"Modern cars are too powerful for UK roads"

Nobody does 70 on the motorway anymore

That’s true, but not wholly in the way you’re implying.

Cougar – Moderator
and possibly racism
Islam is not a race. Nice try though.

Come on, the piss take should have been obvious. Must write out “use more smilies” 100 times…

Driving skills have improved
tyres have improved
brakes have improved
roads have improved
steering has improved
suspension as improved
cars are not too powerful, they have always had the ability to maim or kill. they are safer and we are safer and quicker.

As @squirrel’s post shows you can drive like an idiot in any car. I’d go as far as to say in a powerful car you can have fun safely whereas to make a dull car interesting you do crazy stuff, as per the videos above

Cars are more powerful now than they have ever been yet our road deaths and casualty statistics are lower than they’ve ever been and we some of the safest roads in Europe.

It’s still not as fast as a neighbours Talbot Sunbeam though.

Ha! I’ll never forget one evening driving over to Basingstoke with a mate in his MGC, to see our respective girlfriends at the hospital. (Trainee nurses). Anyhoo we were pootling along the lanes the other side of Newbury, around Kingsclere, and this boxy little car comes up behind, then blasts past, disappearing away in front. As it passes, my mate goes for the gears, at which point, I go “uh uh, not a good idea!” “Fast, is it?” “You haven’t a hope in hell!” “Don’t think I’ll bother, then…”
I’d spotted the Lotus logo on the silver graphic panel along the side as it passed, he hadn’t. 😀
Always wanted one, doubt if I could even afford to run one, these days, not without a lottery win!

As a counterpoint there are some cases where buying an underpowered car is just as dangerous.

Bewildrered person: “I’d like a 1 litre hyundai please”
Salesman “Oh – do you in a city that you live quite close to – is everything relativelly flat?
BP: “NO I want to do 45mph on A roads and 15mph around the peak district”
Salesman: “Okay – you simply don’t like driving – please can I take you license and give you these free taxi vouchers and a national express pass?”

Driving skills have improved

Have they? I think I’ve missed that.

molgrips – Member
Really?

Who buys a fast (note I didn’t say ‘nice’) car and doesn’t drive it fast? And why?
Doesn’t have to be a ‘fast’ car, per se, define ‘fast’ anyway.
You should’ve seen how I used to drive my dad’s old Volvo 244!
My Puma wasn’t the fastest car on the road by any stretch of the imagination, 129bhp from a normally aspirated 1.7 Zetec is easily beaten my a regular VW, Seat or Audi 1.4 TSi, which puts out 184bhp, but it was so much fun to drive quickly along twisty A and B roads; there’s a lovely twisty bit on the A420 Bristol Road dropping down into a village called Ford, which is normally taken about 50mph. That’s about the maximum I can take it in the Octavia, but in the Puma I could easily take it at 70, no problem.
That’s the great thing about ‘fast’ cars, it’s just not so much about maximimum outright power, it’s the better handling, breaking, grip, etc, that goes with it, allowing higher average speeds to be maintained while not necessarily exceeding maximum speed limits.
Damn, I really miss that little car, it sounded great, and really was a blast to drive. 😥

Driving skills have improved

Have you actually been near a road in the last 10 years 😆

molgrips – Member

Who buys a fast (note I didn’t say ‘nice’) car and doesn’t drive it fast? And why?

We covered this pages ago. Fast cars can be satisfying to drive slow, simple as that, the extra power and improved handling that makes them fast can also make them very allround drivable. (or, o’course, can make them total pigs)

Mine as I say isn’t fast fast- it’s just enormously quicker and more powerful than a big estate has to be. But I didn’t get the big engine (and tune it) for the extra 30mph top speed over the little engine, because I’ll never go near that… You could stick a speed limiter on it, I wouldn’t just not mind, I’d never know. Or to take 5 seconds off the 0-60, because doing that too often’ll cause the DMF to explode… I got it because it’s lovely to drive, all the time, it wafts along motorways, grunts through twisty b-roads, it’s just entirely more pleasant than the slower versions. I do use all the power sometimes too but mostly I like the girth, not the length.

There are some fast cars that are just for going fast and are compromised the rest of the time but there’s also a lot of fast cars that make very good, sensible everyday cars.

I think this is all backwards. My fastish car is perfectly safe and suitable for the roads. However I think the chassis is to good.

My car is actually too good, to have fun in any way other than in straight line acceleration you have to be going stupidly quick. It just holds the road so well that it doesn’t feel like it will let go.

A while ago I was driving down a nice B road heading into a pretty tight s bend corner at 60. My made quickly told me that he came that way to my house 10 mins earlier and his car slid across the road at 40. Mine was totally composed and with no drama got around the corner with no breaking. His car was a normal VW Golf and mine is a Focus ST Estate.

Come on, the piss take should have been obvious. Must write out “use more smilies” 100 times…

Sorry. If it’s any consolation, I get that a lot too.

I had a bit of a mid life crisis a year or so ago and scratched an Integrale Evo shaped itch. Very quickly realised it was a far better car than I was a driver(funny that). When I did drive it quickly it was always on my mind that what I was doing was dangerous and irresponsible, so I stopped. But I loved the car, the looks, pedigree, fact that it was Italian and left hand drive. Very much regret selling it. It was pretty much the opposite of the stealth car alluded to pages ago in that it was a bit obvious and standoutish.

PS the only reason for the bragging is to answer the question of who buys a fast car and doesn’t..,..

But by the sound of things you did, and presumably wouldn’t have bought it if you’d no intention of doing so.

We covered this pages ago. Fast cars can be satisfying to drive slow, simple as that, the extra power and improved handling that makes them fast can also make them very allround drivable.

Ok, so 180, 200bhp, I can understand. But 450?

molgrips
Ok, so 180, 200bhp, I can understand. But 450?

450bhp is probably too much for say, a Smart car, or a Polo. It might make them difficult to control and detract from driving pleasure for sure. But what about a Range Rover or S-Class? You want to be able to overtake the oiks should you so wish.

At any rate it’s just a number, completely abstract. How it’s delivered is important.

Well, the number is important.

You can get up to 180bhp easily enough without much of a fuel penalty. However you’re going to be using double the fuel you should be trundling around in your AMG Merc whatever. I’m sure I’ll be accused of youghurt knitting blablabla for saying that but it’s a factor. There’s only so much petrol, and pissing it up the wall does no-one any favours (that applies to driving 4 miles to work as much as it applies to fast cars so don’t start on the yeah buts).

It may be possible to ‘get the power down’ in a nice whatever but it’s not something you should really be doing, is it? It’s increasing danger for everyone just for your own gratification. Not really fair.

And if you aren’t getting the power down, then why own the car? As said, you can get a lovely luxury car that handles well and has 200bhp and still does 50mpg. This should be enough – if you want more, get something for the track.

Ok, so 180, 200bhp, I can understand. But 450?

What about the track day amateur who can’t afford to run two cars? That was pretty much my situation. I fancied something a bit different with a bit of power and that would hold its own on a track. I was already paying for the wife’s car and I couldn’t really justify a commuter and a track car for myself, so I got a single car that ticked all the boxes. It doesn’t mean I drove like a lunatic on the public highway. Although, and I know I’m risking death by flaming here, I will admit the instant power came in very useful for despatching the odd tractor/HGV/ditherer in places that it wouldn’t have been possible in a more sedate car.

What about the track day amateur who can’t afford to run two cars?

Ok fine, but that’s a pretty niche situation!

molgrips – Member

Ok, so 180, 200bhp, I can understand. But 450?

Where’s the arbitrary line going to be today?

The fuel economy argument does make sense to me but it’s quite disconnected from power- rather than going “X amount of power is too much, unless it’s fuel efficient”, why not just cut to the chase there?

But then you get into the whole swamp of, if driving a powerful, 20mpg car is reprehensible, how about me driving my less powerful, 60mpg car for a bunch of non-essential trips to consume the same amount of dinosaurs? And while you can be safer or less safe while driving, it’s never safer than not driving

Basically it’s hard to be absolutist about this, there’s a wee bit of reductio ad absurdum in what I’m saying here but mostly it’s the case that there’s always something you could be doing better, you can always go 10mph slower, drive less, have a slower/safer/more economic car.

It may be possible to ‘get the power down’ in a nice whatever but it’s not something you should really be doing, is it? It’s increasing danger for everyone just for your own gratification. Not really fair.

See, I take umbrage with this as well. You can drive like a **** “increasing danger for everyone” in a Fiat Panda; you don’t need 450 unnecessary horses under the bonnet. Assuming that everyone who drives a powerful car uses all the power, all the time is woefully misjudged.

molgrips

Ok fine, but that’s a pretty niche situation!

Big business now molgrips. Track days are becoming very popular, and many manufacturers are producing track variants of otherwise sedate cars. for example the new Renault Megane 275 Trophy.

There’s only so much petrol, and pissing it up the wall does no-one any favours (that applies to driving 4 miles to work as much as it applies to fast cars so don’t start on the yeah buts).

In comparison with ‘Murica, we are not so much pissing up the wall as barely dribbling. Anything Europe does isn’t a drop in the ocean compared to their consumption. I was in Alberta (obviously not ‘Murica but still) a few years back and was drinking on a roof top bar. To my amazement, and much to the Canadicans bemusement virtually every car was a giant truck.

Assuming that everyone who drives a powerful car uses all the power, all the time is woefully misjudged.

I don’t assume that.

The point is, why buy it if you aren’t using it? You’re telling me that people in fast cars floor it for a few seconds then back off at 60mph? Doesn’t seem like it from what I can see.

Yes, you can be a shit driver in any car. Yes you can drive a fast car sensibly. But the former is more likely to be done at higher speed in a fast car, and the latter – why? Who buys a fast car and drives it slowly?

But then you get into the whole swamp of, if driving a powerful, 20mpg car is reprehensible, how about me driving my less powerful, 60mpg car for a bunch of non-essential trips to consume the same amount of dinosaurs?

I mentioned that. It’s about reducing consumption. You do that by choosing a more efficient car AND not using it wastefully. Saying ‘oh I only drive 5k miles a year so that means I can buy a 25mpg one with a clean consicence’ is daft.

Anything Europe does isn’t a drop in the ocean compared to their consumption.

a) not it’s not and
b) this is a ridiculous thing to be saying. You sound like my kids.

molgrips
Who buys a fast car and drives it slowly?

Drive up the motorway at 70mph. See what passes you. Anything and everything. Clearly a lot of people buy slow cars to drive fast.

a) not it’s not and
b) this is a ridiculous thing to be saying. You sound like my kids.

Congratulations on having smart kids. Average car fuel economy in the U.S is 29 mpg. Average in Europe is 43 mpg.

The average american uses twice as much oil as the average European.

molgrips – Member

Saying ‘oh I only drive 5k miles a year so that means I can buy a 25mpg one with a clean consicence’ is daft.

How about “Because i drive a less efficient car, I’ve pared my milage to the minimum”? Or “I’ve chosen this un-environmental thing, but I offset it with all these other environmental things.” Life is a balance. I live in scotland, 40% of my electricity comes from renewables, compared to your 9% (IIRC) in England, so maybe I get to burn more fuel and you can burn more gas 😉

And like I say, you can always do more. Is your car the most efficient, could you drive it more efficiently, or less? You bought a more efficient car, how is the cradle-to-grave cost looking? The point at which you say “this is fine, that’s not fine” is always going to be subjective and arbitrary.

I’ve made my call and I’m happy with it, it’s pretty defensible too- but I don’t really feel like I can judge other people who’ve made a different call. I burn 500W per hour playing computer games, maybe Joe 450bhp lives in a freezing dark cave and grows all his own food and thinks my electrical profligacy is disgusting

how about the arguement that the fuel consumption of a car is only part of the CO2/resources it consumes story. While I’m sure there are plenty of holes in the arguement there is a school of thought that says the impact of building a car is greater than the emmissions during its life (see the guardian for some maths http://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living-blog/2010/sep/23/carbon-footprint-new-car)

whiles this is something of justification for my own life choices it does give me some hope my 14 year old 200,000mile car with 400bhp+ isn’t “clubbing polar bears to death”

“I’ve chosen this un-environmental thing, but I offset it with all these other environmental things.”

That’s exactly the same as what I said. This isn’t a quota situation. It’s about being as minimal as you can be. If you’re saying that a fast car is essential to your lifestyle.. well.. I’m saying it’s not 🙂

how about the arguement that the fuel consumption of a car is only part of the CO2/resources it consumes story

Sure. But when you chose that car, there was presumably a choice of old inefficient cars or old efficient ones – wasn’t there? I’m not asking you to throw it away for a new i8, which is why I said ‘choosing a more efficient car’ and not ‘buying’ one.

Re your car, let’s say what, 280g/km CO2? that’s somewhere around 90 tonnes CO2 since it was new. That could easily have been halved. The savings could have heated an average house for 3.5 years or lit a room for 400 years!

You’re telling me that people in fast cars floor it for a few seconds then back off at 60mph?

Thats pretty much what I do. OK I don’t try to get to 60 in 6.5 seconds but I accelerate faster than most people do. I have no interest in driving everywhere at 150mph, I might drift over the speed limit at times but only when I think it is safe to. I don’t drive any differently than I did in my old 1.6 diesel C-Max, I just get there faster and can hold the speed better in the corners. In fact on the motorway I tend to chill between 60-70.

And like I say, you can always do more. Is your car the most efficient, could you drive it more efficiently, or less? You bought a more efficient car, how is the cradle-to-grave cost looking? The point at which you say “this is fine, that’s not fine” is always going to be subjective and arbitrary.

THIS!!
The figures are boggling when you actually look at what all the new “efficient” cars actually cost in CO2 terms.
The Hybrids are the worst of them all – especially the Prius.
Think what it takes to make the batteries, then transport them, etc.

molgrips – Member

That’s exactly the same as what I said. This isn’t a quota situation. It’s about being as minimal as you can be

I bet you 10p you’re not being as minimal as you can be. You’re just drawing the line and saying “The un-minimal decisions I make are acceptable, the un-minimal decisions other people make aren’t”

The Hybrids are the worst of them all – especially the Prius.

I call bullshit, and I’ve researched this more than you have I think.

The figures are boggling when you actually look at what all the new “efficient” cars actually cost in CO2 terms.

If you think a diesel polo costs more energy to make than a Merc S class – you’re clueless.

I bet you 10p you’re not being as minimal as you can be.

You’d be right.

When you’re without sin you can cast a rock.

And you’d be very very wrong. My environmental footprint makes absolutely no difference to YOURS. Your footprint is your own responsibility, and dismissing what I say because of my footprint is pointless. This isn’t a moral competition.

And you’d be very very wrong. My environmental footprint makes absolutely no difference to YOURS. Your footprint is your own responsibility, and dismissing what I say because of my footprint is pointless. This isn’t a moral competition.

Why have you spent this whole thread doing exactly this then? Everyone who has made a different motoring decision to the one you make is aparently wrong.

I’m not trying to win moral points.

It’s just about facts. You’re wasting fuel in a fast car. I might be wasting it too, somewhere else, but that makes no difference. You’re still wasting it!

Everyone who has made a different motoring decision to the one you make is aparently wrong.

Well yeah – if you make a ‘different’ decision to piss fuel up the wall then yes, that’s wrong.

molgrips
Well yeah – if you make a ‘different’ decision to piss fuel up the wall then yes, that’s wrong.

You appear to have bought a new (presumably) Passat a while ago. As opposed to an old diesel corsa run on recycled vegetable oil. Or even, an old bicycle to get about on. I’m sure you have your reasons, but did you you work out the difference it would have made to your co2 footprint if you had bought the corsa or the bike?

molgrips – Member

Your footprint is your own responsibility, and dismissing what I say because of my footprint is pointless.

That’s not at all the point I’m making. What I am saying, is that you’ve chosen to condemn one lifestyle choice with a negative environmental impact, while following others yourself. You can’t say “I am not as minimal as I can be” and “Other people should be as minimal as they can be”.

The point is, why buy it if you aren’t using it?

That’s exactly why I didn’t buy a 911 Turbo. I thought the 4S had plenty enough power for road use, sounds better, costs less and looks better without the go-faster wings and scoops.

So do I use it? Yes, but I live in the sticks with instant access to some great driving roads. Also don’t have to use 100% power 100% of the time to have fun. I’m sure if you logged my throttle trace, I’d be using full power for only a fraction of the overall time, but it does get used and the torque/throttle response etc is useful pretty much all of the time. Not to mention how great the chassis is. It’s not all about power – steering feel, brake feel, handling/ride all play a huge part in the driving experience. I can’t begin to state how much better it is to drive than an ordinary Eurobox even at relatively low speed. That’s the difference between driving for pleasure and just driving. I do both.

I can’t begin to state how much better it is to drive than an ordinary Eurobox

But those are not the only two options…

But those are not the only two options…

Really? What else is there then?

BMW 518d?

150bhp and 114g/km CO2. Not really a Eurobox, is it? Nice enough to enjoy being in, quick enough and decent on fuel.

Amazing – we can all get cars with 450+ bhp but ‘don’t have to use the full beans’ on normal roads but woe betide someone turning up to a trail centre with a 160mm travel bike – suddenly they’re ‘overbiked’ and ridiculed….