Is there a thing as too much HP's?

[Evan]

on the topic...
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/content/jan2008/bw2008014_388136.htm?campaign_id=rss_daily">http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/c ... =rss_daily</a><!-- m -->

[BLAIR]

Horsepowers?

My car has 300 horsepowers?

Doesnt sound right hahaha

I didnt bother reading the thread at all. Too much horsepower is when you spin top gear at over 100 mph. If you cant do that.. its not to much

[Hunter]

Horsepowers?

My horse only has the power to eat grass and poop, I wish it had the power to fly.

[BLINGMW]

I agree that the horsepowers are too many. Hopefully the new CAFE standard will help with that quite a bit, though it'll be a while. As much as I don't like trying to solve problems with more regulation, if they passed a bill tomorrow that said you can't produce a car or non-commercial truck with more than 200HP, I would laugh my ass of and say, GOOD! :lol: Then we'd get a bunch of lighter cars. Or sweet turbo diesels with 200HP and 500ft-lbs of torque. :wink:

Sadly, it doesn't seem like there's much concern for better driver training. Seems that the vast majority of Americans have written that off as if there's nothing that can be done to prevent "accidents". Maybe if the insurance companies started offering deep discounts to drivers who went through some real driver training? That's really all it would take. I just don't count on government to help us with this one, and you know, I'm not sure it's a great use of tax $$ anyway, coming up with more rigorous testing/training and some kind of graduated licensing system. I'm sure they'd screw it up anyway.

[Feersty]

I don't know about you guys, but I want to buy a fleet of Tata Nanos!

[BLINGMW]

I don't know about you guys, but I want to buy a fleet of Tata Nanos!

It's pretty amazing they managed to build a convincing car so cheaply... I can't imagine something like that ever selling here, but yeah, you could afford a fleet! :thumbup:

Tata Type R!!! :mrgreen: (eh, it has a ring to it)

[Evan]

I don't know about you guys, but I want to buy a fleet of Tata Nanos!

I agree, Id really like to get between a couple of nice tatas.

I hope they bring out some bigger tatas too

[WRXtranceformed]

Not only are there not enough horsepowers, there are not enough fake tatas out there. If there was a presidential candidate that supported the implantation of fake tatas into those unfortunate flat-chested females that are out there, my decision would be so much more cut and dry during this coming election.

[Evan]

why would you put cars in a womans chest Lee? you're not making any sense.

personally i think fake tatas would be a tragedy. the real tatas are already cheap, although they are in fact pretty small. fake tatas from china might look nice, but they just dont feel the same as real tatas

[ScottyB]

fake tatas from china might look nice

but how would they look in a crash test?

(picturing two girls doing a chest bump)

[WRXtranceformed]

I do like Chinese tatas!

[Goodspeed]

http://wardsauto.com/ar/epa_horsepower_war/

Because to the EPA, more horsepowers = more bad things and stuff. Never mind that these are some of the most fuel efficient sports cars ever. Yes, they could be better, but then again, if it was up to these hippies we'd all be driving Priuses.

[Ginger]

Sometimes people are stupid.

Last time I checked, the Mr. Jones didn't care if his care was Greener than mine....

[Andy]

http://wardsauto.com/ar/epa_horsepower_war/

Because to the EPA, more horsepowers = more bad things and stuff. Never mind that these are some of the most fuel efficient sports cars ever. Yes, they could be better, but then again, if it was up to these hippies we'd all be driving Priuses.

When did you get so tough, macho man?

[HAULN-SS]

Last I checked, the last z06 Vette put out got around 25 mpg highway, right? That's the same as my subaru with <half the displacement

[Evan]

http://wardsauto.com/ar/epa_horsepower_war/

Because to the EPA, more horsepowers = more bad things and stuff. Never mind that these are some of the most fuel efficient sports cars ever. Yes, they could be better, but then again, if it was up to these hippies we'd all be driving Priuses.

Wow. How any 'journalist' can label a vehicle a "fuel gulper" several times without actually citing the factual MPG ratings blows my mind. I fucking hate Journalists.

[Andy]

The corvette gets 27-30 pure hw, but only 16-17 city according to corvette forums. That's not including revving the shit out of the engine which I'm sure drops it further. I know I've been known to unleash all 100whp of my miata during my onramp heroics so I can't blame vette owners but citing 25mpgs isn't the whole story. My friends stock DD hemi charger does like 13-14 MPG's. Long story short, higher MPG's is a necessity in today's world.

Whether you want to frame it as hippy environmentalism or energy independent or increased demand for a finite resource, big HP cars powered by petro is a thing of the past.

[Goodspeed]

Whether you want to frame it as hippy environmentalism or energy independent or increased demand for a finite resource, big HP cars powered by petro is a thing of the past.

Horsepower isn't the problem, its weight. We've grown accustomed to fatter and fatter cars that give us the luxuries we demand. An engine has to provide a higher specific output to lug around more weight. Sports cars, at least by design, try to save weight with magnesium this and carbon fiber that. Never mind that these "gas-guzzlers" are actually wildly more efficient, no matter the HP, than their predecessors or many other engines on sale today.

I can understand a 3500 lb. Mustang coming under fire, but a little over 13,000 Cobra 'stangs (for example) were made in 03/04. How many SUVs are made and sold every year??? By this argument I believe that not a single sports car should be hounded without the demise of the SUV. The (sports) automobile has become the scapegoat of energy-environmentalist peoples (and automakers?) and it annoys me. Thats what makes me a tough guy :wink:

[Ginger]

Citing emissions is one thing - they effect the commons and there's not much of a way, short of regulatory caps, of imposing costs of emissions on consumers. The proper method for this cap is on EMISSIONS, not "related" factors. Let those peoples and businesses effected best decide how to comply with the regulations. But saying we should stop making/using "gas guzzling vehicles" because they use up a lot of a finite resource is sill. If you're willing to pay for it, it's your problem. And don't say we're going to run out of the stuff...

[HAULN-SS]

-points to alaska-