9 ms·

I don't believe this. Colour me extremely skeptical; if he had 10 days worth of water he could have walked to the coast, and he'd hit a road sooner or later. Mo

• throw1234651234 5y ago
  I am in the same boat as you - you can't even cut an exhaust pipe off without specialized tools - getting a wheel on something even without any suspension components seem next to impossible. Maybe I am just mad because swapping out shocks and springs would take me several weekends with full tools and a jack.
  • lostlogin 5y ago
    Working on a (relatively modern) Japanese car after only having dealt with ‘60s and 70’s British vehicles was a revelation. Standardised sizes and parts that actually fitted together. So great.
    • throw1234651234 5y ago
      That's my experience of going from a German car to a Honda. I can take the Honda apart with a screw driver and a 6-19 wrench set and very little else. I required one hex wrench when taking off the whole front of the car. German cars tend to have a bunch of hex and star wrench requirements, in addition to specialized tools for certain parts. On the other hand, older cars did mostly have way more space in the engine bay.
      • cafard 5y ago
        Space and Hondas: I took some skin off my right hand and fingers the last time I replaced a headlight on one--I had to get in behind the gravel shield.
      • LorenPechtel 5y ago
        My father used to tell a story of changing a water pump in his car when he was wearing a tuxedo--and not messing it up. Good luck doing that these days!
        • richardfey 5y ago
          What car was it?
          • LorenPechtel 5y ago
            No idea, but I believe that was back in the 40s.
      • jpindar 5y ago
        That's one reason why I drive a pickup truck, they're easier to work on than cars since there's more space everywhere, even on the smaller old trucks.
        • doubled112 5y ago
          Definitely in older trucks. Is this true in new trucks? Half the time it seems maintenance begins with removing the cab and removing the truck from the engine.
          • throwaway0a5e 5y ago
            They're still a lot better than cars. In trucks you usually need to pull the cab for convenience. In cars you often need to drop the engine in order to do the repair at all. Some things (like a rear valve cover on a transverse v6) often don't have clearance to come off. Realistically it doesn't really matter because it's easier to optimize for not breaking shit or fixing it before is strands you.
        • throw1234651234 5y ago
          Miatas are pretty underrated in that regard - on the 1st gen (~1990) you can reach about everything without taking anything else of. Jobs that would take days (or hours in shop setting) to do on other cars take under 30 mins on the Miata. Notable examples are starter and brake booster - they are "right there", with a ton of space. You can't even get to the spark plugs easily on a lot of cars these days. (heh, "these days", now I sound old)
  • hotpotamus 5y ago
    Skepticism is definitely warranted, but the car in question is a Citroen 2CV which is basically the French equivalent of a Volkswagen Beetle. It's pretty much the minimum viable product of automobiles and quite amenable to DIY. Honestly, all the supply chain shocks of recent times have turned me into one of those old greybeards who waxes nostalgic for cars like this (except for their safety records).
  • jerf 5y ago
    If you haven't seen the Mythbusters episode, you may want to track it down. IIRC they also limited themselves to a reasonable selection of tools on hand, they didn't assume they had their full shop. There are various unusual things about this particular car that make it at least hover on the edge of plausibility, rather than being a completely absurd idea as it would be for most models. As the article said, they did fail, but it's not too hard to believe they could have figured something out that would have at least been faster than walking if they had a bit more time (and by that I mean a few more hours, not a few more weeks). The Mythbusters did a lot of interesting things but where a normal scientist is driven mercilessly by grants, the Mythbusters were always driven mercilessly by TV production schedules.
• lostlogin 5y ago
  Carrying 10 days worth or water sounds pretty rough, there must be a sweet spot where carrying a little less water actually gets you further.
  • Schweigi 5y ago
    With his skills he could have build a sled or a wheelbarrow to carry all the water - still easier than a whole motorcycle :) From the article though it didn’t sound he drove very far, so carry less than 10 days would have been possible too.
  • Groxx 5y ago
    Since it gets lighter as you drink it, I don't think so. Even if you could only walk 1 meter while carrying N liters, you could drink it until you have M, and then walk as far as you could with M. But now you're 1 meter further.
    • cecilpl2 5y ago
      If I tried to walk 100 meters with 2000 litres, I might fatigue myself so much that I would no longer be able to walk any further, no matter how much water I had left.
      • waste_monk 5y ago
        As water weighs about one kilogram per litre, you would be carrying close to two tonnes (+ container weight!) - if you can carry this for 100 meters, I would be quite impressed.
        • iso1631 5y ago
          That's his point
    • gbear605 5y ago
      That’s true, but if I had a thousand day supply of water (multiple tons), my first step would have to be dumping out most of it or I can’t walk anywhere.
• mysterydip 5y ago
  I bust my knuckles up wrenching on my car even when I have all the right tools. The pic of him at camp with the bike in the background and he's completely clean (not even some grease?) makes me skeptical.
  • pengaru 5y ago
    There are other photos of him still clothed at the camp, and the clothes are not clean. In the nearly nude photo his hands are visibly dirty.
    • blueflow 5y ago
      Who made the photo?
      • YeGoblynQueenne 5y ago
        I think he was holding some kind of remote-operation switch. You can see a string going from his right hand in the picture.
      • kosma 5y ago
        Self-timer?
• lnsru 5y ago
  Old cars were serviceable and had decent tool sets inside compared to single screwdriver nowadays. So having the tools does not look like a problem. Old cars were also much simpler to work with. Especially no problems with electrical components. Why he choose not to hike is another question.
  • rob74 5y ago
    I doubt 70s/80s cars came with a tool set included (bicycles did) - but if you were heading out into the desert, it's definitely sensible to take some tools with you.
  • perl4ever 5y ago
    >Especially no problems with electrical components As long as you carried some spare wiring harness smoke. http://www.whereisbobl.com/tiger/smoke.html http://www.whereisbobl.com/tiger/smoke.html "Q: Can I use this device to replace the smoke in my Alfa Spider? Is Brit smoke the same as Italian smoke? A: Only if it's pre-Bosch."
• Groxx 5y ago
  If that map is even remotely accurate, he was only about 10-20 miles away from Tan-Tan: https://goo.gl/maps/fzJmUz3b2PddDSp17 https://goo.gl/maps/fzJmUz3b2PddDSp17 Seems like a fairly easy walk to me. Uncomfortable and a bit long (roughly one day), certainly, but less-so than a dozen days in the desert.
  • ChainOfFools 5y ago
    this part of Morocco is not particularly harsh, either. it's the hardpack, pebble strewn surface called "reg" not the sandy, treeless desert that doesn't really exist in Morocco except in a rather narrow band along the Algerian border. I agree this was likely a preconceived stunt because locals walk that distance, in much more rugged conditions,, all the time without making a big deal about it.
• pengaru 5y ago
  Eh, in his situation I would have probably attempted the macguyver approach knowing full well if it fails I'm just back in the hoofing it situation. 10 days of water in the desert probably becomes a lot less when you're hauling it without a combustion engine assisting. I've done a lot of manual labor in the mojave. When rebuilding a roof in July I was going through 5-10 gallons a day - and that's not dragging heavy shit across the wilderness. I doubt the motorcycle rode particularly well, it probably more resembled a self-powered wheeled sled for precariously carrying him and his supplies with less effort than without fire. My assumption is it tipped over often and was quite graceless...
  • Tossrock 5y ago
    5 - 10 gallons per day?? Are you including washing and other non-drinking usage? Because drinking more than 2 gallons of water a day, even in high, dry heat with physical exertion, is extremely difficult. I've done a good amount of desert labor and a gallon/day is about right for drinking, even at 100+ degrees.
    • pengaru 5y ago
      No, strictly drinking. It's practically all lost to perspiration and respiration - I struggled to drink enough water to manage a single wee throughout the day. This was 120F ambient air temps, much hotter surface/roof-in-progress temps operating in close proximity to. Basically every drink break put down 2 Brita pitchers worth, refilled from a 5-gallon water cooler bottle. Typically I'd have to go down and refill the 5-gallon bottle once per day... hence 5-10gals.
      • Tempest1981 5y ago
        How did you avoid hyponatremia?
        • pengaru 5y ago
          Didn't do anything in particular, dunno. Maybe all the canned sardines in water I was eating/drinking the broth from delivered enough sodium? I didn't feel ill or anything like that.
• stronglikedan 5y ago
  > I don't believe this. Myth Busters proved this was possible. Not that this story actually happened, just that it could have.
  • gruez 5y ago
    They proved making a motorcycle-like thing is possible, but it's basically useless as a vehicle.
    • tzs 5y ago
      They didn't prove that all motorcycle-like things buildable from that car with those tools are useless. These were the possible outcomes from the Mythbusters test: 1. They build it and it works. That would prove that building a useful MLTFTC (motorcycle-like thing from that car) was possible, but would not prove that Leray had done so. 2. They are unable to find a way to build an MLTFTC. This does not prove it cannot be done, but they are smart and inventive builders and had accounts and photos of Leray's alleged MLTFTC to go on, so if they could not figure it out it would cast very strong doubts on Leray's story. 3. The result they actually got. They are able to build an MLTFTC, but it doesn't work well enough to ride. That is the least satisfying possible result. It tells us that MLTFTCs are possible, but doesn't tell us if useful ones are possible. That theirs was not useful fails to rule out that others might be useful because two-wheeled vehicles are quite sensitive to geometry. It has not hard to have two such vehicles that look very similar, but one is rideable and one is not due to a few degrees difference in part of the geometry.
      • dustintrex 5y ago
        Why not build a tricycle instead? Much more stable, not much more complicated, and the parts shouldn't be an issue since you'll have four wheels and two axles lying around already.
        • gruez 5y ago
          AFAIK the premise of the myth is that the first two tires broke. If only one tire broke I think you can plausibly drive the car without any modifications by shifting weight away from the flat tire.
• IncRnd 5y ago
  I imagine for someone stranded in the desert it would be difficult carry ten days of water while aimlessly walking in the hopes of finding a road.
  • plasticchris 5y ago
    Walk at night? That’s better in the desert and you can use the stars to hold course.
  • barrkel 5y ago
    Let's be clear: he'd be about 40 hours walk from the coast, at most, on surface that looks like this: https://www.google.com/maps/@28.03012,-11.1617356,3a,75y,89.9h,87.01t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipOe_MlpNMkKgPxy_PaazIll9tzblJRVY9Xboo7v!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipOe_MlpNMkKgPxy_PaazIll9tzblJRVY9Xboo7v%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-6.7524114-ya348.74597-ro0-fo100!7i7168!8i3584 https://www.google.com/maps/@28.03012,-11.1617356,3a,75y,89....
• LorenPechtel 5y ago
  Hoofing it with 10 days of water? You realize how much that weighs? And I note no mention of food. 10 days of hoofing it without food isn't going to happen. A day of hoofing it with a pack burns 4000-5000 calories/day. Your body quickly depletes it's ready stores and you're down to fat reserves--and the rate that you can use those is limited.
  • barrkel 5y ago
    He couldn't have been more than 40 hours walk from the coast. If the map was accurate, a lot less to a road.
    • LorenPechtel 5y ago
      Depends on the terrain. Last year there was a case in the local news of a guy who died out in Death Valley when he tried to hoof it after a breakdown. His objective was less than 10 miles from his car. I know something of the terrain and even without looking at a map my first reaction to what he attempted was that it would be impossible even by survival standards. I do not believe the terrain could be traversed even with mountaineering gear. (Too much of it is loose material near the maximum stable angle--it won't bear weight.)
• brudgers 5y ago
  Ten days water is twenty liters. 20kg. About a jerrycan full…perhaps exactly what he had.
  • wikidani 5y ago
    Probably a bit more, considering he was prepared for desert conditions (and probably) some physical work as well
  • quickthrower2 5y ago
    20 litres for a sedate software developer in an air conditioned office, yes. If that dev goes to the gym after work they'd need more! Let alone crossing a desert in the heat. I'm probably doing 3 litres a day of pure water (plus water from coffees / food etc.) in 30 degree temps, but spending most of that time inside with air-con. It's probably not enough as I am pissing orange still. Edit: someone like me wouldn't hike in deserts though, so by survivorship bias people that do it often probably need less water to stay cool. But 2l/day even if walking only dusk/dawn seems tight still.
• mirekrusin 5y ago
  It's different world now but my dad with grandpa (his dad) were taking our car apart including engine, unscrewing every single piece of engine, cleaning it and putting the whole thing back together. They were laughing there were always some "redundant screws" left at the end. Everything was like that, TV broke, we took it to dad's friend garage where he had tons of shit and was fixing stuff, taking things out, resoldering etc; you had a hole in your clothes? granny would fix it, your shoes were broken? you'd try to fix them first, not get new ones etc.
  • richardfey 5y ago
    Were they doing it for regular maintenance or to fix some problem?
    • mirekrusin 5y ago
      It wasn't regular, I think more for fun than anything else, rationalized as maintenance. Smaller fixes/replacements were happening all the time though.
  • tzs 5y ago
    For TVs even people who didn't normally fix things around the house could usually fix them. That's because 99% of the time your TV broke it was because a vacuum tube failed. You took off the back cover with the TV on, looked at all the tubes, and found the one whose filament was not glowing. You then turned the TV off, pulled that tube out of its socket, went and bought a replacement, put that in, and that almost always fixed the TV. You get could the replacement tube at many supermarkets. They would have a self-service kiosk that had a tube tester built in. It had a bunch of sockets covering all the tubes you were likely to find in a home TV or radio. You'd plug yours into the right socket and hit the test button, and the tester would verify that the tube was indeed dead (or tell you were wrong in which case maybe it was something other than a tube that failed so time to call the TV repairman). There would be a book attached to the kiosk that listed all the tubes likely to be in home TVs or radios. You'd look your tube up in that and it would tell you what equivalent tube available at the kiosk could replace your tube. You'd grab that tube and go pay the cashier.
• moron4hire 5y ago
  We also didn't have the internet back then for people to immediately call bullshit on stories like this, so there was a higher chance for it to enter the urban mythology without much question. Once it would have hit Reader's Digest, man, it would have practically been a fundamental law of nature.
  • 1024core 5y ago
    FYI: 1993 was just at the cusp of the "Internet Age". WWW dates back to 1989.
• jeffreyrogers 5y ago
  You're assuming he knew where he was. There's a good book called Sahara Unveiled that has several stories in it about people getting lost in the Sahara and dying of thirst. In many cases they were only a mile or two from a place where they could have been saved. The problem is the roads aren't good and are often covered by sand, so people get disoriented and don't know where they are or where they are trying to go. Plus if you leave the shade during the day you will lose water even faster. Maybe this story is fake or staged, but many people have died of thirst in the Sahara even though they could've walked out.
• LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
  How do you walk with 10 days of water in a desert? Towing that behind you on some kind of sled, or what?
  • willcipriano 5y ago
    A fifty pound backpack is hard to carry, 83 pounds of water sloshing around would be a nightmare.
• YeGoblynQueenne 5y ago
  What I find difficult to believe is that he set out on the journey with a 2CV. Of course he broke it. It's a good car, but it's not a jeep.