Yes, of course. And it's because of this computer control that these cars aren't too fast for the road. The average Joe can enjoy the performance without getting into trouble, unless he really asks for it.
I think I'm realizing I mean something different than literally too fast for the street. I mean too powerful, too much grip to be much fun at street safe speeds. To get the 458 "up on its toes" one has to be driving very fast (for example).
I know this is rapidly going off topic but its an interesting point. Peak hp/torque quotes are quickly becoming pointless measures, even more confusingly so when trying to compare something 'new' with an instant slug of electric torque (or assistance). The new series of electrically assisted petrol engines (e.g. BMW i8 style) will change the way you think about a cars performance and compare them forever. The industry needs a new measuring system for comparisons and I'm not sure what that will be yet, probably a visually assisted torque map.... For example how much available 'torque' is instantly and readily usable at every single mph point that you want to traveling at? Or put it differently is the torque instantly there to meet (but managed to not exceed) the maximum available level of traction @ the tires at every mph point? Clearly it if was (its currently theoretical as no such car exists) you would accelerate at the maximum speed dictated by traction alone (regardless of weight). The only thing weight would do is impact the amount of power required (and hence torque) to meet that depend to reach max traction. You would almost need a 'color heat map with red/orange/green' and speed from 0 to vmax across the axis to visualize this. Diagramming this would show how poor the majority of current petrol cars are at getting close to maximum traction for all mph points since at 0 rpm they have zero torque and then they get progressively better/worse (both in terms of torque and energy efficiency) depending on rpm and gear they are in. Since the amount of torque available to 'move' the vehicle is also dependent on its weight (Newton's second law of motion states that acceleration is directly proportional to net force when mass is constant) the trade off would be the amount of energy required to move that mass. So lower weight will always improve range but not necessarily acceleration *if* you can muster up enough instant torque to overcome all of that mass. This is why cars like the Tesla 85D (2.3 tonnes!) can accelerate 0-60 in 2.8 seconds. They actually have to limit the available instant torque to the wheels (from 0) to meet the available grip from the tires fitted. The tires (traction available) become the limiting factor to acceleration. Of course, if you take this theory further (assuming we where able to replace tires with something that didn't have to worry about traction - magnetic levitation for example) then the human in the car very fast becomes the weakest link to going really really fast. How much G-force could you take before you black out? Well the average person passes out 7g of acceleration (that is, 7 times gravitational acceleration on Earth). If the car is designed to accelerate at 7g it would take less than 1/3rd of a second from 0mph to reach 60mph (0.385 seconds to be exact) and the point before we would be unconscious! I suppose all of this backs up your point that there is still a LOT more to go before we become the weak link. However, the amount of acceleration that the squishy human brain can control behind the wheel (and derive enjoyment from!) is dramatically lower. I gain a lot of enjoyment at driving my car around despite the fact I don't have instant torque and have to rev the nuts off the engine to get into its 'sweet spot'. This makes it fun, a challenge. When you start to accelerate over a given speed only computers will be able to manage it and we will all be out of it 'unconscious', dragged along for the ride
Yes.. 16M About two years ago. Very lucky timing... However I passed on a reasonably nice tdf CS at about the same time. That was not such a great choice. Would have been a great car to own for a net credit! How about you?
That's what I'm saying also. Yes, one can drive these cars on the street but what's the point? I drool over the new 911 Turbo S. But I'm not going to buy one to drive around town at 20mph in traffic.
I fully agree with you and I welcome your attitude, somehow honest for a sports car enthusiast. IMO "too fast for the road" is a very "questionable" argument, to say it directly, I hate it! This argument I hear too often from the environmental protection lobby, from the bicycle interest groups in the cities and from all the people who are envious of my Ferraris. I hope they do not follow this thread...
True, we're probably already there, at least in terms of what is possible. If they didn't have rules limiting power and grip in F1, their drivers would likely be at risk of passing out in high-speed corners. And, regarding road cars, I recall a guy saying that the first time he did a launch in his new Aventador, he felt a little dizzy from the shear acceleration alone. He said his passengers experienced the same thing. They got accustomed to the acceleration, but this may be an indication of the performance approaching the limits of the human body. One thing I think about when people talk about a car being "too much for the road," in the context of traffic laws and public safety, is how long before people start talking about passing laws limiting performance, or at least horsepower/torque. I could see people arguing that "no one needs 500 horsepower" or equivalent. Of course, this may not really be a concern for long as we could be heading to a future in which all cars must drive themselves and humans are prohibited from operating them on the road. This may sound paranoid, but I think this will happen some day as the most dangerous component of driving is the human being behind the wheel. This is more true today than ever before with all the texting, etc. Okay, now we're really off topic. Let me get back to the original one: Don't trade the CS!
Well let me change around the question a bit. I like to think about it like enjoying beers among friends, when do you actually stop deriving benefit from the extra pint? There are laws of diminishing returns happening for every extra one consumed (every person is different about when they feel they've had "enough"). However some people will know when they've had enough of a good thing, some wont and I sure as hell don't want people legislating on this for us. Freedom of choice, everyone is different an all that! For me its like trying to evaluate what makes the best all rounder car, the best balanced, fun, visceral, emotional machine you can get, a pure drivers car. Too much grip and the car isn't that fun, too little and its sliding all over the place. Same with power, too much power can dominate things if the chassis isn't up to taking it. Its all about balance. The other extreme: I know some there are some cars such as Andy Frost's drag racer which achieves 0-60 mph in under a second. Would you want to drive a car on the street with that kind of savage, violent and brutal acceleration (even if the computers could scan ahead and determine its "safe" ?). Sounds a bit extreme, even if electric motors make it possible to generate the enormous torque involved to take off like a controlled explosion (and even if you could sort out the obvious safety issues). I'm not sure how I would feel about consuming all that energy to get instantly up to insane speeds from a stop. Its definitely different, even a long track essentially just becomes a series of corners. Maybe just like the beers, there is a sweet spot and you could end up putting too much sugar in your coffee to really enjoy it? Then I guess the debate becomes when do we reach that point?
And just to bring it back on thread For me the CS represents a car exactly like described. Its very very well balanced out of the box, its a pure drivers car. You can spend many hours driving it and you'll find yourself still learning and enjoying it. Get into tweaking its geometry settings, play with tires and pressures, perhaps even spring rates and rollbars - before long you've got it behaving like an extension of yourself - its like a hand in the perfect glove - it does exactly what you expect, it feels great doing it and requires concentration and effort to derive the enjoyment. That's the CS feeling! Sure I can jump in and drive faster (much faster) in an F12 but I'm having more fun in the CS! (or at the very least a totally 'different' kind of addictive fun)!
Well this is already starting to happen with the taxation system. In Italy for example, for a few years now the yearly car tax payable is based on vehicles on the kW output of the engine. The road tax adds a shocking 20/£17 for every single kW (1.34 bhp) over what the government have 'deemed' enough! In this case 184kW (so the authorities believe you don't need more than '247 bhp!', what is so utterly dumb is doesn't even take weight or consumption into consideration).... Very poor and very stupid. A new F12 buyer therefore pays 1,976 of "standard road tax", plus a supplement of 7,180 of surcharges based on the extra power they aren't 'deemed to need' (544kW-185kW multiplied by 20/kw) of additional tax. This means it costs of over 9,000/year of tax for the F12 in Italy! If that isn't a disincentive to need extra power I don't know what is!
Most are I suppose. I happen to love both They fill the same "role" (A to A fun back road weekend raw) in my garage, so I can't justify owning both. I think any true lover of either must like the other too...the logic of not would be narrow (too little torque in the 3.6 being the one I understand). Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Wow, didn't realize that was happening in Europe. My thought is this probably wouldn't happen in the US in today's political climate, but it is sad. What is the justification for these taxes? Is it that the higher horsepower cars are more likely to cause accidents, wear down the roads? If it's about causing accidents, a reckless driver in a 200 bhp car is much more dangerous than a responsible driver in a 500 bhp car.
This is one reason that luxury car sales have ground to a complete stop in Italy, but the biggest reason is the relentless harassment by the Guardia di Finance (the "finance police") that will stop you multiple times a day if you dare to drive around in a Ferrari and keep you by the roadside for up to an hour while you prove to them that you paid taxes on your income. This means you have to carry your tax returns around with you. Or you can drive a dirty Fiat Uno and never get stopped. Easy choice.
That sucks. I can see them levying higher taxes on higher-value cars, but I still don't get why the tax is proportional to the car's power. If it is about public safety, then they are basically saying you can be unsafe as long as you can afford to pay the tax, which doesn't sound right.
Sadly its the higher the horsepower the richer the owner, so it's fair game to tax that rich guy or gal more.
Often, but not necessarily. What if I were a working-class guy with an inexpensive V8. And what if I saved up and bought a huge supercharger and installed it myself to bring up the power to 500+ bhp. The car would have lots of power but would still not be that valuable. I would be expected to pay high taxes for this car, even if I am clearly not wealthy? Why not just tax based on the value of the car if the goal is to tax the rich?
Maybe because by using horsepower there is some sort of environmental justification rather than it being a blatant tax on the rich. But who knows.
Please do not make too many thoughts on this subject! All road cars shall be tested by the State, they meet all the legal requirements. I don't believe that a "non-drivable" car receives the street legal. Thus we are not talking about group B rally monsters or drag racers, yes, we are talking about street legal cars! Logical conclusion; the legislature itself explains our beloved high performance supercars as street legal and as NOT "too fast for the road"! Please let us stop this tiresome topic, I guess we are grown-up people who know how to deal with a lot of power under the hood. If someone has no joy in more power in a sports car then it is his personal thing, no problem with that. But to stop now the increase in power and performance in sports cars because of these people? And the best is yet: a CS with its 400hp and 373Nm of torque is the benchmark of the "right" limit? Why not a Honda Civic? Come on!
That may have been me. I've been toying with the idea of a 16M but I would have to part with my CS. The current price delta and potential regret of parting with the CS have held me back (haven't driven a 16M). If the right deal came along, well who knows. It would be a tough decision though. So for now the CS stays. I'm one of those guys that takes an agonizing amount of time to pull the trigger.
Legal status really depends on the country you live in, some countries have gone crazy with massive amounts of bureaucracy. In UK you can legalize pretty much anything low volume using SVA rules, even a "sofa" was type approved and yes drag racers and racing cars are indeed road legal. Andy Frosts monster drag racer has valid MOT and road legal status and almost all rally cars are road legal. God only knows what he pays in car insurance. I was more observing at what point does too much power "everywhere" dominate everything and spoil the fun? We are not there yet but even when we are cars like the CS will still be raising huge smiles... Image Unavailable, Please Login
