What happens when you let teens drive really fast cars

[Phantasee]

Stuart's case for high performance cars actually makes a lot of sense; it's why I want a Crown Vic with a V-8; when I do manage to get my own car.

If I do any freeway driving, I don't feel safe unless I have at least 6 cylinders under the hood. 4 cylinders just doesn't give you any reserve power, even on normal streets. I think that out of all the accidents I've avoided, I've benefitted from accelerating rather than braking in almost half.

[Glocksman]

Stuart's case for high performance cars actually makes a lot of sense; it's why I want a Crown Vic with a V-8; when I do manage to get my own car.

I'd love to have a police interceptor Crown Vic as well.
Not so much for the power (though that's nice to have), but for the durability packages Ford includes.
Heavy duty brakes, cooling, motor, etc., can make for an extremely long lasting car for the average person.

[Beowulf]

There's a reason why one of my cars has a 3.3L V-6, and the other, although a 4-banger, still has 150 hp.

[J]

I'd love to have a police interceptor Crown Vic as well.
Not so much for the power (though that's nice to have), but for the durability packages Ford includes.

Admit it now, you just want it so you can do donuts in the parking lot when it snows.

[Dahak]

Stuart's case for high performance cars actually makes a lot of sense; it's why I want a Crown Vic with a V-8; when I do manage to get my own car.

If I do any freeway driving, I don't feel safe unless I have at least 6 cylinders under the hood. 4 cylinders just doesn't give you any reserve power, even on normal streets. I think that out of all the accidents I've avoided, I've benefitted from accelerating rather than braking in almost half.

Why shouldn't 4 cylinders give you any reserve?
The BMWs I used to drive where 320d's which is a 4-cylinder, 2L, 170hp Diesel. I never had any problem to quickly accelerate, even in the 6th gear...
I know some Americans who just care about cylinders or engine displacement, but completely ignore hp and think it's funny to drive a car with less than 3 or 4L...

[Stark]

While I'm not sure why the US seems full of driver combat wherein highend acceleration is some kind of lifesaver, even in a shitbox 2.0L 80s Mitsubishi there's still grunt left at 110km/h. Not that I ever solved any traffic problems by speeding up.

[Terralthra]

Stuart's case for high performance cars actually makes a lot of sense; it's why I want a Crown Vic with a V-8; when I do manage to get my own car.

If I do any freeway driving, I don't feel safe unless I have at least 6 cylinders under the hood. 4 cylinders just doesn't give you any reserve power, even on normal streets. I think that out of all the accidents I've avoided, I've benefitted from accelerating rather than braking in almost half.

Why shouldn't 4 cylinders give you any reserve?
The BMWs I used to drive where 320d's which is a 4-cylinder, 2L, 170hp Diesel. I never had any problem to quickly accelerate, even in the 6th gear...
I know some Americans who just care about cylinders or engine displacement, but completely ignore hp and think it's funny to drive a car with less than 3 or 4L...

Too right. I get comments about my CR-V's "underpowered" engine, because it's a 4 cylinder or because it's 2L, but it's got 146 hp, which is absolutely plenty for a car that only weighs 1.5 tons. I can get up to any freeway speed I feel safe at (even on I-5, that tends to be no higher than 85ish) with plenty of room left for acceleration.

[Napoleon the Clown]

Higher engine displacement makes it far easier to have a nice fat powerband with plenty of torque down low. And diesels are cheating, Stark. By their very nature they've got more torque, which is what causes acceleration.


Mostly, it's a brainbug though. Properly designer, a four cylinder engine will be plenty for the kind of performance the average Joe will use. I will note, however, that my brother's four cylinder Chevy Cobalt (baseline, 148 or whatever hp) is less pleasant on the freeway than my 205hp Pontiac Grand Prix, largely owing to powerband. Both cars have a similar number of hp per liter, but mine has more oomf at freeway speeds, largely due to the displacement. The hp:weight is also pretty similar, with mine better by only about three pounds per hp. That's less than a kilo and a half, yah limey Brits .

That can, of course, be overcome. Then again, the increase in displacement causes an increase in fuel consumption, in general. Which can be overcome, though it isn't completely straightforward. Compromises.

Still, I don't need more than my car gives for getting to speed (especially considering traffic is the limiting factor there) or any sort of emergency acceleration I've needed. Keeping an eye out for fuckwits and other hazards helps me more than being able to stomp on it when I need to.

More power is mostly about being able to use it for fun. Yeah, it can save your ass. But it's more likely to be something to have fun with. I'll be honest, if I could afford a car that has a great zero to sixty, I'd buy it and enjoy myself. Though I am a firm believer in going the speed limit and would avoid speeding. One thing that performance cars have that would be more likely to save you though, is superior breaking. Sixty to zero in 108 feet (for the current Z06) us something that could be the difference between a nasty wreck and a near miss, provided nobody is too close to your bumper.

[Metatwaddle]

A surprising number of highway off-ramps are like that.

You’d love the ones in Philadelphia that are like that… and then end at stoplights which cause traffic to back up onto the ramp! The mere 300ft (long left hand on-ramps on I-76 are even better though.

My favorites are the on-ramps that are really short and almost all below highway level, so you can't see the cars until you're basically trying to merge with them. I'm amazed that I haven't gotten into an accident trying to get on the Schuykill from Belmont Avenue yet.

The worst part is that SEPTA sucks donkey balls, so public transport isn't really an option.

[Uraniun235]

I know some Americans who just care about cylinders or engine displacement, but completely ignore hp and think it's funny to drive a car with less than 3 or 4L...

Unlike Europe, the US never had taxes on engine displacement, so there was no impetus to aggressively squeeze as much power out of smaller engines as possible. Want more horsepower? Add some more displacement! So a lot of Americans have had experience with engines of 4 cylinders or less as being anemic. I had a 1988 Cavalier that got maybe 80hp on 4 cylinders. It was a total piece of shit and I know it's not representative of all 4 cylinder engines, but it would be easy for dumber people to say "welp, guess 4 cylinders sucks".

[Darth Wong]

Stuart's case for high performance cars actually makes a lot of sense; it's why I want a Crown Vic with a V-8; when I do manage to get my own car.

Stuart's case also applies only to him, not the population at large. In the hands of a skilled and disciplined, responsible driver, extra performance can only help. But the vast majority of drivers are not skilled, responsible, or disciplined, despite almost all of them thinking they are.

In the hands of the average driver, a high performance car can actually make matters worse, as demonstrated by the increased accident insurance rates for such cars: actuarial testimony to the fact that high performance cars are actually more likely to get into accidents, not less.

Despite Phantasee's bizarre assertion about half of his near-accidents being avoidable due to performance, I have never seen any report, study, or police department claim saying that a significant proportion of accidents are due to inadequate performance. Almost all accidents are due to driver error, driver aggressiveness, or poor driving conditions.

In short, while car performance can theoretically improve one's safety margins, it is an insignificant factor compared to driver attitude.

[aerius]

In short, while car performance can theoretically improve one's safety margins, it is an insignificant factor compared to driver attitude.

No kidding, if everyone had my dad's attitude and driving skills the accident rate would drop to zero. There wouldn't be any accidents or crashes short of a car getting hit by a falling meteor.

Getting a high performance car and thinking it'll save your ass is like buying a carbon fiber hockey stick and thinking it'll get you into the NHL when you can't even skate. Good driving skills & attitude will keep and get you out of far more potential accident situations than any high performance car. Driver first, then worry about the car.

[Kanastrous]

Despite Phantasee's bizarre assertion about half of his near-accidents being avoidable due to performance, I have never seen any report, study, or police department claim saying that a significant proportion of accidents are due to inadequate performance.

I have found a little reserve of squirt-power vital on a couple occasions (both times I can think of, on bikes, but in principle I think it could apply to cars) to get out of potentially dangerous situations.

Although I can't point to a study demonstrating that to be a rule, rather than anecdotal experience.

[Broomstick]

I approach driving the same way I approach flying - I drive the vehicle I'm in at the moment, not the vehicle I want to be in, or might in someday.

I've driven mostly 4 cylinder vehicles (my pickup has a 6-cylinder, which is considered anemic for a pick up although it's not for what I use it for). Some of them did not have impressive pickup. Nonetheless, I've (so far) had a spotless driving record regardless of country roads, interstate travel, city driving, bad weather driving, driving in mountains, driving interstates in the mountains in bad weather...

A lot of it has to do with understanding the vehicle I'm in. That means I might demand a little more space in traffic before pulling out or making a turn - but wishing will not produce more acceleration. That means not driving in hazardous conditions and, if conditions get hazardous, get off the road. That means understanding that my truck actually handles slick conditions less well than my car, but it can handle deeper snow. My truck has ABS, my car does not - which affects how I brake. My truck will ALWAYS require more room to stop than my car, ALWAYS - and I take that into account. I will stomp on the accelerator to extract myself from a hazardous situation but in almost 30 years of driving that is a very rare circumstance, and when I do accelerate in such a manner it is temporary and I drop back to the speed limit as soon as feasible. I never drink and drive, not ever. And so on and so forth.

Drive what you're in at the moment, not something else. A good driver will drive any car well - he (or she) does not need a muscle car to drive well.

[Ma Deuce]

The BMWs I used to drive where 320d's which is a 4-cylinder, 2L, 170hp Diesel. I never had any problem to quickly accelerate, even in the 6th gear...

Not directly comparable to most of the economy-minded gasoline 4-bangers we have here. Your Bimmer has a turbocharged diesel, and can generate as much torque as a small gas V8.

Admit it now, you just want it so you can do donuts in the parking lot when it snows.

I plan to do that with my '88 4-banger Mercedes 190E when I finally get it fixed up.

I would have preferred the 2.6L straight-6 model though: smoother, more powerful and more reliable, at virtually no fuel economy penalty. Given how little I paid for the car, I'm not complaining though. Still, it does have 136 hp and 149 lb/ft (with a nice broad powerband) which for a 2800lb car isn't bad at all. My dad's old V6 Mercury Topaz had similar weight, power, and torque and that thing was pretty quick.

[Dahak]

The BMWs I used to drive where 320d's which is a 4-cylinder, 2L, 170hp Diesel. I never had any problem to quickly accelerate, even in the 6th gear...

Not directly comparable to most of the economy-minded gasoline 4-bangers we have here. Your Bimmer has a turbocharged diesel, and can generate as much torque as a small gas V8.

Well, I don't know any not-turbocharged diesel running around here, anyway. Except maybe lorries...

[Ma Deuce]

Well, I don't know any not-turbocharged diesel running around here, anyway. Except maybe lorries...

Well there you go.

I must say though, modern gas 4-bangers have become much more drivable in recent years thanks to the mass proliferation of variable valve timing, which allows for both good high-end power, and a fairly broad powerband.

[Davey]

[sarcasm]
With idiots like that on the road, I'm always surprised at how everyone around here still reacts with shock when I say if I could get any car in the world, it'd be a tank. The way I see it, screw acceleration and maximum performance and all that tosh, it's all about armoured protection; there are too many reckless drivers out there. Generally we can count on them to thin their own ranks, but the problem is letting them do that while keeping collateral damage and non-idiot casualties to a minimum.
[/sarcasm]

Any car deserves the same kind of respect I'd give to guns. They're fun to have around, even more fun to use and enjoy in the right way, and they often make great conversation pieces, but if you abuse them, they'll always kill you one way or another.

[Bounty]

Well, I don't know any not-turbocharged diesel running around here, anyway. Except maybe lorries...

Well there you go.

I must say though, modern gas 4-bangers have become much more drivable in recent years thanks to the mass proliferation of variable valve timing, which allows for both good high-end power, and a fairly broad powerband.

In Phantasee's world, my 1250cc gasoline engine is a deathtrap. That's weird; I've never been in a situation where I needed more power than it could give me, even on the freeway. I have to keep and eye on traffic and anticipate others' manoeuvres, but I see that as a good thing; you don't get the urge to use all your RAWR POWAH when you drive a small car.

I've also driven 1.4-2.0 turbocharged diesels and one 3.0 gasoline BMW; apart from them going up to 30 a bit faster, I didn't really feel all that safer.

[Colonel Olrik]

If you need a V8 to handle a highway entrance, then maybe the problem lies with the bad design of American highway entrances. There are no more maniac drivers than the Germans and I have also never had problems handling them with my previous car. Even the current one is only 1600cc.

[Darth Wong]

If you need a V8 to handle a highway entrance, then maybe the problem lies with the bad design of American highway entrances.

Or with the mass of American cars and SUVs. Even a fairly powerful engine might have trouble accelerating a 5000 lb behemoth quickly. But in general, while I know how difficult it can be to merge with a car that has an anemic engine, almost nobody ever gets killed in highway merge fender benders. You're far more likely to get killed or seriously injured by someone T-boning you at an intersection while illegally flying through it, rear-ending you while you're sitting at a stop, or something else that involves a driver flagrantly breaking the rules of the road.

[Napoleon the Clown]

Or some fuckwit crossing over and hitting you head on, or maybe losing control and colliding with an object of greater mass and high resistance to being moved. Seriously, people, if you regularly need a 0-60 time of under six seconds just to avoid a wreck you're driving poorly.