silvrsvt Posted December 6, 2013 Share Posted December 6, 2013 Another thing to factor in with all this "Excessive" power is that newer cars control it with all the nannies they have... Case in point: My 1998 Mustang GT with its whopping 210HP was a much more dangerous car to drive then my 2006 Mustang GT with 305HP. It didn't help that the platform was a dinosaur, but it only had crappy traction control on it. The 2006 Mustang had a far better platform to put down more HP and a far better sorted traction control on it. There was times in the 98 I'd be nervous about the ass end coming out from it, but in the 2006 I never had that fear. I flashed my 2013 SHO, prior to it getting flashed, it didn't "feel" like it had 365HP...it moved nicely, but after the flashing the ECU, the car has more of an edge to it and you can break the wheels on it a lot easier...it "feels" fast now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted December 6, 2013 Share Posted December 6, 2013 Good God, man. Read that last sentence again. You don't see how that makes "speed was a contributing factor" meaningless? Honestly...it means speed is a contributing factor IN EVERY CRASH! He's not reading it the same way we're reading it. When I see Speed is a contributing factor it means someone was driving over the speed limit or driving too fast for conditions (going too fast around a corner or too fast in low traction or low visibility). Since 2 parked cars can't hit each other outside an earthquake, speed is always a factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted December 6, 2013 Author Share Posted December 6, 2013 (edited) Good God, man. Read that last sentence again. You don't see how that makes "speed was a contributing factor" meaningless? Honestly...it means speed is a contributing factor IN EVERY CRASH! Forget it. Nobody agrees with me on this. Horsepower to the people!! Edited December 6, 2013 by NickF1011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted December 6, 2013 Share Posted December 6, 2013 All I can say is that the most dangerous car I've ever driven was my father's 1973 AMC Gremlin. Absolutely no traction, thanks to the "chopped tail" design, and terrible drum brakes. The car certainly was no powerhouse. I have confidence in saying that our 2005 Focus is safer at 80 mph than that Gremlin was at 50 mph. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted December 6, 2013 Author Share Posted December 6, 2013 All I can say is that the most dangerous car I've ever driven was my father's 1973 AMC Gremlin. Absolutely no traction, thanks to the "chopped tail" design, and terrible drum brakes. The car certainly was no powerhouse. I have confidence in saying that our 2005 Focus is safer at 80 mph than that Gremlin was at 50 mph. My main gyst here: I suspect that the every day driver would likely be safer driving a Camry with the base engine than with the 290+ horsepower mill it offers. Comparing cars from entirely different generations doesn't really say much. I'm sure the Gremlin was safer at 50 MPH than the Model T was at 25. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted December 6, 2013 Share Posted December 6, 2013 (edited) My main gyst here: I suspect that the every day driver would likely be safer driving a Camry with the base engine than with the 290+ horsepower mill it offers. Comparing cars from entirely different generations doesn't really say much. I'm sure the Gremlin was safer at 50 MPH than the Model T was at 25. Higher power, in and of itself, does not make a vehicle less safe. Having driven the Gremlin at 50 mph, with its lack of balance and poor brakes, I'm not sure that the Model T would have been less safe at half the speed. The Model T was simply a better-engineered vehicle. Which, in reality, is the key question. Is the car engineered to properly handle the power put out by all of the engines that it offers? I'm not seeing where the Camry is not equipped to handle the power of its top engine offerings. Edited December 6, 2013 by grbeck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted December 6, 2013 Share Posted December 6, 2013 theres a lot of variables involved in circumstances surrounding potential crashes. My Bike is 143hp, easily enough in a 450lb bike to be potentially leathal...yet Ive had a tank slapper at a mere 15 mph thanks to a damp man hole cover....seriously must have looked like I was breakdancing from behind.....woke me up quicker than spending a $450 gift card at Starbux within an hour..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrewfanGRB Posted December 6, 2013 Share Posted December 6, 2013 Forget it. Nobody agrees with me on this. Horsepower to the people!! I'm not actually arguing on that part of your post/argument. I'm only arguing that speed in and of itself, regardless of the vehicle driven, is not the factor in causing fatal crashes WisDOT or NHTSA would want us to believe. WisDOT puts morons on the streets and then wants to yell at ME for going over the speed limit. It's nonsense. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrewfanGRB Posted December 6, 2013 Share Posted December 6, 2013 My main gyst here: I suspect that the every day driver would likely be safer driving a Camry with the base engine than with the 290+ horsepower mill it offers. This assumes the average Camry driver would drive the 290hp model differently than the base model. Even if the base model can get you going if you step into it and it can still go over 100mph. Bad drivers are bad drivers. Cars don't turn good drivers into bad drivers. I understand the argument you're putting forth, but I don't think it works the way you think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted December 7, 2013 Share Posted December 7, 2013 I've never seen anyone driving a Camry fast or dangerously. Ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted December 7, 2013 Share Posted December 7, 2013 I've never seen anyone driving a Camry fast or dangerously. Ever. Fast, probably not. Dangerously, all the time. It's usually elderly drivers who can barely see above the steering wheel weaving from side to side. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted December 7, 2013 Share Posted December 7, 2013 Fast, probably not. Dangerously, all the time. It's usually elderly drivers who can barely see above the steering wheel weaving from side to side. Good point..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGR Posted December 7, 2013 Share Posted December 7, 2013 The statistic for "speed related crashes" is meaningless. I remember when a car magazine did some research on this. One of the "speed related" accidents they uncovered was on a rural crossroads. One road had stop signs, the other didn't. A driver ran the stop sign and t-boned another car, killing that driver. Since one of the drivers was speeding, that got reported as a "speed related" crash. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted December 7, 2013 Share Posted December 7, 2013 I've never seen anyone driving a Camry fast or dangerously. Ever. You've never seen me driving a Camry rental.... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted December 7, 2013 Share Posted December 7, 2013 The Camry's still rated at 268, right? (re: the 290 number thrown around) With that car, the only way speed could be a factor is that you NEVER realize you're speeding in it. For some cars, that's a positive. For the Camry, not so much. Most boring, detached 0-60 ever. As far as horsepower being the problem, I don't think so. I see tons of people hooning their Priuses (especially in MD), and I also see lots of people granny-pedaling their M5s and SRT8s. It's all about the driver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All-Or-Nothing Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Yeesh, forget I even started this thread. Every car should have 800 horsepower and speed limits shouldn't exist. Only smart thing said in this whole thread Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Fast, probably not. Dangerously, all the time. It's usually elderly drivers who can barely see above the steering wheel weaving from side to side. As I've said before, the Camry is the new Buick LeSabre, and the Corolla is the 21st century Plymouth Valiant. Toyota could stuff 500 horsepower into those cars, and most of them would still be driven at 60 mph in the slow lane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schpark Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 As I've said before, the Camry is the new Buick LeSabre, and the Corolla is the 21st century Plymouth Valiant. Toyota could stuff 500 horsepower into those cars, and most of them would still be driven at 60 mph in the slow leftmost lane. FTFY 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Dangerously Dangerously? You summonabatch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted December 10, 2013 Author Share Posted December 10, 2013 I'm not seeing where the Camry is not equipped to handle the power of its top engine offerings. The part of the Camry usually not equipped to handle the power of its top engine offerings is usually the geriatric behind the wheel. The statistic for "speed related crashes" is meaningless. I remember when a car magazine did some research on this. One of the "speed related" accidents they uncovered was on a rural crossroads. One road had stop signs, the other didn't. A driver ran the stop sign and t-boned another car, killing that driver. Since one of the drivers was speeding, that got reported as a "speed related" crash. Perhaps if the driver that was t-boned was driving slower he/she would have seen the other car was running the stop sign and had more time to react. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 The part of the Camry usually not equipped to handle the power of its top engine offerings is usually the geriatric behind the wheel. Perhaps if the driver that was t-boned was driving slower he/she would have seen the other car was running the stop sign and had more time to react. Irrelevant when assigning blame and root cause for the accident. If we all drove 10 mph there would be no fatalities at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted December 10, 2013 Author Share Posted December 10, 2013 Irrelevant when assigning blame and root cause for the accident. If we all drove 10 mph there would be no fatalities at all. People would find a way. And I didn't say it would be the main cause. But excessive speed very often makes bad situations worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 The part of the Camry usually not equipped to handle the power of its top engine offerings is usually the geriatric behind the wheel. Perhaps if the driver that was t-boned was driving slower he/she would have seen the other car was running the stop sign and had more time to react. What matters is whether they are pushing the car to its limit. Those drivers do not have the pedal anywhere near the metal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted December 10, 2013 Author Share Posted December 10, 2013 What matters is whether they are pushing the car to its limit. Those drivers do not have the pedal anywhere near the metal. Doesn't take an all-out effort from the car for most drivers to be pushed well past what they are capable of controlling. Reminds me of the Camry commercial where passengers are put through the "roller coaster". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 People would find a way. And I didn't say it would be the main cause. But excessive speed very often makes bad situations worse. Going 70 in a 70 on the freeway and crashing will always result in far more damage and injuries than a 35 mph crash in a 35 mph zone. That doesn't mean speed should be a contributing factor in either accident assuming normal conditions. Saying that speed was a factor because it caused more damage is meaningless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.