First of all, allow me to apologize for being 34 years late in addressing this extremely pressing issue, which I have been wondering about since 1991. It has to do with some of the technical details of the blockbuster 1991 movie Terminator 2: Judgement Day, of which the movie was absolutely jam-packed. Remember, this was a movie that dealt with all sorts of sci-fi tropes like time travel, advanced robotics, artificial intelligence, liquid metal, and, of course, the top speed of a 1982 Chevy S-10 truck. I will address one of these technical concepts, the one I cannot adequately suspend my disbelief enough to accept.
Do you remember the movie? I bet you do. It was huge! It’s still huge. An icon.
Here, watch the trailer if you’d like a little reminder:
Which one of the technical concepts or cenceits in this movie is a step to far for me to accept, even in a sci-fi context? The time travel? Sure, the very idea of time travel is very much an unproven thing, and the very concept that all of time may be perpetually extant, an unending river of events, perpetually flowing, and we just need to be able to move from one point to another is compelling, but far from proven. But that’s not what I have a problem with.
The robotics? Even with a layer of biological skin growing over a metallic endoskeleton, the Terminator is still just plausible enough, given enough engineering development. The AI? Please, we’re getting close to the point of AI development we see in this movie today!
What about the T-1000’s dynamic liquid-metal technology? I don’t think we have anything like that now, but I’ve broken enough thermometers to have seen how cool mercury is at room temperature, so I can accept that.
But you know what I cannot comfortably accept? And what I couldn’t even accept back in the day when I saw this movie at the theater? What happens in this scene:
See what I’m talking about here? There’s that dramatic car chase, where our heroes, consisting of a mother, her son, and a large, Arnold Schwarzenegger-shaped robot commandeer a 1982 Chevy S-10 and attempt to outrun the T-1000 Terminator robot, who is driving a big rig truck.
In the course of the chase, the kid demands of the Terminator to “step on it,” whereupon the robot answers that “this is the vehicle’s top speed.” And what is that top speed?
In the movie, it looks like about 61.5 mph. The speedo needle does briefly bounce to 65, but then pretty rapidly settles back down to right around 60 mph or so. Here’s my question: can this be right? And my other question: were Chevy S-10s really that slow?
I don’t buy it. Of all the bonkers stuff in the movie, like how time travel requires nudity, this is the bonkersest. I mean, Chevy S-10s were slow, I know that, but they weren’t that slow. Let’s just consider the specs of a 1982 Chevy S-10 for a moment here. You could get them with two engines, a 1.9-liter inline-four that made 82 horsepower, or a 2.8-liter V6 making 110 hp.
Neither are big numbers, but not that unusual for cars of the 1980s, and certainly not the lowest numbers out there. Hell, I daily drive a car with about 52 hp and that can hold 70-75 mph pretty easily. A 1982 Chevy S-10 weighed about 2,600 to 2,800 pounds, and even if we assume the smaller engine and higher weight, that still comes to about 34 pounds per horsepower, which is on par with my low-hp car that can still manage over 70 mph.
So what might the top speed of a four-banger S-10 have been? If I had to guess, I’d have to think it could manage at least 80-85 mph. Hell, a 1977 Volkswagen Beetle, which made 48 hp on the same SAE scale used for the S-10, had a top speed of 84 mph. Sure, it weighed less, about 1800 pounds, but that would have given it a 37-ish pounds-to-hp ratio, which is worse than the S-10. So surely the S-10 could have at least matched that?
There are some mitigating factors at play, though, so we should evaluate this vehicle carefully. The S-10 used in the scene was about nine years old at the time of shooting, and seemed to be a work truck, specifically a gardening truck for the Bol-L-Gol Gardening concern, which seems too small an organization to have a fleet of trucks with speed governors on them. So I don’t think the speed was artificially limited.
What could have limited the speed of the S-10, though, is specific to the one in the movie. Specifically, it’s that camper shell, which looks to be home-built out of wood, like a little cabin perched on the bed of the truck:
Sure, it looks charming with its peaked roof and wood paneling, but it had to be pretty heavy and is, aerodynamically, a nightmare. Carrying a little cottage on your back would absolutely slow you down.
The bed-cabin gets smashed to toothpicks and tongue depressors pretty early in the chase, and yet the speed of the truck doesn’t seem to benefit from being freed from that burden much, if at all. This could be because there’s still considerable weight inside the truck cab itself, with two people and a robot.
Let’s say Sarah Connor weighs, what, 130 pounds? And the kid, he’s probably, oh, maybe 100? But the Terminator, the T-800, he has to be pretty substantial, right? That’s got to be at least 500 pounds of killing machine? Let me look that up.
Of course, the internet provides an answer: 400 pounds. So, the cab itself if hauling around about 630 pounds, give or take? That’s a pretty decent amount, though not that terrible, really. I’m sure S-10s routinely carried two 250 pound guys on the highway.
It’s possible this S-10 wasn’t well maintained, or had some transmission slipping issue, or something, but the truth is, on camera, in the scenes we saw, it seemed to drive just fine, and sounded just fine. I can’t believe that this vehicle could only go a bit over 60! The S-10 in that scene, as shown, should at least have managed 70 mph.
And, what gets me is that there was no reason to have it max out its speed so low! I don’t know why director James Cameron made this decision, but what would have had to change about the movie if the truck couldn’t go more than 70 mph instead of 60? Nothing!
Everything could have played out exactly the same, except the S-10’s maximum speed could have been better represented, freeing us in the audience from some unpleasant waves of disbelief and speculation, and saving the poor maligned little truck from decades of exaggerated claims of extreme slowness.
Has this movie been re-released yet, with some new, re-mastered director’s cut? If not, then I think it absolutely should, and the one change that absolutely must be made is that the chase scene speed be adjusted so the S-10 maxes out at 71.5 mph.
That would make the world a much better place, I think.
Kill Some Time By Watching This Old Beetle Documentary With Me And Obi-Wan Kenobi: Cold Start
Tom Cruise Tries To Get Into The Prime Minister Of The UK’s Car But This Story Kind Of Baffles Me
This Deleted Scene From Pixar’s ‘Cars’ Raises All Kinds Of Unsettling Questions
Hey… wait a minute! The ODO rolls over at 1,000 miles! Ok, this is some bs now
Han shot first!!
Of course, why is this even a real question? I only watch Star Wars via my old laserdisk cuts, why do you ask?
Note, Empire, which Lucas supposed hates most was the least f*cked with.
I’m just generally opposed to remastering, reediting, rereleasing, etc.
Yep, that’s why my go to is as close to the theatrical versions is as possible to find.
I saw it happen too.
And Aliens had automatic machine guns. I hate all versions that exclude that slaughter.
It’s about damn time someone has questioned this hollywood nonsense! T2 on vhs was the bare essentials that Christmas and the chase scene has been locked in my brain ever since. Even the time I floored the geo metro downhill on the highway and finally hit the last hash on the spedo I yelled out: “this is the vehicle’s top speed!” Soon after the CEL lit up. Why wasn’t the ‘check engine light’ on in the S-10 in T2? All Chevys of that era always had the CEL on… Always!
Sadly the 85 mph speedometers on ’80s cars were often based in reality.
I always thought it was due to an earlier scene in the movie where Sarah instructed the Terminator to drive the speed limit to avoid being pulled over.
I doth protest !
T2 was a paragon of fact-checking and scientific research !!!
Shame on you, Sir, for stomping on these frail, fragile, lonely sprouts of truth in movies !!! Those pioneers of crystallized truth !!!
After ALL the movies to that point, where the protagonist(s) would be driving anything from a V8 family sedan all the way to a BMW or an S-Class, and they would be chased, caught, repeatedly slammed, and eventually ran off the (usually straight as a pipe, miles-long and very, very empty) rural road by either a 3-speed 40’s military truck, a road boat full of gravel, or (usually) a 70-years old pickup truck that couldn’t reach 50mph in their dreams, THIS is what you have a problem with ?
If Hollywood is any indication, the only power one needs to catch up with a normal fast car hauling good guys and run it off the road with a horse cart, is the power of bad guy-ness.
Next thing, you’ll start to question Michael Bay explosions, and me gonna get real mad.
Back in the early ’90s, I had an had old S-10 of that early ’80s generation, and I can attest it struggled a bit when the speed limits went up to 65, with only somewhat-less-than-200-pound me in the cab.
To me that was one of the least suspension-of-disbelief moments in the movie.
Great film, by the way.
We’ve seen this many times from Hollywood, gross mismatches between chase vehicles.
Look, buddy, if you’re chasing my car with your semi, I’m gonna run circles around you until I blast away. It’s just physics.
I dated a girl who at the time worked for Robert Zemeckis who was making Back to the Future III and she heard the following story. If you watch the movie with out seeing the trailer you will not know which Terminator is the bad guy until the first fight scene. The problem is the trailer spoils that aspect. Apparently, Cameron did not have say over the trailers and advertising. When he saw the trailer had spoiled the early twist he got SUPER pissed. My ex told me that he called the head of the company and absolutely gave him the business and threatened to come down and beat the shit out of whatever dipshit made the trailer. She heard it got pretty tense.
I was blessed with not having seen the trailer.That first scene absolutely nailed it for me.
Come with me if you want to live…
They needed it to be believable that an 80s semi, fully loaded with liquid nitrogen, could not only catch up to the heroes but do so quickly and with violence.
Can we please not use the phrase “we need to talk about”?
Thanks
Apparently this is an issue of some concern to you, and maybe we need to talk about this?
I had a 1984 Chevy Citation (the vehicular equivalent of a male chastity belt) with the 2.5L Iron Duke. I think it was alike 105 HP. It’s top speed was about 91 MPH on high octane fuel and a strong tailwind. The speedo only went to 85, but that 91 reading was obtained by a Mustang GT pacing me.
The 61 MPH isn’t unbelievable. If you assume that the truck wasn’t factory new, then you must assume these things. The already pathetic HP output is realistically 10 to 15 less than advertised and that is with all four pots firing. The transmission is anything but an efficient input to output machine. Then as noted, you have a heavy robot and chunky cabin in the bed. Lets just say that everything else about that S-10 screams it’s owned by someone that won’t even do the wipe bugs off the windshield type of maintenance.
Also, remember, Terminator 2 was released in 1991, but its set in 1995, so that truck is actually 4 years older than it appears, with 4 more years of hard landscaping use under its belt
I’ve
broken enough thermometerschainsawed a few batteries to have seen how cool mercury is at room temperature, so I can accept that.J-dawg, come on man. An old carbuerated pickup, probably not well maintained can easily be crippled to low speeds. As you pointed out, it had extra weight, a camper shell, and something you missed, it would have been climbing up the bridge. When we see the external shot, it’s crested, but before that it was slogging. Some of those bridges are steep.
And I’d argue it does add to the tension. Anything that could happen to improve a sitation, but isn’t, in an action movie is tension riser. “If only this truck could go a little faster!” is what is meant to cross your mind. It worked so well it has you begging 34 years later.
Cameron 1, Torch 0
Without looking it up, I totally recall that the time portal was designed by the resistance(humans) to exclude the cyborgs and weapons from going through, but those crafty cyborgs developed a bio-engineered living skin so they could.
“totally recall”
So you had “Total Recall?” Ha ha
I love that movie too!
“We Hope You Enjoyed The Ride.”
-JohnnyCab
Jason, you do know Jack didn’t actually have to drown?
Time is not a real thing. It’s merely an abstract concept. You can’t travel through it because it doesn’t actually exist. It’s just a way of describing rates of change. You can’t freeze it. You can’t go backwards or forwards. All time is local. And so on.
It’s kind of like asking a physicist to define a field. Eventually they will distill it down to being what it does, rather than what it is.
Want to know why the rate of expansion of the universe is so hard to determine? Well, time is an element of rate and ‘time’ changes according the local gravity (a field btw) and gravity is nowhere near constant anywhere. Without knowing the precise amount of gravity be exerted on literally everything in the universe literally everywhere at a given moment, it’s pretty hard to determine it’s exact effect on expansion rates. And if there really is Dark Matter, then things get even messier. So you take your best guess with what information you have available and if more information becomes available you adjust accordingly. But actually knowing you got it right is essentially impossible.
I started watching NOVA from its inception and it ticked me off that they would frequently state theory as fact, IE the universe is 15.4 b. years old, then change that figure by a few Billion years the next time and again state as fact. So much credibility gained at no cost by simply stating “to the best of our knowledge, the consensus is X”
It just always bothered me.
I’m leaning towards the big membrane,string theory offshoot as more likely an accurate explanation for anomalies.
One night, when I was really high, for an incredible moment I actually understood brane theory. I could see all the two dimensional particles on the brane and the brane appearing as three dimensions. But then it was gone.
I was thinking about it because I came up with some wacky theory that dark matter is just normal matter that slipped through pores in that ubiquitous membrane we think of as space-time. My theory was idiocy, but it really opened my mind to the concept of sub-dimensions.
Granted wrapping your mind around the concept of dimensions beyond what we experience is near impossible. Black holes took a while to be accepted conceptually, and we got lucky to pick up the massive gravity wave of two merging right after turning the detector on. The more you know, the more you know you don’t know. Brane theory seems the most plausible to me, from my limited understanding.
What was weird for me was that I didn’t start with branes, they just made sense. So even though I am wholly unqualified, I’d agree with you.
I ended up on branes when I was contemplating that elementary particles are all two dimensional waves/strings moving on the surface of something and that something was branes. That’s when I had the passing epiphany that branes could have extra dimensions that would allow the particles to appear to exist in three dimensions and the rest of physics to exist.
I am imagining some theoretical physicist reading this and laughing at how wrong it must be. I hope someday it recurs in my mind so I can describe it better and actually know why it’s wrong.
Oh, and that quantum chromodynamics is just a product of a position of the two dimensional plane (brane?) on which those those particles are spinning relative to the viewer. One of my kids loves to laugh about how simple I am.
I also think those branes can’t slide past each other at faster than the speed of light.
And some shit like all matter being like tangles of energy on those infinite branes. It’s so fun to theorize when you don’t actually know anything, like myself.
Maybe the owner swapped in a short diff, and the RPMs were governed with a resulting ~60 mph top speed?
One or two under inflated tires might do it. So might a timing issue, imperfect carburetion a gentle slope, hauling a 1000 lb Terminator and a bunch of other stuff.
ANSWER: “It’s possible this S-10 wasn’t well maintained, or had some transmission slipping issue, or something…”
FFS… far too many words were written here for a situation easily explained: “Something was seriously wrong with it.” This comes from the same realm as sci-fi nerds trying to explain physically impossible engineering in their favorite franchises, when the simple answer is, “Because it looks cool.”
Maybe an inside Kathryn Bigelow joke?
(Camron and Katherine Bigelow were married at the time and Katherine was making Point Break with Keanu Reeves who I believe is well known for movie about a dangerously slow bus) oh, and Point Break, not the stupid remake, is a much better movie in my opinion
A Back To The Future speed / time travel joke maybe?
It is a strange choice. My guess is that if you tell the audience you are going 60 it will create anchoring for the sensation of speed. if you want your actual filmed at 25 mph chase to feel like its happening on the freeway, you tell your audience that you aren’t going really fast so real world 25 feels like movie world 60, instead of trying to make 25 feel like 70 or 80, which is a stretch for the imagination even with camera angles. i.e. tell the audience the chase is slow for the freeway and it makes it easier for them to believe its happening at near freeway speeds at all, and that a big loaded truck would easily catch up to a light personal truck.
Sidenote, at sea level I would guess my daily driver puts out about double 85 hp to the ground for roughly double the weight. take off another 10-15% for my elevation and I still cruise at 80 mph all the time, with WAY worse aero than a stock 2wd minitruck. At my elevation my estimated wheel HP is around 130 hp for 5500 lbs.
While it doesn’t look like the type of big corporate bug exterminating company that might do such a thing, it’s possible they could have installed a speed limiter on the S-10 to prevent the exterminators from racking up speeding tickets in branded company vehicles. Or to save at least some money on gas by keeping the speed low with that huge wind block of a bed cover/cabin.
A governor to slow down the governator
Given the S10 platform’s general unreliable nature it might have been a joke out of frustration with having to work with one of the damn things.
I knew many S10s/Blazers of Thesius back in the day.
Oh Jason. Sometimes commandeered cars don’t go as fast as you want them to. The T800’s “top speed” line is robot for “I’M GOING AS FAST AS I FUCKING CAN!”
It’s just movies. Next you’ll tell me that a Wrangler should have no problem outrunning a dinosaur.
Well ackchyually….
The answer is simple, Cameron is a Ranger fan, and wanted to rag on S-10’s.*
*I have no idea if this true.