Hold Your Horsepower

The New Republic ^ | January 17, 2005 | Gregg Easterbrook

[Torie]

DAILY EXPRESS

Hold Your Horsepower

by Gregg Easterbrook

Post date 01.17.05

The cheerleaders, I mean automotive press, have departed, and over the weekend the annual North American International Automotive Show was opened to the public. You can gawk here at the flashy cars on display; detailed reporting on the event can be found here at The Detroit News auto show site. The theme of this year's cars was more: more power, more gizmos, more weight, more cost, even more safety features. But at this point what we need from cars is less.

Much of the buzz at the car show was about frills, of course. Heated steering wheels and air-conditioned seats, for example. What's an air-conditioned seat? Cooling ducts run through the seat, keeping your posterior chilled in summertime. Some new Lincoln models have dual-position air-conditioned seats, with settings for cool and cold. Video screens for the backseats are coming into vogue. (Cell phones will soon be able to receive television and movies; we will exist in dread of lunatics who flip open their cell phones, position them on the dashboard and watch television while driving.) On the safety side, computer-controlled stability systems, now installed on some luxury cars, may represent the next big advance, making rollovers and spinouts less likely. These systems are expensive, so it's unclear if government will mandate them. Washington still has not mandated that cars have heated side mirrors, a safety feature whose cost is minimal.

Lots of cars at the auto show were described in press reports as "futuristic," though none to my eye looked as visually revolutionary as Raymond Loewy's Studebaker Avanti, which hit the streets in 1963, nor as fresh conceptually as the BMW 2002 sedan, which arrived in the United States in 1971, nor as original in utilitarian terms as the first minivan, the Dodge Caravan of 1984. Several hydrogen-powered prototype cars were on display, but bear in mind that Detroit is talking hydrogen to divert attention from the fact that it is doing nothing about regular MPG. If hydrogen is to be used by vehicles on a large scale, the element will need to be manufactured using substantial amounts of electricity generated by nuclear power. A recent issue of the technical journal Nature estimated that replacing current U.S. automobile petroleum with hydrogen would require construction of 200 new Three Mile Island-scale nuclear power plants to generate the electricity that makes the hydrogen. Whenever you hear an automaker or our president or the governor of California rhapsodize about hydrogen, bear in mind that this is strictly to divert attention from inaction on raising fuel economy using existing technology.

The big "more" of the auto show is more horsepower. Eighteen models on display at the show boasted 500 horsepower or more. And these aren't race cars, but rather models intended for the street. Five-hundred horsepower is not only obscene but antisocial: Such power is useful only for drag-racing, cutting off other drivers, and speeds well beyond 100 miles per hour. The other day I was motoring down the wonderfully named Democracy Boulevard in Montgomery County, Maryland, doing 50 miles per hour in a 35 zone. A middle-aged woman yakking on her cell phone blew past me at perhaps 75 miles per hour in a shiny new BMW 545i, which has 330 horsepower. Driving 75 miles per hour on a suburban street with pedestrian crosswalks and bus stops is socially irresponsible. But in a high-horsepower car, all you need to do is tap the throttle pedal for an instant and you're at 75. The more horsepower, the easier it is to drive like a maniac.

And more horsepower is everywhere. This chart shows that in 1975, when the fuel crunch hit, new cars in the United States averaged 136 horsepower. The average declined to a low of 99 horsepower in 1982, as manufacturers scurried to raise fuel economy. (Higher horsepower means more gasoline burned.) Really, 99 horsepower isn't enough for anything larger than a minicar; you need enough horses to be able to accelerate, especially at freeway merge lanes. But in the last two decades, average horsepower has been climbing steadily. In 2004, the typical new car had 184 horsepower, and the typical new SUV or pickup truck used as a car--SUVs and pickups used as cars now account for about half of new vehicle sales--had 235 horsepower. That rolls together for an average of about 210 horsepower in new passenger vehicles sold in the United States. In other words 2004 cars, SUVs, and pickup trucks offer more than 50 percent better horsepower than passenger vehicles in 1975. (At that time there were no SUVs, and using a pickup truck as a car, rather than for commercial work, was rare.)

Ever-higher horsepower is the reason the overall fuel economy of new U.S. vehicles is now at its lowest since 1988. Engineers have steadily made automotive power trains more efficient--but nearly all the efficiency has gone into power, not MPG. Other things being equal, a one-third reduction in the horsepower of new vehicles would lead to roughly a one-third increase in their miles-per-gallon numbers. And a one-third increase in the MPG of new cars and SUVs is all that is required to eliminate petroleum imports from Persian Gulf states! The calculations are here.

Cutting average horsepower by one-third would still leave the typical new vehicle sold in the United States with more horsepower than the typical new vehicle of 1975. Yet Congress and two consecutive two-term presidents have taken no meaningful action to raise fuel economy of vehicles, and horsepower isn't even being discussed as a problem. Do you think there's a "right" to horsepower? Puh-leeze. Perhaps you've got a right to horsepower for vehicles used exclusively on private property. Cars and SUVs are driven on public roads, and courts have consistently held that government can regulate vehicles for public safety and for public-interest issues such as pollution reduction and petroleum savings. You don't have any "right" to test a rocket engine in the street or drive a bulldozer on the highway, because such things imperil public safety. High horsepower, which imperils public safety, needs to be regulated.

But suppose you don't care about petroleum imports, greenhouse gases (which are proportional to fuel burned), or the fact that aggressive, overpowered cars and SUVs are a root cause of road rage, which makes driving unpleasant for everyone. Wouldn't you still care that more horsepower means more people dead--especially, more young people dead? How fast was the BMW 2002, the first really cool car that many Baby Boomers lusted after? The 1971 BMW 2002 did zero-to-sixty in 11.3 seconds. Today the average new car or SUV does zero-to-sixty in 9.9 seconds--the average new vehicle is now faster than the BMW 2002. Many cars are much faster, and not just sports cars. The new Honda Accord V6, a family sedan, does zero-to-sixty in 6.7 seconds. The Mazda Protégé, an affordable small car, does zero-to-sixty in 6.9 seconds. The new Ford Mustang GT does zero-to-sixty in 5.6 seconds, which used to be a Ferrari time, and costs only about $25,000, placing it within the reach of most Americans. Volvo now builds a model that does zero-to-sixty in 5.4 seconds.

All this power makes it increasingly easy for drivers, especially young drivers, to get in trouble. A Ford LTD of the 1960s, the sort of land yacht so many Boomers learned to drive on, did zero-to-sixty in 13 or 14 seconds--you had to work really hard to spin it out. A car that does zero-to-sixty in just a few seconds, on the other hand, is distressingly easy to lose control of. High-horsepower cars that gain lots of speed with just a touch of the throttle are practically a death sentence for teens or careless drivers. Horsepower, surely, is the reason road fatality numbers aren't dropping much, despite the spread of air bags, antilock brakes, and other safety improvements.

The other day I was dropping two of my kids off at high school, and noticed a girl in the seniors' parking lot stepping out of a shiny Acura TL with paper tags, indicating it was brand new. The Acura TL has a 270-horsepower engine and does zero-to-sixty in 6.0 seconds. Basically, it's a machine designed to kill that girl. There are lots of such machines, designed to kill customers, on display at the auto show. What did the press reports talk about? Styling.

Gregg Easterbrook is a senior editor at TNR and a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution.

[Cobra64]

I agree. Max is a jack-ass. Probably never graduated from high school last year.

[Cobra64]

You'd learn to love 'em if you had the occasion to haul kayaks and caged raccoons simultaneously. Like I have.

You use them for their purpose. And, that's a good thing. IMO, most don't have a clue why they bought them. I asked my neighbor, she didn't have a clue. I said she should have bought a Volvo (since most of them are clueless ditzes as well).

[backhoe]

As I mentioned to a dissenter on Free Dominion, "From my cold, dead hands..."

...but of course, there is a little more to it than that deliberately provacative statement. ( And the dissenter never explained what he meant about "clear-cutting the forests"-- geez, we haven't done that down here for over a hundred years- we practice husbandry. )

An SUV would normally be close to my absolute last choice for a vehicle- don't have a thing against them, but a truck ( for moving objects ) or a van ( for moving people ) would have served my "lifestyle" more handily than the 'Zook ( my "bad day" moniker for the Amigo- on a good day, she's "Suzi..." ).

A year & a half ago I was making 3 or 4 trips a day out into the country to look after things at my MIL's house and old store- she's very old, very heavy, and slowly dying. The car- my wife's hand-me-down-- was almost at the "honk if parts fall off" stage, and one day, her next door neighbor has, Lo! & behold, the 'Suzi, sitting by his borrow pit, for sale.

I look it over- it's cheap, apparently in fine condition, and just tall enough to lever a heavy old lady into a lot easier than the sedan I was driving. And the neighbor offered me $200 to take the old car off my hands.

Aside from easing up the problems associated with hauling my MIL to the Docs and stores, it's nice to drive something with functioning accessories like the CD player and A/C, the milage is not bad- for a 4,000lb. box-- and it's so un-PC.

You can make a theoretical justification for SUV's down here- we have a lot of "county-improved" roads, which means red clay... like driving on talcum powder when it's dry, and a skid pad when it's wet-- but the real reason so many people have them ( all my in-laws have nothing but SUV's! ) is the dam-fool laws and regulations that made station wagons and big sedans hard to come by.

Most families need to move a fair quantity of people and things around, and these little econo-boxes the nanny-staters want to force everyone else to drive just do not cut it.

I suppose I could steal a phrase from the Left and say "it's all about 'choice,'" but what it's really about is people being free- you are free to buy and drive one, if you want to and can afford it-- on the other hand, no one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to operate a planet-busting SUV if you do not want to.

[Max Combined]

". I drive BMWs. I just guess I'm a heel-clicking Nazi, right?"

If the shoe fits. . .

[Max Combined]

"If I were you, I'd watch your comments to some who have been here 5 years longer than you."

If frogs had wings, they wouldn't bump their a$$ every time they jumped.

What, did the liberal Torie buy a bullet bra from you? Is that why you have your nose up her fanny?

[Max Combined]

"? I've had two Jeeps when I live in snow country. Since we moved to NC we sold them. BTW, I am a permanent member of the VRWC and would never buy another SUV, with the exception of the H2, just to annoy folks who strut their trucks that they never need to use 4WD or load up with mulch or lumber."

Thanks for sharing.

[from occupied ga]

Except this: I loathe SUV's. Loathe them.

Then don't buy one.

[Poohbah]

The other day I was motoring down the wonderfully named Democracy Boulevard in Montgomery County, Maryland, doing 50 miles per hour in a 35 zone. A middle-aged woman yakking on her cell phone blew past me at perhaps 75 miles per hour in a shiny new BMW 545i, which has 330 horsepower. Driving 75 miles per hour on a suburban street with pedestrian crosswalks and bus stops is socially irresponsible.

And doing 50 MPH in a 35 zone isn't? Why doesn't the idiot who wrote this square away HIS act before bitching about anyone else's?

[Max Combined]

"A mere statement of my sensibilities. A mere statement of fact."

Yes, it is a statement of fact, that you loathe SUV's, which is illogical, since they are merely a tool and emotional, since loathing is far more emotional a reaction to a tool.

I suppose you loathe handguns as well, since that is also a typical, emotional liberal response to another tool.

[Max Combined]

"Suggest you may want to keep your yap shut"

Thanks for the suggestion.

"and don't accuse someone of being a troll because they don't like an SUV."

Suggest you take reading lessons, because Torie did not write that she did not like an SUV, she wrote that she loathed them. Look up the meaning of loathe and it might become more clear to you why it is emotional and illogical to loathe a vehicle.

"I've had 'em when I needed 'em living in snow. country. I SOLD 'em when I moved because I DO NOT like them."

I do not own an SUV myself, but I do not loathe any type of vehicle, since they all have their advantages and disadvantages.

[MarkL]

Two things in particular jump out at me from this nimrod's article...

1) That SUVs are the root cause of road rage? An inanimate object causes road rage?

2) That more power equals more deaths? Actually, I believe that studies have shown that in their quest for greater gas milage, the auto manuafcturers have trimmed down the weight of their cars, making them less safe in collisions, which actually causes more deaths.

I don't really have time to respond to the other nutty assertions this guy makes right now.

Mark

[Max Combined]

"You sir, are the troll. IMOHO."

No, Torie is the troll, because she admittedly posted an article and posted a comment about SUVs that she knew would only irritate most of the people on this forum.

[SVTCobra03]

I cant believe I missed this thread last nite. You must own a 64 AC Cobra. Is is a kit or original? My modified 03 Mustang Cobra has 500hp and its still not enough. The 07 Cobra coming out next year is supposed to be a real beast.

[SVTCobra03]

Sorry. That was for Cobra64.

[Max Combined]

"I cant believe I missed this thread last nite. You must own a 64 AC Cobra. Is is a kit or original? My modified 03 Mustang Cobra has 500hp and its still not enough. The 07 Cobra coming out next year is supposed to be a real beast."

I think you meant to post this to Cobra64, so I will pass it along to him.

[Fresh Wind]

The primary cause of road rage is stupid drivers doing stupid things. What they drive means nothing. There are idiots driving motorcycles, there are idiots driving Geo Metros and Civics, there are idiots driving BMW's and Mustangs, there are idiots driving Jeeps and Escalades, and there are idiots driving buses and semis.

Another root cause is endless, frustrating traffic congestion, poorly designed roads, unsynchronized traffic lights, and construction projects that go on for years. And then there are the speed cops that hide beside the roads and pick off the occasional unlucky speeder, while the people who pull the truly dangerous stunts are ignored because the cops are busy manning their comfortable speed traps.

Speed doesn't kill, speed differences do, however. Higher average speeds reduce traffic volume, but it's the idiots who insist on going much faster or much slower than the average that cause the problems. It's ironic how many driving situations exist today in which you put yourself in mortal danger by obeying the speed laws.

[DCPatriot]

Michelon Pilot Sports only give you about 11,000 miles.

Burning rubber with them would be silly.

BTW, regardless of how much you pay for a BMW, they are totally worthless as soon as the snow covers the pavement.

[bmwcyle]

SUV AMEN

[Jagman]

Cool. Good drivers can overcome technology deficits like bias ply tires and terminal oversteer any day.

[Richard Kimball]

They were in CO, and CA, along with Ferraris and Maserratis, and Porches.

Well, we had a front and back porches, but I'd never even seen a BMW. Never saw a Mercedes until I moved to Austin. We thought a Camaro was the highest dollar car ever made (except for Cadillacs, which were strictly for old guys, but did have that awesome 500 cubic incher). Central Texas was strictly American Iron, although the Jap bikes made serious inroads after AMF bought out Harley and tried to destroy the company.

[uglybiker]

....I drive a hairdryer.
But it sucks!

Uh...if it's a hair dryer, wouldn't it.......blow? 8^P

[Dead Dog]

I have to admit, pissing off people who loath inanimate objects is part of the fun of owning an SUV. I also like the ability to play in the woods, ford streams over 24 inch es deep, and crawl up steep banks. All with leather seats and a good stereo.

[Centurion2000]

And these aren't race cars, but rather models intended for the street. Five-hundred horsepower is not only obscene but antisocial

Sounds like penis envy from a liberal that cannot afford the car.

I get 235 HP in my truck, I'm happy and it's tough enough to withstand impacts from anything but a semi.

[Jack of all Trades]

Horsepower levels are on their way up yes, but that's a function of increased efficiency. The writer has some fundamental misunderstandings about automotive technology.

If you want to optimize power, efficiency, and emissions, you can really only pick two to target. Tailpipe emissions regulations have been steadily tightening. That's a huge factor in the pace of MPG improvements.

[nicollo]

Thanks for a great post. I suspect, and I'm sure our Detroit Freepers can better say, that the seamless bumpers are a result of crash-impact regs. Today's front ends are made to crush. Where that's imcompatible with protruding bumpers, I don't know. There's something about SUV design that still yields to protruding bumpers. Then again, the import SUVs seem to have seamless fronts. So it's back to styling.

Where it ends is a scratched front that ruins the look of the topside. The only way to keep it clean is a car bra, which are u-u-gly.

[killjoy]

Michelon Pilot Sports only give you about 11,000 miles.

Cool! I didn't know they made them for cars. I use them on my bike and love them. If you think 11,000 miles is bad, on a bike they only last about 4000.

[Iconoclast2]

Did he leave that part out because he didn't want to disappoint him that the top speed was only 168, or because he didn't want him to know he'd reached it? ;)

[uglybiker]

A blue bottle in the trunk and a red button on the dash. Nitrous is a good thing. Been thinking of putting it in my Cobra.

Only babies use bottles. ;-)

[DCPatriot]

Yeah...but on a car they cost about $1,100 for a set of four.

And the BMW M3 and M5 have different sizes on the rear than front...and they're directional too.

Can't rotate them.

[killjoy]

Yeah...but on a car they cost about $1,100 for a set of four.

On a motorcycle it is around $300 total for the front and rear including mounting and balancing.

[BigWaveBetty]

The other day I was dropping two of my kids off at high school, and noticed a girl in the seniors' parking lot stepping out of a shiny Acura TL with paper tags, indicating it was brand new. The Acura TL has a 270-horsepower engine and does zero-to-sixty in 6.0 seconds. Basically, it's a machine designed to kill that girl.

First let me say if this story upsets you do not buy an Audi S4 - 340 horse power - 0 to 60 in a blink. Yeeha!

While watching a documentary about the Autobahn they lamented how teen aged drivers are responsible for many accidents since they're not used to driving 120mph. Which made me think, why not a governor on the car for the youngins? And because I always try to think ahead... knowing that many kids are driving dad's car ... why not make a governor that works off a special key, so we parents can still drive like a bat out of hell?

Must write to Audi with my idea...

[Auntie Dem]

Is Gregg Easterbrook gay? " Five-hundred horsepower is not only obscene but antisocial" 500 hp is just a start!

No kidding. I've seen some Hot Rod articles on guys with 580 CI engines with nitrous putting out over 1,200 HP! Is that excessive?

I'd take one!

[Poohbah]

In the 1960s, drivers on the Autobahn would sometimes encounter a Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud that would leave their BMWs, Porsches, and other assorted high-speed machinery in the dust. One gent in a Ferrari got his car up to 160 miles an hour, and this Rolls-Royce was still pulling away easily.

They all called the Rolls-Royce rep, who said (in a properly stodgy British manner), "We don't know what you're talking about."

At the Frankfurt Auto Show, a man came up to the Rolls-Royce booth and said, "I have a confession to make...I did an engine swap on my Silver Cloud."

Rolls-Royce rep: "Are you the bugger who's been terrorizing the Autobahn over the past year?"

Confessor: "Yes."

Rolls-Royce rep: "I do hope you kept it all Rolls-Royce, good sir."

Confessor: "I did. I put in a Merlin."

[sheik yerbouty]

Yup!

[nicollo]

Torie, this article is indefensible. I'm sorry you tried.

First of all, Huntress has is right: Easterbrook is all twisted around cause and effect, just like the rhetoric of gun control. Next, as Poohbah wrote, Easterbrook's complaints about a woman doing 75 in a 35 (and it ain't 35 on that road) is ludicrous given his admission to doing 50 himself -- and I would add to that that Easterbrook's car could do 75 just as easily as that lady's car, so what's the point, other than his distaste for her SUV? Then, as Jagman and Auntie Dem point out, emmission regs caused the drop in HP, not the fuel crisis. Your reply to that was, "we could do so much 'better.' And he suggests that recently, we have been 'regressing.' YMMV." YMMV, indeed. That's no argument, and Easterbrook's didn't get there, either.

You are only right, finally, when you called this article "self-indulgent." I'd have used "self-absorbed." And full of untruths. Such as this:

Do you think there's a "right" to horsepower? Puh-leeze. Perhaps you've got a right to horsepower for vehicles used exclusively on private property. Cars and SUVs are driven on public roads, and courts have consistently held that government can regulate vehicles for public safety and for public-interest issues such as pollution reduction and petroleum savings.

Utter bull. The Federal power to regulate automobile manufacture and sale is not a police power to enforce the public safety. It is derived from the commerce clause. Moreover, road regulations have been consistently held by the courts to be a matter of state and not federal law. That's why there's no national licensing. That's why there was never a national speed limit -- Jimbo Carter's idiotic 55 was a funding mandate, not a federal law. Easterbrook made it all up. See here:

House Rpt.105-477 - NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1998
CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee finds that the Constitutional authority for this legislation is provided in Article I, section 8, clause 3, which grants Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the several States, and with the Indian tribes.

Really, whatever qualities you find in Easterbrook, this one is ruinous.

There's far more than emotion to the outrage of folks on this thread. From day one, automobiles have frighted the frightful. Not until 1912 did automobiles kill more than trolleys or horses, yet none of the terrific outrage thrown at automobiles was aimed at horses and trolleys. It wasn't so much the dangers of automobiles that scared but that RICH people were driving them, and having a blast doing it. If a trolley maimed a child, so be it, for trolleys are of for and by the people, but there was Hell-to-pay if some rich guy in a "pleasure car" even threatened a dog. Easterbrook is saying but the same: away, vile machine, you are too much fun!

What is it about automobiles that so freaks the reform-minded? I think it comes to this: they don't like to see people doing what they cannot abide or do for themselves.

In Easterbrook's honor, I'm gonna go out for a ride in my horsepower-bereft Ford Escort down Democracry Blvd at 75 mph while talking on my cell phone. If an SUV gets in my way, I'll run it down.

Nicollo unmasked: Bromleyisms here

[Cobra64]

BTW, regardless of how much you pay for a BMW, they are totally worthless as soon as the snow covers the pavement.

I seem to get around okay in mine. BTW, ever heard of the X3, or the X5?

[DCPatriot]

Yeah...also heard of the 325xi...which is 4 wheel drive.

[nicollo]

I've ranted here uselessly. Your post no. 8 settled it.

[nicollo]

"...why not a governor on the car for the youngins?"

That's just fine if Audi wants to try your idea, but reformers such as the author of this article will demand that the guvment make everyone have a speed governor, like it or not. In 1935, following the spirit of the New Deal, I guess, 68% of Americans favored speed governors limiting cars to 50 mph. Imagine what that would have done to the auto industry, to transportation, to the nation as a whole?

Thankfully, while 68% of the Americans George Gallup spoke with wanted it, their representatives in the states and in Congress never got around to it. The reason why we accept some 40,000 road deaths a year is because automobiles are so damned useful. And fun.

I shiver to think about all the New Republic fools shaking their heads in agreement and damnation of horsepower and things of which they know nothing. To paraphrase a great American, and in his day America's foremost car lover -- and who loved speed, William Howard Taft, I loathe nothing like the calamity howler.

Here for some stories of Taft and his cars.

[nicollo]

Easterbrook's fantastical horror for horsepower if observed would ruin the national economy.

Europe did it to itself after WWI, by taxing horsepower. Even the Model T was considered a luxury car for its 20 horses. (No mistake that 20 HP was the cut-off: the Euros were trying to limit T imports). The result was to destroy the middle market. European makers stuck to feeble low-end cars that were barely useful and ultra expensive cars with plenty of HP and luxury and very limited sales. Warren Harding cut Woodrow Wilson's wartime horsepower & other automobile-related excise taxes that were doing just that to the American industry, and the result was competition, innovation, and greater value in more affordable cars.

[nicollo]

Okay, one more from Nicollo, just to show what an ass our friend Easterbrook -- and a liar:

I went out and ran up and down Democracy Blvd. At its origin at Old Georgetown Rd. the speed limit is 35. About 200 yards along is a high school, and when I went by the lights were flashing yellow. The road is 6 lanes here. One could easily hit 75, but it would not be prudent, not even when school's letting out... Anyway, a mile along there's the first of many lights leading to the I-495 intersection and a shopping mall. Once past the mall, the limit rises to 45, and there's a 1/2-mile downhill run to another light. While gravity might have helped my little Escort and its meager 120 horses, traffic blocked my way at around 40 mph. There was no room to bust through.

Now past the light, the road narrows to 4, then 2 lanes, and the speed limit rises to 50mph. Traffic went a stupid 40-45 for this stretch, about 2 miles. The limit dropped to 45 near the next light at Falls Road.

I purposefully let traffic get ahead for the return run and to do proper honor to Mr. Easterbrook. My little 4-cylinders got me upwards 75-80 just as I caught up to the cars ahead, which were hovering at the 50 speed limit. From there on back, in the 6-lane section of 45 and 35 limits, traffic mostly blocked a good speed, although it did allow for some good warrior driving along past the mall and the highway interchange.

The lesson: anyone doing 75 on this road is extraordinary, and speeds of 50 unusual, even where the speed limit is 50. Easterbrook is a liar.

[Attn Law Enforcement: this is a fictionalized account. :)]

[Old Professer]

Top speed is over 168, he had to back off for traffic; quite a car, all in all.

[Old Professer]

Any cliff higher than 100 feet will accelerate you to 120MPH.

[Old Professer]

The wind in one's hair, the bugs in one's teeth, what better sort of summer day could there be?

[Final Authority]

I used to have a Vega in 1976 through 1982. I drove it for 155,000 miles and I did it with all of the 76 net HP it had. I did get about 29 MPG however. Now I have a 235 HP Grad Prix that gets 26 MPG on the HWY if I keep it under triple digits. It has air bags, great HVAC, great handling with traction control and ABS braking. It is tons safer than the Vega, nearly as fuel efficient, and luxurious as well. I say keep the HP and the quality of the rides we have today. Don't ever go backwards.

[spinestein]

Similar story yet completely different.

I used to have a 1980 Mustang with a 2.3 L engine with all of 88 HP that got 30 MPG and topped out at 92 MPH. I bought a rusted out, dented up '68 Mustang fastback with a 289 for 500 bucks and stole the engine out of it, added a bunch of goodies to it, and put it into the 80 'stang along with a 4 speed manual tranny and Rancho suspension.

I then had a car that had a top speed of 146 MPH and did the 1/4 mile in 13.8 sec but only got 13 MPG.

This is NOT going backwards, this is called progress!

[nicollo]

The wind in one's hair, the bugs in one's teeth, what better sort of summer day could there be?

Atmospheric champagne, indeed! (Oh, and 325 horses helps mightily.)

[shellshocked]

Dood at work just bought a Mercedes AMG E55, 469ZHP!

[Cobra64]

Wish I hadd a 100 grand for a new toy. AMG is Benz's racing division.

[Senator Pardek]

"Give me a real American muscle car, and a real American male who loves to drive it, any day of the week."

It's a deal!!!