That point where performance cars can out perform our roadways? Perhaps cars like this always existed, however it seems the price of admission to this one time exclusive club has dropped to what may be a dangerous level. The example that always comes to mind is the Z06, that is a lot of car for public roads, now walks in the ZR1 and it makes the case even stronger. This is all assuming the owners of these cars have the skills to handle them in the first place, should a special drivers license be required to purchase a car/bike that is capable of biblical performance?

Be honest, is there any need for the performance difference between a ZR1 and a Z06 on public roads? Is it all about bragging rights or do people plan on tracking these cars. The vette is just one example, a regular C6 is a fast car capable of amazing performance numbers, how much is enough? Will people start hurting themselves and those around them as insanely fast cars keep coming down in price and up in performance?

If you ask a GM fan which vette he would want most will want the ZR1, as most P-car fans would want a GT2 or Turbo, as where I have no intentions of tracking the car and would be hard pressed to get anything more then the S model of a 911. Is it just human nature to want the best? It seems the performance differences become less important in the real world.

 

I think we past that point a long time ago. Ten years or so ago an M3 only had 240hp, and cost over 40k, and those cars were fast as shit(maybe not vette fast, but fast). I thought I was getting a hell of a deal back in 2000 when I bought my 01 CL-S(30k for 260hp), wasn't much you could get back then for that money. Like you said, the price of admission has come way down and now you can get 300hp 4 cylinders for 30k or so. Hell even normal family cars can be had with 260-280hp.

Just to clarify, obviously my definition of fast is not Porsche or GTR fast, nor do I really care about what magazines say a car will do in the 1/4 mi.

 

Doesn't matter to me. If someone wants to kill themselves by being stupid, then go ahead.
I do think cars over 250HP should require a 21 & over rule.

 

Not to get off topic, but on the Corvette forum I'm on, most of them prefer the Z06 over the ZR-1. This is mostly because they get almost equal performance without paying the 75k dealer markup for the ZR-1.

 

Agreed. I think 10 years ago, we hit the point where Horsepower has peaked. Who here actually uses ALL they're HP on todays roads? Even if you had a 500HP AMG...you'll probably never use more then 25% of the power. Even on TOP GEAR with Veryon. They only used 200-300 HP of the car.

 

In Japan, the GT-R has the GPS / computer system linked so people can't release the 'full potential' of it unless it knows you're at a track. That is Japan.

What do you think would happen if that happened in the US? What red-blooded American would want 'big brother' telling you what you can / cannot do to the car that *you* own?

It would be nice if they actually taught people how to drive properly cars that are beyond the capabilities of the average person. However, there are too many people on the road today who can't properly drive a Neon or a Civic or a tiny grocery getter, let alone a supercar in regular traffic at posted speeds in good weather.

By testing people who want to own/drive supercars, you'd more likely punish those who drive responsibly than those who will be idiots. I do think a 21+ age rule (someone already mentioned) would be a good start, since a significant %age of accidents are due to inexperience driving.

 

it's interesting that you mentioned that because i was just talking about something like this with some coworkers.

 

I kinda felt like this back in 03 when Dany Heatley crashed his Ferrari putting his teammate Dan Snyder in a coma which eventually killed him. Just because you can afford it doesn't mean you can handle it. Heatley was only 23 at the time of the accident.

The idea of needing a special license to own one would only hurt the auto industry itself. I know plenty of guys with 911's that never hit 75 mph. Most of the people who buy them don't really drive them fast but there's always the few who let things get out of hand. Idiots have been killing themselves in fast cars on public roads for decades now. I'd think that if you're going to kill yourself driving like a nut in a vette, you could have done the same thing with any other car.

 

^ But the problem is, the moron in the driver's seat doesn't take himself out ... s/he takes someone else out in the process. That's the problem!

If you want to take yourself out being an idiot, that's fine. I take issue when others are harmed.

 

I tend to agree that a specialized license won't solve the problem. The problem lies in the lack of respect for other drivers now-a-days, whether in a subcompact or supercar, it's a selfishness at a level that far exceeds the amount of money you have in your bank account. I can't tell you how many 100hp Civics or Corollas I see cutting in and out of traffic at absolutely crazy speeds while the guy in the Porsche or Vette is doing the speed limit. It's the driver 9 out of 10 times, not the car.

 

i do... then again my car only has 100hp

 

I don't think it's unique to our time.

Though it may not have been as fast the 1967 vette surely wasn't as easy to drive as the new models. It had over 400 hp and 7-8 inch bias ply tires. And I doubt the crash safety and seat belts are anything near what they are today. I also think the 67 vette was probably allot safer than a shelby cobra or any of the odd 60's coupes made for racing.

Also the 250 hp rule seems a bit strange. If I had 250hp in the bmw 2002 I had in high school I would probably have soiled every pair of pants I own on the way to school. I think you can look at Australia for those kinds of rules. They have performance rules that dictate what a new driver can use in Victoria (some fast cars still aren't banned, and some slow cars are). They also have some odd graduated license program.

http://www.arrivealive.vic.gov.au/node/199

I think the driving criteria should be higher for people of all ages no matter what car you drive. When I passed my lisence test at 16 in my mom's 120 hp bmw 528e I still had no idea what the car was capable of. I had no idea how it would act in a emergency stop, what it felt like when the car was loosing traction, or any real grasp on how the weight shifts when changing direction. By the way some of my friends and coworkers drive I think they still don't know these things 10-20 years later, but thank god we all know how to parallel park in a city with one street that requires it and can answer 15 standardized test questions.

 

I use it every day, whether merging onto the interstate or passing a car on the hwy, or going to my local track event.

 

I don't think the special testing for a certain level of HP would do much good, because it would only validate that people had the ability to drive excessively fast on public roads. If people drove any car at the posted limit, there would be no issues, but I am realistic, I don't even follow that!

The issue to me is just that the cars abilities have surpassed the roads, and now those cars are easy to attain.

 

Cars have completely and utterly exceeded the capability of the average driver but not our roads IMO.

 

Maybe in Maryland, but have you driven on the some of freeways here in L.A. county?

On my drives into work it's amazing to me how many times I see accidents in roughly the same locations time and time again, yet it seems like nothing is ever done when it's quite obvious what the problem may be ... inadequate merging lane length, bumps in roads, poorly placed signage, exits that are difficult to take.

 

i think a special license would be a good start, because first off who can afford these cars?
older adults, and who wrecks most of the time? the inexperienced son that takes the car out for a spin.

 

x 2.
My slushbox 3G TL does 0-60 in the low 6s and quarter-mile in very high-14s. It is quicker than most of the stock musclecars from the '50s-80s, as well as most 'vettes, about half the exotics and most ponycars through the late '80s.
The TL is as fast, if not faster than, my abilities. I'm not going to redline the TL on every on-ramp, break traction at every light or try for highest speed on every curved ramp- some people do, sometimes unsuccessfully. I do not see a need to go faster at this point.

Knowing my limitations, I would not trust most people to drive well on the street in Porsches, AMGs or other hi-po cars that are 400+ horsepower, let alone 500+ horsepower.

 

That's why I brought up the Heatley/Snyder incident, that's exactly what happened, Heatley survived from the driver seat, Snyder wasn't so lucky.

 

I think in general, I agree with iTimmy that the cars have far outpaced our abilities to drive them. Most people haven't the slightest clue how to handle a slide if their car gets out of sort in a potentially dangerous situation. The problem is that the rules have not kept up with the power. Our driving requirements are way too meager for the kind of power that can be unleashed on the road. What needs to happen is that the general standards for driving need to be increased and it needs to become more difficult to get a drivers license. By raising the base standard, we bring the overall quality of drivers up a bit to be more in line with the power that is available to them today.

 

Go to middle America, our roads are no where near as cluttered as east/west coast, big city roads like most of you are accustomed to. There are many places that one could use the full hp (for short bursts) and not harm or cause harm to any one. Not every road is like LA

 

100%. That and a more stringent Graduated drivers license program(like we have here with strict rules to when and passengers in the car for the first 2 years) , and raise the legal age to 18 (though many will not like)

 

Agreed. The majority of drivers of performance cars will never come close to approaching the maximum capability of said cars during daily driving. The track is a completely different story. The s is more than enough car for me. Going to a turbo or gt3 at this juncture seems like a waste of mullah imo. It's almost like getting a turbo for the sake of "upgrading" from my c2s.

My colleague drives a gt3 as his daily driver and complains of the harsh ride and low stance. My other colleague with a gt3 rs has put 500 miles on it in 1 year of ownership, it's more like a garage queen than anything else. He also has a c2s for a daily driver. It's obvious that the men driving these cars have enough disposable income to obtain vehicles with hp, torque, and performance far outstripping the drivers' skills and capacity. To each his own I guess.

 

I kinda disagree with this part of your statement. Enthusiasts and older drivers, I'll set the bar at 40 years and older, do understand how to control a car in a hard skid. The auto industry has attempted to idiot proof driving for us. ABS brakes, Traction Control, Electronic stability programs, parking sensors, it's all a bunch of crap that for the most part has bred a generation of driver who don't know how to drive. Now that they idiot proofed driving, the idiots feel more comfortable being idiots.

There were extremely powerful cars in the mid to late 60's and into the seventies as well, mostly RWD with unsophisticated suspensions and lo-tech tires. These cars didn't have any "electronic driver aids" of any type. Some people still went out and killed themselves, the majority survived either because they could handle the machine or they just respected it's power.
I'm in 100% agreement with this part. They don't have to parallel park in MA to get a license any more. The actual driving portion of the test took 5 minutes when I took it in the early 90's. I went back a few years ago to get another motorcycle learners permit (I never follow through with the actual license) there were a bunch of questions on the test regarding unpaid child support and renewing a license. I guess it's valid since it's a law, but I'd prefer they were asking questions about actual driving situations and traffic laws.

I don't know how it is in other states but MA is just a joke.

 

I think the bigger problem than people driving high HP cars is people driving modified Civic's and Corolla's who cut in an out of traffic like others said. What's the harm in flooring a 600+HP car on the open freeway? Surely it's not as much as when you have a POS weaving through traffic...

 

The problem is that idiot proofing the cars while making them safer has also made people less aware while they drive. There is lack of respect for physics and a lack of respect for other drivers on the road as we have gone out of our way to rely on technology to do everything for us. And while there were certainly extremely powerful cars in the past, those were more exceptions than the rule. With daily driven family sedans getting into high 5-second territory in the 0-60 and inching nearer to 300-hp every day, more and more people on the road are driving more and more powerful cars, but paying ever less attention. I think this is a really bad mix and the licensing laws have not kept up with this trend and are as lax and ridiculous as ever.

And I still contend that the majority of drivers would not know, or would not recall, how to get out of a truly bad situation if they got themselves into one. Unless you have been trained properly and had it drilled into you to the point of instinct, it is often too late when you recall what to do. This is not to say that people are always going to kill themselves or others in those situations, and the technology has certainly made the cars themselves better able to withstand the mistakes, but if your average driver got themselves into a full on spin in the wet, most would panic and hit something before they remembered what to do in that kind of situation.

 

I think we are pretty much in agreement here. But there were plenty of 300+ hp cars back in the day and they didn't have the idiot proofing we now do. I believe this led to better driver training, which I think we are in agreement has become quite lax nowadays.

Maybe it's because I learned how to drive in a 82 Chevy Suburban in New England and was taught by a guy who used to daily drive a 68 XKE roadster or maybe it's because I've been a car geek who's very interested in the physics of driving for years but I know how to handle all the scary situations if I encounter them. Part of the problem is it depends on what your driving. What I needed to do in the 82 Suburban (2WD 350 ci) or my 73 Lemans (350 ci, my first car) when driving in the snow is completely different than what I should do in a 03 CLS automatic (which has electronic stability) which is completely different that what I should do in my 03 CLS 6MT (which doesn't have electronic stability).

The rules have changed a bit on how to handle a skid or oversteer in the past 30 years. The only thing that's really the same as it always was is hydroplaning but the tires handle it better.

It's almost like getting a drivers license nowadays is a given right, keeping it may be a privilege. More training and tougher standards could be a solution but it still doesn't take care of the idiots who drive like idiots.

 

but, but, but, but...... I'm not stupid, am I?



In all seriousness, even for me honestly I think a C6 Z06 would be more than enough. I don't foresee myself ever buying a car that cost over $60,000 (would probably get the C6Z used, honestly) unless I made the same amount of money as the average NFL player did.

And I blame it on the driver every time. Doesn't matter what car it is, like its been said, there's plenty of asshats in Civics, 911s and Corvettes swerving through traffic. So many times I've had people in Dodge Rams, Chargers, Mustangs, Silverados, 4-cyl Accords and the like revving at me, cutting me off then flooring it, meanwhile I'm going 2 over the speed limit in my Z28. God forbid once of those asshats gets behind the wheel of a Carrera S.... people will get seriously hurt.

I've been pulled over twice in the Integra, once in the TL, and never got a moving violation ticket, but I did get 2 fix-it tickets, so its not like they're not catching me. It really is the driver, though douchebags seem to be attracted to certain cars more than others.

 

wait I think we have the same car....

 

Another thought I had, based on the direction this discussion has gone, has to do with drivers understanding of cars. It seems that working on cars has become a very unfashionable trade, not that it ever was particularly glamorous, but now it seems people only move in that direction as a last resort. Which means the current generation of drivers have very little understanding of how and why a car works, granted this is not the end of the world and the engineers of today are doing a fantastic job of making cars safe and reliable for every idiot and their brother. However, like with most aspects of life, the more you understand it and the safer everyone is when you are around it. I'm not saying every kid should be taught automotive 101, but the complete lack of interest in the how and why of cars is going to lead to an even worse generation of drivers.

I think of someone like my father, who spent most of his life working on cars, which fueled my passion for cars from a very young age. He has not been working on cars for around a decade and things have changed and left him behind - he is still amazed at direct ignition with coils placed directly on the spark plugs, after all he was brought up with points and condensers and grew up with the evolution of the distributor. Its hard for an old school guy like that to keep up with the modern gadgets.

So we are slowly(or maybe its not so slowly) turning into a group of drivers where the youth simply doesn't care as long as it has Nav. and lots of tech features and the older generation simply being left in the dust unless the focus a lot of time trying to keep up - my father has given up and now likes making furniture out of wood, he now drives a new Honda Accord and thinks it may be the best car he's ever owned, and he may be right.

 

on that.
Maybe like others have said, make someone require special licensing to obtain a car beyond certain variables. I guess in a sense, being certified for a gun.

But I agree that so many times, they end up killing others and not themselves.

 

While I agree, poor example, there is no certification required to buy most guns, just a valid drivers license or other form of ID and a clear back ground - or even then you can easily buy used and avoid all of the that 90% of the time.

 

It all comes down to parenting. Laws are worthless if you don't have parents that raise their children right.

Take the cell phone ban in Jersey. I can't begin to tell you how many HS kids I see leaving school with the phone glued to their head.

Bottom line, rules without enforcement (from the parents) mean nothing. Would I ever let my 18 yr old kid take out my 400 hp sports car? Sure, as long as I'm sitting in the passenger seat.

Teach your kids that driving is a privelege not a right. Teach them to respect the other drivers and the road. Then it doesn't matter what car they're driving.

 

I think you are right about the lack of understanding by modern drivers and those of us who are true gear heads who are happy to learn every aspect about our cars are becoming a rare breed.

That said, I disagree about every kid being taught automotive 101. I think that is something that is highly lacking during driver education is teaching the basics of things like changing a flat tire, checking the engine oil, checking the other vital fluids, and checking the tire pressure. I am not expecting people to be able to understand how an engine works or even the physics of driving, but I feel like some of the absolute basics of automotive ownership should be covered, especially those things that are preventative measures that can potentially make the difference in a possibly dangerous situation (e.g. properly inflated tires during a freak rain storm). I think that these basic skills instill a proper respect for the car and get people to appreciate and respect other people's cars more as well.

 

I'm certainly not going to disagree, I think education, as a whole, is in need of dramatic reform and while I would like to have automotive 101, I think there are other more pressing issues to address before something like this.

 

^ That might be an interesting suggestion. I had a basic understanding of cars when I was in high school. But when I bought the TL-S, I became really interested in the inner workings of the car (through reading the numerous posts from the gear heads on this site!) While I am far from calling myself 'expert' with car repair, I can do a thing or two diagnosing common mistakes and even changing things on the car with the aid of family + the right tools, so I could call myself knowledgeable. It did help me understand how some factors / properties of a car can affect handling / driving dynamics.

I wonder if people take the driving course in school / AAA / whatever program would also have to *learn* about other aspects (ie all parts of the car and define what they do, actually change a tire on their car) as part of the formal education of driving ... I wonder if they would be more aware of what the capabilities of the car can do. But more importantly, respect any car's properties and be a smarter driver because of it.

Just to put it out there -- would that kind of knowledge make my mom a better driver? Absolutely not! It would make her know what a spark plug does and where it goes but she still couldn't parallel park without hitting the curb if her life depended on it!

 

Reminds me of an old, but classic joke....

Why couldn't Helen Keller drive?









Because she was a woman!

 

i worry more so about the driver than the roads.

public regulations wont change. speed limits are safe, but will be broken. drivers licenses for 15 / 16 yr olds are necessary for travel to and from work.

the only thing i could think of is by insurance companies spiking their rates even higher for young drivers with high horsepower cars. but in all reality, their parents will continue to pay this if they are supplying their kid with a 300+ HP vehicle.


sorry, the biggest concern here are the inexperienced drivers with cars too fast to handle. what could be done to regulate this?

 

In all honesty, my TL is more car than I need. I look at the new CTS-V and think it's great, and I look at some heavily modded cars pushing lots of power and they're great too, but in reality, what do you get for it? You can only go so fast on the road...is getting to 60 in four seconds better than six? What does that get you, to the red light two seconds quicker? If you regularly track your car (strip or roadcourse), then you can utilize the car's capabilities, but beyond that, it seems like a waste.

Maybe I'm just getting old (ok, I am), but I'm past the desire to have gobs of power; I just want a car that's fast, handles well, and is fun to drive.