Hey, Lupinsea...

[John V]

She only named one car specifically in this thread - a Viper. Since you obviously know what other cars she's talking about, can you tell me what they are? Thx.

[Sharp11]

Originally Posted by John V

She only named one car specifically in this thread - a Viper. Since you obviously know what other cars she's talking about, can you tell me what they are? Thx.

Wow, I thought I liked to argue, but you really take the cake John.

I'm genuinely puzzled as to why you're challenging my and Rgal's premise - that is that we're in a HP race today (once again) - do you really need a list?

She brought up the Viper in an anecdotal sense - i.e., she dusted it with her little 1.6. She wasn't compiling a list of overpowered cars If she were to, the Viper would certainly be there.

You mentioned the Corvette, a laudable car - light, powerful, but it's the stock vette, not the Z06, which even Lem admits is unpleasant for daily driving. And what about the completely stupid and insane 700hp Vette in the works? Does that car seem the least bit fun for street driving? Hence my "small penis" joke.

What's truly bizarre is, in this very thread, you seem to agree with what we're saying by replaying the MZ4 comment I posted, but with a slight twist, you suggest "tolerating" its overpowered nature with a lighter touch on the throttle - Rgal, rightly, took exception by challenging the logic of that with this

That's the whole point. One should press down hard on the go pedal. Why have something that sucks gas and blows pollution, and then you have to breathe on the throttle? Bad, in a global sense.

Why would you buy a stereo with 300 watts per channel when 50 would do? I don't get it.

Once again, in typical and uniquely carmudgeonly style, round and round we go......

Ed

[John V]

I'm honestly not trying to be argumentative, Ed. Sometimes, yes. Here, no. I honestly wanted to know what other cars Roadstergal was talking about, since she didn't name any specifics.

Maybe to you and I, a Corvette SS with 800 bazillion horsepower is stupid. I certainly don't want to own one, and I have really no interest in driving one. But to someone, that might be the ultimate car.

You said people were "horsepower obsessed," referenced the MZ4, and said it (where it = the desire for more power) was stupid. I don't want an MZ4 for a number of reasons, but I can understand where BMW was going with that car. They had a motor that fit in arguably their most capable chassis, and they married the two. Whether the end result is equal to the sum of the parts is arguable; however wanting more power isn't "stupid" in and of itself. It's personal preference. I would love to have another 50hp/50ft-lbs in my car if it didn't add much (or any) weight. The chassis could easily handle it. Is that stupid? I don't think so. I wouldn't have to use all of it all the time but to me it would make me like the car even more.

Be careful making sweeping generalizations relating feelings of inadequacy to car choice. I'm sure there are plenty of well-endowed Z06 and Viper owners out there who just love the feeling of being shoved back into the seat. It is not what you and I (and RGal) value most, but that doesn't make it stupid.

[Roadstergal]

If there were no tradeoffs for power, sure, why not? But there are. With very few exceptions, especially the 'Vette that always gets dragged out at that point, more power means more consumption and more emissions. It also means more potential for the doofuses that are the majority of drivers to cause great bodily harm and property damage. Which leads to the matter of priorities, which is a pretty major one, to me. Over 20 years ago, cars like the 325e and the Miata were getting 30mpg. That's still considered good mileage today! Cars are getting more powerful instead of more efficient, and our environment is showing major strain. What was considered impressive hp back then is now considered not enough hp for a commutermobile, which is silly. Onramps haven't gotten shorter. The laws of physics haven't changed.

And as far as competition is concerned -the big classes 'round the NW for racing are Spec Miata and Pro3. Not exactly HP monsters. Racing is about driver skill; what makes sense for racing is a cheap level playing field where drivers can compete against each other, not compete on magazine pages.

[John V]

Originally Posted by Roadstergal

If there were no tradeoffs for power, sure, why not? But there are. With very few exceptions, especially the 'Vette that always gets dragged out at that point, more power means more consumption and more emissions.

Cars are making more power today than they were 20 years ago, but they're simultaneously spewing out fewer harmful gases than they were 20 years ago. Craziness.

It also means more potential for the doofuses that are the majority of drivers to cause great bodily harm and property damage.

I couldn't agree more. Which is why we need stricter driver licensing requirements.

Which leads to the matter of priorities, which is a pretty major one, to me. Over 20 years ago, cars like the 325e and the Miata were getting 30mpg. That's still considered good mileage today!

I can't believe you would even suggest going back and driving one of those emissions-spewing monsters today. That's like instant death to the environment!

In all seriousness, cars have gotten heavier, primarily because they've gotten safer and have more content. Blame the safety thing on your government. Blame the content thing on your fellow man. Could I have fun driving a 205hp base Boxster? Sure, plenty. Is my 250hp "S" model more fun? To me it is a bunch more fun. That's not silly.

Cars are getting more powerful instead of more efficient, and our environment is showing major strain. What was considered impressive hp back then is now considered not enough hp for a commutermobile, which is silly. Onramps haven't gotten shorter. The laws of physics haven't changed.

It does seem silly to me that a Camry or Altima today has over 250hp. There is positively nothing fun to me about a 250hp Camry. The base four cylinder model is, I'm sure, perfectly fine as far as Camrys go. But it's market-driven. If everybody wanted the four cylinder model, Toyota would surely not bother selling the V6 one.

[Sharp11]

Originally Posted by John V

I'm honestly not trying to be argumentative, Ed. Sometimes, yes. Here, no. I honestly wanted to know what other cars Roadstergal was talking about, since she didn't name any specifics.

Maybe to you and I, a Corvette SS with 800 bazillion horsepower is stupid. I certainly don't want to own one, and I have really no interest in driving one. But to someone, that might be the ultimate car.

You said people were "horsepower obsessed," referenced the MZ4, and said it (where it = the desire for more power) was stupid. I don't want an MZ4 for a number of reasons, but I can understand where BMW was going with that car. They had a motor that fit in arguably their most capable chassis, and they married the two. Whether the end result is equal to the sum of the parts is arguable; however wanting more power isn't "stupid" in and of itself. It's personal preference. I would love to have another 50hp/50ft-lbs in my car if it didn't add much (or any) weight. The chassis could easily handle it. Is that stupid? I don't think so. I wouldn't have to use all of it all the time but to me it would make me like the car even more.

Be careful making sweeping generalizations relating feelings of inadequacy to car choice. I'm sure there are plenty of well-endowed Z06 and Viper owners out there who just love the feeling of being shoved back into the seat. It is not what you and I (and RGal) value most, but that doesn't make it stupid.

In fairness, americans have always favored the trend towards more HP; when I was a kid there were plenty of desirable sports cars one could buy: Fiats, Triumphs, MGB's etc. these were awesome cars (if built like junk) that were fun to drive in a way many people have never experienced - I think I like the Miata so much because it comes the closest.

Yet, it was the muscle car (and pony cars) that won out - awful chassis and brake combinations in poorly built pedestrian cars with huge power.

I think BMW succumbed to marketing pressure with the Mz4, my old car, with its 225hp 3.0 six, that got 24 mpg around town, with an automatic, could do 0-60 in 5.8 seconds. That was a dream number even for a muscle car back in the 60's - now it's not "fast" enough, it needs to be a sub 5 second number. At the expense of handling, too, the M is heavier, has poorer weight distribution and is slower around the skidpad.

I bet if BMW wanted to make the Z4 even better, all they needed to do was slip the LSD into the standard car, perhaps ditch the rf's and go back to hydraulic assist for the steering and bingo, best Z4 ever.......but nooooooo.

Where does it end? When will will, as Rgal calls them, the doofusses require sub 4 second, then Sub 3 seconds times? And for what purpose, so they can boast about it online or at the local meet and greet?

What about handling, braking, shift and clutch feel, lighter weight and a raft of other more important improvements? Are these things being compromised in the name of more power?

I stand by my not so "sweeping generalization" on this one, escalating HP is a dumb trend and if Mazda hadn't crippled the NC Miata with an SUV-like ride height, I'd have one as a third car, so excellent is the basic formula.

Ed

[Sharp11]

Originally Posted by John V

Cars are making more power today than they were 20 years ago, but they're simultaneously spewing out fewer harmful gases than they were 20 years ago. Craziness.

John,

Read Peter Egan's column in the April R&T, he talks about this very issue - it's a good take on the subject.

Ed