Car restrictions

**TravisS** · 06-04-2003

major_small, the reason I bring it up is because I drive a 2001 Accord Coupe LX 4-cylinder with a 5 speed manual.

At stock they make 150 HP, top speed (for both 4-cyl AND V6) is 122 MPH, or right around there. The newer V6's make 240 HP, which is a very healthy amount more than the 4-cyl, so I'd guess your dad's top speed is still limited to less than 130 MPH.

And there is a HUGE difference between 130 MPH and 160, in both reaction time and especially in braking distances.

Silvercord, please, don't try and confuse what I meant by that

Raising the legal driving age to 21 would not help, and in many cases would worsen the problem. In an urban ares, with no public trasportation and 30+ minute drive between towns 16 years old is almost too young. Driving experience has nothing to do with age, it really doesn't.
I'm 21 myself and have a pretty healty amount more experience than a 30 year old driver. I've been driving since I was 15, and I drive right around 30,000 miles a year, largely highway driving. The age of people and the type of car is not the problem. Yes, younger drivers are more likely to drive stupid (I will not deny that) but I've seen plenty of older (like 30+) drivers that are just as idiotic as the new 16 year old driver.

It's WAY too easy to get a lisence, that's the problem. In the USA you'd have to be a complete idiot to not get a license, and yes I mean that. I'm absolutely amazed at the fact people can even fail the driving test, seriously, it's amazing!

It's the drivers skill, skills which must be learned through first hand experience, that matters. It's not the driver's age, not the car, only the skill and common sense of the driver that becomes dangerous.

**Zach L.** · 06-04-2003

You definitely bring up a very good point. I think the major point that most people lack is not the skill, but the common sense to know what the boundary of their skill is. Your a much safer driver if you can recognize the limitations of your own ability and not completely ignore them (such as by letting your ego get in the way).

**-KEN-** · 06-04-2003

>>It's the drivers skill, skills which must be learned through first hand experience, that matters. It's not the driver's age, not the car, only the skill and common sense of the driver that becomes dangerous.<<

dingding! Hence limiting cars to anything under a v12 would be monumentally stupid.

I drive a 2003 Audi A4 (1.8t, inline 4, turbo), the Automatic Tipptronic . It can go 0-60 in 8.5 seconds, and its top speed is electronically limited to 130mph...I've been in one accident with it, and it was at 20mph

- long story. Anyway, I can get pretty spiffy acceleration, and can zip along at 130. See where I'm getting? You can zoom along fast as hell in smaller engines, too.

**alpha** · 06-04-2003

You bring up very good points. Experience is what is needed to really learn to drive, but for some, that experience goes in one ear and out the other.

**alpha** · 06-04-2003

Originally posted by -KEN-
>>It's the drivers skill, skills which must be learned through first hand experience, that matters. It's not the driver's age, not the car, only the skill and common sense of the driver that becomes dangerous.<<

dingding! Hence limiting cars to anything under a v12 would be monumentally stupid.

I drive a 2003 Audi A4 (1.8t, inline 4, turbo), the Automatic Tipptronic . It can go 0-60 in 8.5 seconds, and its top speed is electronically limited to 130mph...I've been in one accident with it, and it was at 20mph - long story. Anyway, I can get pretty spiffy acceleration, and can zip along at 130. See where I'm getting? You can zoom along fast as hell in smaller engines, too.

off topic, but you drive a pretty spiffy car for your age.

**-KEN-** · 06-04-2003

Spiffy indeed. Thanks. It's mainly because my parents' line of thinking is "Well, expensive cars must be safer...so you can either get an Audi or a Volvo". Well, Volvos ARE safer than most cars, and Audis are pretty damn safe too, so I just went with the cooler car. Plus, my dad and brother both have Volvos, and my oldest brother has a kickin' rad 2000 A4 (manual, quattro), so I went with a car I knew was

.

Anyway, how do you know my age? ARE YOU STALKING ME?

**TravisS** · 06-04-2003

"Well, expensive cars must be safer...so you can either get an Audi or a Volvo"

Cool parent's, and cool theory

My first car was a 1979 Ford F-250 4x4. I guarantee you could ram your Audi into me and I would come out on top, and it was only $5,500

My friend got into a pretty nasty accident and won a very large amount of cash. She wanted to get a Ford Mustang convertible, for the "coolness" factor. Her parents wanted her to get a Hummer H1, for the "safety" factor

She didn't get either, but damn, I would have gone for that H1!

**-KEN-** · 06-05-2003

Originally posted by TravisS
Cool parent's, and cool theory

My first car was a 1979 Ford F-250 4x4. I guarantee you could ram your Audi into me and I would come out on top, and it was only $5,500

Yes, well, duh

. I actually hit a truck at 20mph, and since new cars are meant to crumple up at the slightest touch for "safety reason" (read: so you order lots and lots of parts from them

), I had a pretty nasty hood, a leaky radiator, blahblahblah....and a big hole in my front bumper from his trailer hitch (CURSE YOU, TRAILER HITCHES!!). The only thing off about his car was his rear bumper was dangling down.

Actually, a truck was the first car I asked for. My parent's said no, because according to her I'd flip it and die.

Oh well, I'm more than happy with my current car, and since I'll have it for a minimum of 6 or 7 more years, I'm taking superb care of it

**alpha** · 06-05-2003

Originally posted by -KEN-
Spiffy indeed. Thanks. It's mainly because my parents' line of thinking is "Well, expensive cars must be safer...so you can either get an Audi or a Volvo". Well, Volvos ARE safer than most cars, and Audis are pretty damn safe too, so I just went with the cooler car. Plus, my dad and brother both have Volvos, and my oldest brother has a kickin' rad 2000 A4 (manual, quattro), so I went with a car I knew was .

Anyway, how do you know my age? ARE YOU STALKING ME?

Yes, don't you know, you're one to be stalked.

j/k... I have a pretty good memory (not as good as it used to be, but good enough). The AP CS thread. Remember that..

Yeah, my parents are into the whole safety thing as well. So they gave me my 2000 Accord SE. But for me, I don't know how long I'll keep this car. I want something with better handling, preferably AWD. I'm not bringing it to college in the fall, so we might sell it.

**-KEN-** · 06-05-2003

Originally posted by alpha
Yes, don't you know, you're one to be stalked.

j/k... I have a pretty good memory (not as good as it used to be, but good enough). The AP CS thread. Remember that..

Yeah, my parents are into the whole safety thing as well. So they gave me my 2000 Accord SE. But for me, I don't know how long I'll keep this car. I want something with better handling, preferably AWD. I'm not bringing it to college in the fall, so we might sell it.

Really? My friend just got a 2003 Accord EX Coupe (same green color as the top left), and I really like it. Handles pretty well, and he got it in manual. I think it's front wheel drive though, isn't it?

Heh, he wants to race me...it would be an amazingly close race. I have 170hp, he's got 160. I've got the turbo in mine though. Oh well.

AWD cars...hmmmm...the only AWD car I've ever driven has been my mom's Mercedes ML320 (I think she's got the 320...it's the first ML model that they ever made), but it doesn't count since it's more of a truck. My brother was trying to tell me that quattro slows his car down, but when I looked at the 0-60 for Audis, mine's actually the slowest time

.

**alpha** · 06-05-2003

Originally posted by -KEN-
Really? My friend just got a 2003 Accord EX Coupe (same green color as the top left), and I really like it. Handles pretty well, and he got it in manual. I think it's front wheel drive though, isn't it?

Heh, he wants to race me...it would be an amazingly close race. I have 170hp, he's got 160. I've got the turbo in mine though. Oh well.

AWD cars...hmmmm...the only AWD car I've ever driven has been my mom's Mercedes ML320 (I think she's got the 320...it's the first ML model that they ever made), but it doesn't count since it's more of a truck. My brother was trying to tell me that quattro slows his car down, but when I looked at the 0-60 for Audis, mine's actually the slowest time .

I've driven my dad's subaru. I think it handles nicer than my car. My car handles fairly well, but I still prefer AWD. It is FWD. I'm still not sure though, I'll see as time goes on.

That could be a close race. It depends on how good of a driver you both are. Mostly him because he has to shift. There is a good chance that he could beat you though..

**TravisS** · 06-05-2003

The 2003 Accords have a bit more understeer than the last gen (1998-2002), which have a good amount of understeer themselved.

All in all I think my Accord is a pretty good handeler, but a HUGE part of that is I replaced the stock 195/65/15 tires and rims with 225/40/17's. 30 mm wider and a grippier rubber will make a world of difference

My next car *hopefully* will be a 2006 (that's when my lease is up) Accord Coupe EX V6 6 speed, i.e. the prelude replacement

**alpha** · 06-05-2003

Originally posted by TravisS
The 2003 Accords have a bit more understeer than the last gen (1998-2002), which have a good amount of understeer themselved.

All in all I think my Accord is a pretty good handeler, but a HUGE part of that is I replaced the stock 195/65/15 tires and rims with 225/40/17's. 30 mm wider and a grippier rubber will make a world of difference

My next car *hopefully* will be a 2006 (that's when my lease is up) Accord Coupe EX V6 6 speed, i.e. the prelude replacement

I haven't driven a 2003 yet. Good to know they have a bit more understeer.

I still have the stock tire size. If I keep the car, first things I'll get would be some sway bars and maybe a strut bar.

I wish I could have gotten a lude.

**OneStiffRod** · 06-05-2003

Yeah, limiting the speed is stupid... it's un-american!

Besides that, this limitation would ruin the whole racket these city gov's got going where they charge you $180 for going 6miles over the limit - they would have no income as no more tickets could be given.

This argument is just as riduculous as the idea they got in london that says if u drive your car into the city center you are charged $15pounds - now they are considering that here.

Or as bad as the idea they had here in Los Angeles, some city FOOL, came up with that allowed the police to confiscate your car if you're pulled over for DUI... even before trial they would take your car and sell it at auction and pocket the money - leaving the person car less and even without compensation - all before the person was convicted. Luckily someone recognized that it was totally unconstitutional.

**Xei** · 06-05-2003

>>Or as bad as the idea they had here in Los Angeles, some city FOOL, came up with that allowed the police to confiscate your car if you're pulled over for DUI... even before trial they would take your car and sell it at auction and pocket the money - leaving the person car less and even without compensation - all before the person was convicted. Luckily someone recognized that it was totally unconstitutional.

DUI is stupid, but still... sell your car and stuff? Thats B.S., I certainly wouldn't blame the person for going postal on the cops.