When is Enough Horse Power To Much???
12-10-2006, 04:31 PM
#61
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bay City, Michigan
Posts: 48
I think it might be in GM's best interests to offer maybe another engine option or two, like they did in the 60's and 70's. Not just an SS or WS6 package that yields 10 more hp.. Maybe another V8 with hp numbers much like the 4th. gen. nested if just offering a 250hp. V6 and a 450-500hp. V8. Kind of like what they do with their trucks, their excellent sellers, with motors like, 4.3v6, 4.8v8, 5.3v8, 6.0v8, and the big dog 8.1v8. Maybe it would peak a little more interest in the car by having different power plants. Remember Ford did this with their Mustang. Not only having a v6 and v8 260hp. GT, they also had the Roush w/ a little over 300hp. and the Cobra w/ 390hp. You didn't see Ford getting rid of them because of crappy sales.
But I agree with the addition of H/P driving classes. I'm 27 and I have friends that are 18-19 years old and mommy and daddy buy them everything, so what's a 450hp. camaro. Then 2 weeks later they all smashed up. And of course the likely story " I wasn't f*cking around". At least learning how to handle that kind of power and what to do and how to avoid a crisis would be very educating, and if helped drop insurance costs that would be an even better advantage. I know it was nice when I took one for my motorcycle.
But I agree with the addition of H/P driving classes. I'm 27 and I have friends that are 18-19 years old and mommy and daddy buy them everything, so what's a 450hp. camaro. Then 2 weeks later they all smashed up. And of course the likely story " I wasn't f*cking around". At least learning how to handle that kind of power and what to do and how to avoid a crisis would be very educating, and if helped drop insurance costs that would be an even better advantage. I know it was nice when I took one for my motorcycle.
12-13-2006, 07:21 AM
#62
Advanced Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Under The Hood
Posts: 3,875
I realize that most enthusiasts like lot’s of HP and Torque and live by the adage “too much is not enough”…however, with some of the recent threads in this forum (as well as other sites) talking about HP in the 400 and up range for a (relatively) inexpensive sports coupe like the Camaro, I find myself more and more often asking when is enough HP actually too much?
I wonder if I am the only one concerned that unless the manufacturers who are producing these vehicles (vehicles with 0-60 in the under 4 second mark and top speeds approaching 200MPH) steps in of their own accord with a plan; then either the federal government or the insurance industry, or both, will.
Let’s face it, the average driver in this country can barely manage to park between the lines and about the only emergency maneuver they can handle is to stand on the breaks and close their eyes…if they had to take a real performance driving course before getting behind the wheel 80% would flunk. And even though most, especially on boards like this, like to think of themselves as great drivers, most ARE average.
Were I GM and producing 500+HP Corvette or a 400+HP Camaro I’d have to be at least a little bit worried about a multi-Billion $ lawsuit when some “adult” is stupid enough to let his 17 year old drive his Z06…now we can all say that it’s the parent’s fault for being that stupid but we all know it happens or the 17 year old will take the car without permission and it’s probably only a matter of time before some crack pot decides to blame GM for his bad judgment or his late son’s stupidity.
And how long are the insurance companies going to stay out of it?
How anxious are they going to be to insure a Z/28 with 400+ HP and is so widely available to the public? It’s one thing to have that kind of HP available in cars at or over the six figure $ mark since relatively few can actually afford them but the Camaro will probably be priced right in with a majority of cars available in 2009 – if insurance companies refuse to insure cars like the Z/28 or the insurance winds up costing more per month that the average payment, how many Z/28’s and their ilk will be sold (or continue to be produced)?
I’m not claiming to have an answer here…just thought I’d put this out for comments/see what some of you are thinking.
I wonder if I am the only one concerned that unless the manufacturers who are producing these vehicles (vehicles with 0-60 in the under 4 second mark and top speeds approaching 200MPH) steps in of their own accord with a plan; then either the federal government or the insurance industry, or both, will.
Let’s face it, the average driver in this country can barely manage to park between the lines and about the only emergency maneuver they can handle is to stand on the breaks and close their eyes…if they had to take a real performance driving course before getting behind the wheel 80% would flunk. And even though most, especially on boards like this, like to think of themselves as great drivers, most ARE average.
Were I GM and producing 500+HP Corvette or a 400+HP Camaro I’d have to be at least a little bit worried about a multi-Billion $ lawsuit when some “adult” is stupid enough to let his 17 year old drive his Z06…now we can all say that it’s the parent’s fault for being that stupid but we all know it happens or the 17 year old will take the car without permission and it’s probably only a matter of time before some crack pot decides to blame GM for his bad judgment or his late son’s stupidity.
And how long are the insurance companies going to stay out of it?
How anxious are they going to be to insure a Z/28 with 400+ HP and is so widely available to the public? It’s one thing to have that kind of HP available in cars at or over the six figure $ mark since relatively few can actually afford them but the Camaro will probably be priced right in with a majority of cars available in 2009 – if insurance companies refuse to insure cars like the Z/28 or the insurance winds up costing more per month that the average payment, how many Z/28’s and their ilk will be sold (or continue to be produced)?
I’m not claiming to have an answer here…just thought I’d put this out for comments/see what some of you are thinking.
12-13-2006, 11:43 AM
#63
Administrator
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Brunswick, Maine 04011
Posts: 3,667
Thanks for your comments...
While I agree in general and say that you make a very logical argument; I'm not so sure the government would stay out of it as you suggest...while your argument is sound, I would suggest that the government might stick their regulatory power into the horsepower issue because...
1)although it may prove the least meaningful in reducing accidents, it's easier to address/regulate than driver training and education
2)there are probably more people who think horsepower is bad than good and would welcome the regulation
3)It's an easy way to appear to "care" and do something without actually having to do much of anything.
I don't know, maybe I'm just getting cynical in my old age.
While I agree in general and say that you make a very logical argument; I'm not so sure the government would stay out of it as you suggest...while your argument is sound, I would suggest that the government might stick their regulatory power into the horsepower issue because...
1)although it may prove the least meaningful in reducing accidents, it's easier to address/regulate than driver training and education
2)there are probably more people who think horsepower is bad than good and would welcome the regulation
3)It's an easy way to appear to "care" and do something without actually having to do much of anything.
I don't know, maybe I'm just getting cynical in my old age.
without training.
Almost all accidents are the result of some sort of driver error... From failing to take weather conditions into account, driver distractions within the vehicle, or the driver making a decision to simply go too fast or fail to drive defensively, or the decision that the driver is sober enough to drive home after three drinks at the local bar.
Regulating horsepower simply dimishes the ability of driver who are trained to handle it to avoid dangerous situations.
Adding VSC,ABS,TC to vehicles without training is the equivalent of providing a loaded gun to an eight year old. Sure these technologies make the vehicle safer in the majority of situations, but these features also dimish the ability of an untrained driver to accurately assess the level of risk associated with their driving habits.
I saw on the news today about the increasing number of roll overs and to me the answer is simple... Cars skid less and they will roll over more. There is a direct cause and effect to the implementation of new technology.
In my opinion, every vehicle released with computer controlled handling absolutely needs to have a simpel and easy to find and convenient manual override switch so those drivers that so choose do not have to succumb to the accompanying pitfalls of the technology. Hopefully an associated driver training course would convince 99.9 percent of the rest of the drivers to keep these safety features enabled, but the ability to diable them will allow a driver to accurately assess the driving conditions prior to entering onto a public road and creating a public hazard of themselves.
12-13-2006, 12:03 PM
#65
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,943
tnthub,
I agree with you to a great extent and it is insane but quite normal that the government will almost always take the easy way out and do so for appearances only...as evidence, I would suggest that one need look no further than the ridiculous "55 MPH" speed limit.
I agree with you to a great extent and it is insane but quite normal that the government will almost always take the easy way out and do so for appearances only...as evidence, I would suggest that one need look no further than the ridiculous "55 MPH" speed limit.
Last edited by Robert_Nashville; 12-13-2006 at 12:07 PM.
12-13-2006, 01:02 PM
#66
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bay City, Michigan
Posts: 48
I agree with you to a great extent and it is insane but quite normal that the government will almost always take the easy way out and do so for appearances only...as evidence, I would suggest that one need look no further than the ridiculous "55 MPH" speed limit.[/QUOTE]
That's the only reason I like michigan, 70mph baby.
That's the only reason I like michigan, 70mph baby.
12-13-2006, 02:08 PM
#68
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Seattle, Washington
Posts: 1,459
I agree; however, it is a little difficult to control the type of people and/or their behaviors behind the wheel. Not to mention, I am sure there is a very strong correlation between the types of people who will buy a camaro and wreckless driving. If you can't control one's wreckless driving behavior you have to look for something else to control for, and the only other variable is the car. If you stick a person who is prone to wreckless driving behind the wheel of a 450HP they will then have the ability to drive more wrecklessly than if you stuck that same person behind the wheel of a 300 HP car.
12-14-2006, 02:16 PM
#69
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chicago burbs
Posts: 618
Then doesn't that just bring us back to the question I asked at the beginning..."how much horse power is too much"? What good is it, really, if Camaro's and other "modestly priced" cars with significant HP (as in 400+) end up not being bought because the people who most want them (typically "younger" drivers) can afford the cars but can't afford the insurance coverage (or perhaps, can't get insurance at any price)?
Also, I would like to know how many accidents are really caused because of "too much power". Most of the accidents I've seen were in sub 200 HP ****boxes running into each other or off the road, not $35K 390+ HP Mustang Cobras slamming into guardrails at 160 MPH.
12-14-2006, 06:22 PM
#70
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Warner Robins, GA
Posts: 255
12-14-2006, 08:04 PM
#71
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1
OK. I have to say, first of all. I fit the stereotype, I am a 17 year old male, with a love of fast cars. Especially the look (and rumored 600 hp supercharged LS7 was it? Hot Rod mag. December issue i think.) of the 2009 Camaro.Truthfully i know that if i get behind the wheel of a 300 HP plus car. I will speed. period. Going to a driving school to learn how to handle the car will help a little bit. Then testosterone sets in and you are speeding down the 40 MPH speed limit road at 90 next to the Rousch Mustang. ( I know i'm gonna get flamed for this post.) The fact of the matter is I would love to buy the 09 camaro. Reality - I won't get anything over 300 HP - guess that means the V6 for me. even if i do buy it - guess what - insurance is gonna be bad. I'm really thinking about taking up on California's offer. - that is, giving a deposit of 35,000 dollars to DMV. considered proof of insurance. if i had the money to do that. i'll get the RS. with 600 HP . probably just to tell my 19 year old friend who owns a porsche boxster - that i'm faster than him. bak to the subject. that would be really cool if it was a mandated performance driving class. even cooler if it gave me a break on insurance. all i can say is vroom vroom.
12-14-2006, 08:30 PM
#72
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Gregory, MI
Posts: 34
What about all the guys/gals that grew up in the 60s/70s. The first round of muscle cars. We had power, but NO safety. Now we have ABS brakes, traction control, airbags, SEAT BELTS.
Back then we ran around and did stuff we wonder how we got away with it.Then the 80s arrive and it is 4 cylinder HE**. We have a whole generation that doesn't know of the power of HP.
Give them some credit and let them learn, if they can afford to buy it!
Are you going to make them take a time-out(?) if they do something wrong?
There are so many safety features on a car today, yes it does give some sense of "I can do anything" but I think the ones who will really buy the top horsepower vehicles will be the parents not the kid.
Back then we ran around and did stuff we wonder how we got away with it.Then the 80s arrive and it is 4 cylinder HE**. We have a whole generation that doesn't know of the power of HP.
Give them some credit and let them learn, if they can afford to buy it!
Are you going to make them take a time-out(?) if they do something wrong?
There are so many safety features on a car today, yes it does give some sense of "I can do anything" but I think the ones who will really buy the top horsepower vehicles will be the parents not the kid.
12-16-2006, 11:37 AM
#73
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Posts: 2,947
Also, I would like to know how many accidents are really caused because of "too much power". Most of the accidents I've seen were in sub 200 HP ****boxes running into each other or off the road, not $35K 390+ HP Mustang Cobras slamming into guardrails at 160 MPH.
There's never going to be a safeguard for stupidity, and any external control that attemps to remove responsibility from the individual driver will fail.
We all must be responsible for our own actions, simple as that, I believe..
But having a test mule and an off-road course, for the cause of letting someone see just how powerful a vehicle is, and if they can control it...isn't a bad idea. The same thing is done by most motorcycle dealers about their "R" models.
12-16-2006, 01:58 PM
#74
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,943
The issue as I see is more than “more horse power than people can handle”…even run-of-the-mill family sedans these days have more than sufficient HP to get people into trouble and I think all of us know two very basic things...
1. “Driver Training” in this country is mostly a joke and none of the courses offered today teach real driving skills/accident avoidance/emergency maneuvers.
2. Most of us simply aren’t as good of a driver as we like to think we are.
That said I see the basic issue being how insurance companies/government will view the greatly increasing HP available at a relatively inexpensive price; especially if there is an increase in accidents involving high performance cars like the fifth-generation.
I’m going to heavily paraphrase here and my memory may not be 100% but a few years ago at F-Body Gathering in Atlanta, Scott S. noted that Chevrolet has documented that people tended to have more accidents from more aggressive driving in Chvey Luminas than in the almost identical Corsicia (at least I think those were the two vehicles)…the point being that because the Lumana was more “aggressively styled” it tended to get driven more aggressively and, therefore, more often wreched.
I can’t help but wonder if people in high performance cars don’t always tend to do the same thing and if so, might they be even more inclined to do so if they have 450HP on tap than 300?
I may be completely wrong but I still see some over aggressive lawmakers (state or Federal or both) or a very scared insurance industry on the horizon to rain on the high performance parade we are currently experiencing if the issue isn’t addressed by the manufacturers themselves in some proactive way.
1. “Driver Training” in this country is mostly a joke and none of the courses offered today teach real driving skills/accident avoidance/emergency maneuvers.
2. Most of us simply aren’t as good of a driver as we like to think we are.
That said I see the basic issue being how insurance companies/government will view the greatly increasing HP available at a relatively inexpensive price; especially if there is an increase in accidents involving high performance cars like the fifth-generation.
I’m going to heavily paraphrase here and my memory may not be 100% but a few years ago at F-Body Gathering in Atlanta, Scott S. noted that Chevrolet has documented that people tended to have more accidents from more aggressive driving in Chvey Luminas than in the almost identical Corsicia (at least I think those were the two vehicles)…the point being that because the Lumana was more “aggressively styled” it tended to get driven more aggressively and, therefore, more often wreched.
I can’t help but wonder if people in high performance cars don’t always tend to do the same thing and if so, might they be even more inclined to do so if they have 450HP on tap than 300?
I may be completely wrong but I still see some over aggressive lawmakers (state or Federal or both) or a very scared insurance industry on the horizon to rain on the high performance parade we are currently experiencing if the issue isn’t addressed by the manufacturers themselves in some proactive way.
Last edited by Robert_Nashville; 12-18-2006 at 09:40 AM.
12-17-2006, 10:08 PM
#75
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Springfield,OH. U.S.A.
Posts: 2,947
I could be wrong but, I believe the majority of Corsica's were touting 2.2 Liter motors, not known for inspiring spirited driving, while Lumina's carried more 3.1's on average with a DOHC 3.4 as the Z car. Which had a more powerful exhaust note as well. Also the wheel/tire/suspension packages probably helped inspire Lumina drivers as opposed to the hub-cap toting 13" wheels on the Corsica's...like my uncle's red '94.
My cousin Tim had a 3.1L blue mid '90's Corsica, with a performance wheel/tire/suspension pkg, and he frequently laid stripps of rubber at take offs.
It would be interesting to see data on all this, and as I know you're aware, politicians will use whatever poll that supports their point of view.
I see more of a problem with people properly maintaining their vehicles. Most have cheap hard tires, worn brakes, misaligned vehicles, bouncing down the road on worn out suspension parts.
I see far more accidents involving poorly maintained cars than not, and those people tend to care as little about their driving habits as they do their cars...just my observations though.
I do agree about the poor quality of driving instruction for teens coming up. And many just elect to wait until their of legal age to skip the training altogether. I believe every young person should take advantage of a good driving school before striking out on the road, be they 16 or 26...
My cousin Tim had a 3.1L blue mid '90's Corsica, with a performance wheel/tire/suspension pkg, and he frequently laid stripps of rubber at take offs.
It would be interesting to see data on all this, and as I know you're aware, politicians will use whatever poll that supports their point of view.
I see more of a problem with people properly maintaining their vehicles. Most have cheap hard tires, worn brakes, misaligned vehicles, bouncing down the road on worn out suspension parts.
I see far more accidents involving poorly maintained cars than not, and those people tend to care as little about their driving habits as they do their cars...just my observations though.
I do agree about the poor quality of driving instruction for teens coming up. And many just elect to wait until their of legal age to skip the training altogether. I believe every young person should take advantage of a good driving school before striking out on the road, be they 16 or 26...
Last edited by 90rocz; 12-17-2006 at 10:11 PM.