new locations, allowing them to alter the activity of local genes. Specific environmental stimuli can initiate relocation to target locations (here,here), and stimuli can activate the TEs, resulting in adaptive benefits. For instance, TEs modify gene regulation in maize to confer drought tolerance, alter flowering time, and enable plants to grow in toxic aluminum soils (here,here).

Phenotypic plasticity refers to an organisms ability to transform its anatomy and physiology in response to environmental stimuli. The changes do not result from genetic alterations but from internal adaptive mechanisms. Developmental biologist Ralf Sommer enumerated these mechanisms essential components in a2020 review article:

plasticity requires developmental reprogramming in the form of developmental switches that can incorporate environmental information. However, the associated molecular mechanisms are complicated, involving complex loci, such as eud-1, that function as switches and GRNs. While still early, it is likely that switch genes point to a general principle of plasticity because other examples of plasticity also involve complex switch mechanisms.

The incorporation of environmental information tacitly implies the presence of sensors and signal transmission pathways. The switch incorporating the sensory output equates to a logic-based analyzer, and the gene regulatory network (GRN) activity corresponds to the output response. In summary, the core components perfectly match those of the engineering model for adaptation.

Phenotypic plasticity has been observed in numerous species in diverse taxa.Gulls of the familyLaridaetrack the sodium level in their blood with sensors in heart vessels. When the level reaches a threshold, gulls generate a specialized gland that extracts excess sodium from the blood and excretes it through the beak. If the gull migrates to a freshwater environment, the gland disappears.

Cichlid fish demonstrate phenotypic plasticity for multiple traits.Muschicket al.in a 2011 studyraised Midas cichlids on food with different hardnesses. The different diet groups developed significantly different pharyngeal jawbones, and the differences resembled qualitatively the differences in jawbones found in specialized species.Hreret al.in a 2019 study exposed Midas cichlids to light of different frequencies. In response to a change in frequency, the cichlids switched the expression of cone opsin genes crucial for color vision in only a few days. Other such mechanisms likely exist, based on the observation that cichlids rapidly converge to thesame basic forms repeatedly.

As a final example, fish residing in cave environments display distinctive traits such as reduced eyes and pigmentation. The standard evolutionary story is that these traits gradually developed through natural selection. But experiments over the past decade on the effects of exposing fish to cave-like conditions are changing the narrative.

Rohneret al.in a 2013 studyraisedA. mexicanusembryos in water with low conductivity mimicking cave conditions. The embryos developed into adults with significantly smaller eyes.Corral and Aguirre in a 2019 studyraisedA. mexicanusin different temperatures and different levels of water turbulence. The variant conditions resulted in adult fish differing in vertebral number and body shape. For instance, fish raised in more turbulent water displayed more streamlined bodies and extended dorsal and anal fin bases that improved their mobility in that environmental condition. AndBilandijaet al.in a 2020study raised the same species in darkness, and the fish developed many cave-related traits such as resistance to starvation and altered metabolism and hormone levels. Future research will likely uncover even more examples where cave-specific adaptations result not from random mutations but from internal mechanisms.

The engineering model not only best fits the latest experimental and observational data, but it can help guide future research. Whenever a species rapidly and predictably adapts to a specific environmental condition (here,here,here), investigators can expect that changes are directed by sensors, logic-based analyzers, and output response mechanisms. They can then focus research on identifying and understanding these components.

Traditional evolutionary processes do play a part in biological adaptation, but mounting evidence demonstrates that their role is relatively minor in the drama of life (here,here). Instead, engineered adaptive mechanisms that direct targeted modifications perform on center stage.

Read more from the original source:

Nearly All of Evolution Is Best Explained by Engineering - Discovery Institute