Gentleman's Agreement removed.
I don't see it stopping
New technologies will keep on pushing the speed, horsepower, and torque barriers while still having an acceptable MPG. Why do you think it's bad if a car has over 300hp? It's not... it just means the engine is efficient, and therefore it provides more fun out of driving.I hate goverment regulation. I'm a supporter of small goverment; the last thing I need the goverment to do is say how much power my car HAS to make.
You're championing the cause of quantity over quality, so to speak. Just because we CAN make a go from 0-60 in 4s means we SHOULD? Name some roads or highways where that kind of speed is useful, let alone needed.
The Accord is currently avaliable with 240HP. That number is only going to go up in the future because of "competition." Is that right? Increasing HP just for competition's sake?
You have to understand that, in some series, such as the JGTC, the cars don't make anywhere near the power of the new street-legal super/turbo MB's. And yet people buy and drive and wreck them. You can see the stories all over the net. Thankfully, those cars are fairly rare and unattainable to most people. But that will change with time, which is the scary part...
It was the same in the days of American muscle cars. Those days are back, just in a different form. Hopefully they'll fade away in a similar fashion.
And, if you want to get technical, the internal combustion engine is not a very efficient machine.
And you saying that an efficient engine = driving fun makes no sense.
Besides, engine technology these days is great. Chassis development, however, usually does not match the engine. Some cars, like select Hondas, Toyota, and especially the Lotus Elise, among others, show that you do not need 600TQ to make a fun car. A balanced, well-engineered chassis and a capable, but not ridiculous, engine is all that is need for fun.
In a great sort of irony, car makers are being lazy and excessive at the same time, packing cars full of useless crap making them heavy as hell and then compensating with ridiculous engines. This isn't a good thing. It certainly isn't good engineering.
This brings me to Lexus. They have openly stated that while they will increase performance, they will not get into HP game. Smart, guys, kudos. I have a ton of respect for them. Hopefully they will approach future cars, even and especially the performance variants, from a chassis standpoint. Hybrid power, too, which is encouraging, not some huge forced-induction 12-cylinders.
But do think about these things. Five years from now, your life is going to be put in danger by countless newly-licensed drivers who will be able to afford used Evos and WRXs, etc. for cheap...
Last edited by SecPole14; Aug 9, 2004 at 02:52 PM.
It was the same in the days of American muscle cars. Those days are back, just in a different form. Hopefully they'll fade away in a similar fashion.
That's immaturity speaking.
Chassis development is also a key area. Problem with the lighter chassis is that they are made from aluminum. You ever see a Jaguar XJR in a collition? The whole front end gets messed up. How about the Audi TT? One hit a 98ish Grand Am going around 30mph, the Grand Am sustained frontal damage (bumper, lights, fender). The TT did a 180º and would not start, started leaking coolent, hood, bumper, lighs, and engine compartment damage. A well balanced chassis does not necessarily mean a safe one. I think that's all 0I33I was saying--it's not the government's place to arbitrarily limit something like automobile engine power.
Last edited by 0l33l; Aug 9, 2004 at 09:15 PM.
HELLO? YOU EVER HEARD OF INSURANCE? Some hippies wanna ban everything that the market desires, jeez. You see there's this thing called insurance, yeah! You see Camaro's and Corvettes are already very cheap and have remarkable performance, and to lesser extent Mustangs. You see, these are the cars that result in the highest % of fatality crashes in the US, and resultingly the most expensive to insure. However, there numbers are fairly limited, so they aren't as expensive as they should be. Man I hate hippies.
If Camry's become incredibly fast cars, insurance companies will have no choice but to jack up the rates to the point where only the elite and careful drivers can afford such commodities. Then, demand for slower cars will be higher.
Secondly, if the manufacture of fast cars became cheaper, that would mean that slow cars would even cheaper than than they are now. . . the demand for an inexpensive automobile far outweighs the demand for a fast one. Hello? Why do you think Hyundai/Kia is the fastest growing manufacturer.
Third, there is this thing called fuel to account for. Hybrids make a car more efficient (by conserving wasted energy). Either way, a fast car will always be more inefficient than a slow one with no exceptions. Fuel prices are expected to double within the next few years, and I'll take any wager that the demand for economic vehicles will grow even greater than now, much faster than the demand for fast vehicles. Fast cars are a luxury, and will remain so. . . basic pickup trucks still are the best selling vehicles around the world by a HUGE margin.
There are so many market forces at work, I would have to type for an hour to explain it all. But those who are for power restrictions on engines, really have no clue whatsoever what they are talking about. I'm not trying to insult you, although it will seem this way, but there really is more at hand than just "saving lives." That's what the Highway Patrol is for. If you sentence every speeder to death, nobody will speed (I'm not for that either)!
That's not nice. <restrains comment>
Quatnity over quality? Lets say you have two options: 1) using a technology like Vtech to boost horsepower and torque or 2) not using it because it won't do you any good on the highways?
Horsepower and torque on the Accord are limited because of its FWD architecture. And yes, if the Accord is switched to RWD or AWD they will increase HP to make their car more appealing to consumers. Hey, that's what Mitsubishi is trying to do with the Galant vs. Camry; they claim the Galant is faster, and has better brakeing, making their car more appealing to consumers.
The reason for the fade of the American muscle cars was the OPEC embargo. People realized that they needed more fuel efficient vehicles. Att hat time Detroit was producing cars in the range of 6L!!!!

If should have said more efficient. Car manufacturers are striving to make it more efficient, increasing hp and torque while lowering fuel consumption.
Never said that. Said that a more powerful engine = driving fun.
...it just means the engine is efficient, and therefore it provides more fun out of driving.
Engine technology can still be worked on
Chassis development is also a key area. Problem with the lighter chassis is that they are made from aluminum. You ever see a Jaguar XJR in a collition? The whole front end gets messed up. How about the Audi TT? One hit a 98ish Grand Am going around 30mph, the Grand Am sustained frontal damage (bumper, lights, fender). The TT did a 180º and would not start, started leaking coolent, hood, bumper, lighs, and engine compartment damage. A well balanced chassis does not necessarily mean a safe one.
Your examples are meaningless. A body structure is supposed to absorb and redirect the energy of a crash. Would you prefer something so ridgid that it would just channel the forces straight through your body and crush your bones? The XJR is a strong, safe chassis. As is the Audi TT, much better than a Grand Am. I would have to see data on this scenario instead of reading some meaningless description. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
Define useless crap? A LOT of people find navigation systems useful, some even find them necessary.
Toyota has cars that have 12-cylinders in Japan. And Lexus is rummored to be developing a performance division. I'm all for Hybrid technology, it brings less pollution, less gas consumption, and higher hp and toruqe figures.
Think about it: people are always getting fast used cars. Look at the preludes, they are fast and now any ricer who has enough sense to save up some more money is able to afford one now. Whenever you are driving you are at risk of some moron running into you, running a red light, opeining his door wide open, etc, etc.
Anyway, I hate aruging semantics on the internet. It's hard to say what will happen, we're just tossing (in most cases) unsubstantiaed opinions around. The coming decade will prove who is correct.
This is hilarious. . . I havn't posted here in a long time, but still read. . . since I no longer own a Lexus I don't feel I have the *priviledge* to post.
HELLO? YOU EVER HEARD OF INSURANCE? Some hippies wanna ban everything that the market desires, jeez. You see there's this thing called insurance, yeah! You see Camaro's and Corvettes are already very cheap and have remarkable performance, and to lesser extent Mustangs. You see, these are the cars that result in the highest % of fatality crashes in the US, and resultingly the most expensive to insure. However, there numbers are fairly limited, so they aren't as expensive as they should be. Man I hate hippies.
If Camry's become incredibly fast cars, insurance companies will have no choice but to jack up the rates to the point where only the elite and careful drivers can afford such commodities. Then, demand for slower cars will be higher.
Secondly, if the manufacture of fast cars became cheaper, that would mean that slow cars would even cheaper than than they are now. . . the demand for an inexpensive automobile far outweighs the demand for a fast one. Hello? Why do you think Hyundai/Kia is the fastest growing manufacturer.
Third, there is this thing called fuel to account for. Hybrids make a car more efficient (by conserving wasted energy). Either way, a fast car will always be more inefficient than a slow one with no exceptions. Fuel prices are expected to double within the next few years, and I'll take any wager that the demand for economic vehicles will grow even greater than now, much faster than the demand for fast vehicles. Fast cars are a luxury, and will remain so. . . basic pickup trucks still are the best selling vehicles around the world by a HUGE margin.
There are so many market forces at work, I would have to type for an hour to explain it all. But those who are for power restrictions on engines, really have no clue whatsoever what they are talking about. I'm not trying to insult you, although it will seem this way, but there really is more at hand than just "saving lives." That's what the Highway Patrol is for. If you sentence every speeder to death, nobody will speed (I'm not for that either)!
The absolute LAST thing I need is for someone like you to explain to me the "many market forces at work." You could count on one hand the number of people on CL who keep up the industry on a week-by-week basis, and I can definitely say I'm one of them. I couldn't tell you how to do a 2JZ swap, but I have vast knowledge about the workings of the auto industry.
You make yourself sound ridiculous. Not to mention I can tell you didn't actually bother reading the majority of my post. I'm not supporting flat-out restrictions, but come on, it has to stop somewhere.
Thanks for playing.
Last edited by SecPole14; Aug 10, 2004 at 10:28 AM.

)
There is a 700hp Supra that gets 24mpg.. that's higher than the factory fuel specs. Then SCC featurd another Supra that got 30mpg
More power does not necessarily = lower gas mileage. 
Your examples are meaningless. A body structure is supposed to absorb and redirect the energy of a crash. Would you prefer something so ridgid that it would just channel the forces straight through your body and crush your bones? The XJR is a strong, safe chassis. As is the Audi TT, much better than a Grand Am. I would have to see data on this scenario instead of reading some meaningless description. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
Guys let's keep this civil and on topic please
Celebrating Lexus & Toyota from Around the Globe
well think of it this way. As the efficiencies of the engines went up we moved to a cycle of smaller engines that produces more power, I think we are nearing that point again.
When the SC400 was first introduced it produced a lot of power for the displacement 4.0L 250HP 260TQ look at the G35's 3.5L and it's producing 280HP and 270TQ(?) at this pace in 2 model cycles we'll have 300HP and 300TQ out of a 2.5L engine that gets us 25mpg average.... I say it's a good trend...
LOL
let the floodgates open... and I don't mean the flames.. I mean the HP's
well think of it this way. As the efficiencies of the engines went up we moved to a cycle of smaller engines that produces more power, I think we are nearing that point again.
When the SC400 was first introduced it produced a lot of power for the displacement 4.0L 250HP 260TQ look at the G35's 3.5L and it's producing 280HP and 270TQ(?) at this pace in 2 model cycles we'll have 300HP and 300TQ out of a 2.5L engine that gets us 25mpg average.... I say it's a good trend...
I do still, however, stand by my comments. I just perused the thread, not really reading into detail. But limitations on manufacturing are not a good idea. If you are obeying the laws of the road, than there is no issue on safety. Having not read your post, this is more of an off statement than a response to you.
How the hell did people find where they were going before NAV? Granted some upcoming technologies like live traffic with NAV are more practical, but when planning a road trip I look at a map. The only reason I would get a NAV system is to stroke my ego. I would never use it.
Secondly, these gizmo fast cars are what you call a niche market. Check the percentage of these "fast" cars and "gizmo" cars to actual cars. You'll see that it is VERY low; a huge gap between those and basic pick up trucks. YOu might live in CA or some other ritsy neighborhood somewhere in the country, so the numbers where you live may be disproportionate and non-representative of the entire nation. If you ask me, the problem is with the manufacturers of cars, it's with the consumers. We have too many bad drivers, particularly young ones, and I hate to say this, but we do not have enough enforcement either.
The same kind of logic is used against drug dealers, prostitution, and human exploitation(not saying they are even remotely the same as fast cars). People say that we need to shut down the manufacturers. . . dumb move. You only make the few that survive, legal(through loopholes) or illegal, all the more profitable. If there is sufficient demand (which for fast automobiles there will always be), there will always be profitability, and thus there will always be a supply. Squeeze the supply, you up their profits and create monopolies for suppliers. Now this policy helps, but it will not stop the existence. In the case of illegal activity it decreases it, but it makes those who remain stronger. In cars, we're talking about dumb drivers having cars beyond their capabilities. You know what happens? You get import tuners, that turn civics(slow) into decent performance machines through illegal means. An effective policy? Hardly.
Good economic policy = stop the side that presents the problem. Consumers create the problem, tax(restrict) the consumers, not the suppliers. If you make driver's license requirement stringent enough, and punishment for unlicensed driving harsh enough, you will completely eliminate the problem. With no demand, manufacturers will not be profitable. Problem solved.
I also think and by being on tons of forums, we have knuckleheads all over with their 240hp Accords, 245 Altimas, etc etc etc and with the SILLY MARKETING fooling people that they are truly world-class sports sedans.
THEY ARE NOT. They are family cars. Go to Wal-mart, pick the kids of from school, go get some Chinese cuisine. The Camry was the best selling car with 200hp last year. And these cars are Ameican made for American desires. So the gentleman's agreement has nothing to do with them.
The gentleman's agreement did not stop;
The GS 400 being the fastest accelerating sedan temperarily
The NSX
The S2000
The Supra
The 300ZX/Fairlady i.e 350Z
EVO
WRX
GT-R
etc etc etc
I thought it did make some sense to have a limit. For gentleman. Look at the Audi, Benz, BMW fight. It's great to look at, it's great to read and hear but WHERE CAN YOU DRIVE TO FULLY EXPLOIT THEIR VALUE?????
What is funny is Honda will be the first to break it with the 300hp RL. Toyota and Nissan are going to have a field day when their 400 and 500hp cars start coming out.











