We are aware of the login problems affecting the forums, and appreciate your patience as we work on a fix.
Did you recently purchase a new Tesla, Rivian or Lucid vehicle directly from the manufacturer and willing to share how your experience compared to previous vehicle purchases made through a traditional dealer? A reporter would like to speak with you; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 2/19 for details.

The Growing Divergence Between Horsepower and Speed Limits

1235731

Comments

  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    you: I might not go the the extream as some other posters here would but very few of us want our new and improved whatever it is to be de-contented from what we already have.

    me: that might be, moi? I have used some everyday examples and I have used some frivolous and sci-fi examples surely - to make the point that is better for anyone to have more power and capability than less. No one wants to be slower, weaker, less aestetic, or dumber, and we don't want what we purchase to be so either.

    you: You are one of the very few people I have talked to that even considers these sub compacts as an option.

    me: yes, typically people are consider subcompacts are either 1) buying a very sporty little car - an Elise or Miata, 2) just starting out in life - want low downpayment and monthlies, 3) are frugal, or 4) or ecologically minded; though it has miniscule effect because the majority of a growing world do not share that goal (tangent).
    Subcompacts do not provide an individual or family with the advantages of more space, more performance, or more safety. Individuals value these sorts of attributes, over any supposed societal conservation goals (it is a conundrum how society expects to conserve when we support continued population growth and immigration, a higher lifestyle, and a growing economy (U.S. and global!)).
    I as an individual see no advantage to buying a low-powered sub-compact other than to save a few $'s.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    just got 39 mpg on the second tank of gas in the "subcompact", including 50+ miles at 75 mph as I was caravanning with friends to and from the museum and they are fast drivers.

    The speed limit on the highways we were travelling was about 1/2 and 1/2 55 mph and 65 mph. So I exceeded it the whole way, the engine never felt strained, and on the 55 stretches, I exceeded the speed limit by almost 40%.

    Nowhere on our entire route was there a two-lane with opportunitites for passing however.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • boaz47boaz47 Member Posts: 2,747
    I wasn't going to name names. *S*. And I know much of what you are posting in Hyperbole. But it is a point that drives the market so that we get bigger and more powerful with each new generation of vehicle. It doesn't have to be a lot but to keep the fleet turning over it seems to be necessary. I have read that most people trade in or sell their cars every two or three years. I an not typical in that regard but I will admit I am not about to trade in my vehicle if it is still meeting my needs and the new version is less of a vehicle than what I already have. If my vehicle is falling apart of if it needs fixing more than I am willing to fix it that is a different story. But in truth how many of our vehicles wear out before we replace them?

    However if I were still a commuter of any distance I might consider a small car. But to be honest my friend Nippon has always been an advocate for simpler more basic vehicles. Even to the point of defending the Prius when its only real attribute is fuel mileage. It sure isn't economy in the normal perspective.

    If we want to address the origional question I think our method of measuring vehicle power will have to change before a true power cap can be applied. But even if we start measuring the power from an electric motor the race will only begin again. I simply has to. That is hard wired into the buying public's DNA. let me give an example.

    A few years ago I bought my first battery powered drill. 12 volts was a big thing then and to a degree if worked fine for the few times I wanted to detach myself from my power cord and but up a curtain rod or drill a hole in wood or this sheet metal. When that drill was ready to be replaced I had a chance to buy a new 12 volt, 14.0 volt or a 16.4 volt or a professional grade 18 volt. I wasn't ready to spend what they wanted for a 18 volt so I got a 16.4. I was the envy of my weekend project friends. Not long after one of my friends got a Dewalt 18 volt drill. His would last an additional 10 minutes during a drilling project we were working on before he had to replace the battery. When my wife managed to freeze the motor on my drill I thought about getting a 18 volt. I already had a 18 volt circular saw so I already had two batteries and a quick charger but I passed the 18 volt saw and charger to my son and got a new 19.2 kit with drill, brad nailer saber saw and circular saw and light. Darned if I didn't discover that professional grade now had 24 volt tools. Now more people are interested in cars than they are hand tools so what chance does any manufacturer have of convincing people that less is better? I doubt if there is much of a chance at all. So if they want to sell us smaller lighter less powerful cars they would have to be priced so low there wouldn't be much profit left. Much like when the first Hondas came to California, if you bought a new Olds they would throw in a new Honda 600 for free. Much like a spare tire. I can't see any other way to get the buying public interested in smaller lighter low powered cars.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    you: just got 39 mpg on the second tank of gas in the "subcompact"

    me: personally, gas is till too cheap to worry about that. I'll move closer to work or get another job before I change vehicles. You know that new Camaro concept is targeted for 30mpg highway w/ the current LS-2 400 hp (DOD engine). Once we raise these stinking low speed limits that are set so a fully loaded garbage truck can drive safely ...

    you: I exceeded the speed limit by almost 40%.

    me: Ahhhh!! Never admit that sort of stuff in writing. Homeland Security, you know. Always say, "you know someone who did ..." ;)
  • nitromaxnitromax Member Posts: 640
    Hey Kernick, are you the guy who wrapped his house in plastic when we had the Anthrax scare?
    :-)

    I will take intelligence and street smarts over brute force any day.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    you: I will take intelligence and street smarts over brute force any day.

    me: poor choice to pick one over the other. t's better to have both! ;)
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    maybe what we need is a whole lot more cops, then there would be less to be scared of on the roads.

    Maybe eventually we will have individual public transport pods that will take us wherever we need to go for routine stuff - work, groceries, etc - the industry seems to be headed in that direction.

    Then we could have toll roads for drivers in personal cars with wildly excessive power exercising their mojo.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 20,174
    your profile indicates you got our of dakota and a f250 for a ptcruiser and a focus zts. in that context, your post does not make sense. i have a zts also, fun car.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • boaz47boaz47 Member Posts: 2,747
    well, I said I did my part. But we still have the F250. But then my son uses it mostly and he uses it to tow a Rock crawler. It has more than 500 Pounds of torque and gets 20 MPG while doing it. I could tow a fully loaded Tundra and still get 20 MPG. A Tundra couldn't even pull my rig fully loaded let alone get 20 mpg while doing it. So in that context smaller lighter just doesn't cut it.

    The ZTS is a fun car. It is my wife's daily driver, even if she doesn't have to drive daily. The point I am trying to make is I don't believe either of those two cars have too much Horsepower. And if the next ZTS had even less HP I could see no reason to trade the one we already have as long as it was still running pretty well. There is no incentive in taking a step back from what I already have. The proposition some seem to be pushing is that what we have is too much and we need to put some limit on it. but if the new and improved whatever you drive is less car than what you are now driving why buy it? However if the new and improved whatever you drive has more goodies and an extra 25 to 40 hp maybe it is worth taking a look. I wasn't satisfied with the power in my PT so I got cold air and an exhaust system. I am looking into getting a chip for it and maybe even a dry NOS system. Looked at a supercharger but that is pretty big ticket.

    The ZTS handles like a slot car and like you I enjoy it. But you can bet I would love it even more with another 50hp. I wouldn't love it as much with 20hp less. I think that is the point we are dancing around. If you like what you drive would you like it better with another 50 horses? If the answer is yes then you can see where cars are headed. If you like you car would you like it better with 50 fewer ponies? My contention is that the majority of the buying public would rather have more than less. Do you disagree?
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    but that is a numbers game. The thinking goes "a higher number is always better than a lower number". I think it becomes kind of silly when the numbers get so high that there is no way to exploit the extra power they represent.

    I could understand if you thought we were not at that point yet. But I would disagree - Mercedes wants current V-8 S-class owners to think they just have to have the extra power provided by the new S65 AMG, but really, 500 hp or 605, will you ever find anywhere on the public roads where you can test the difference between them? And that is an extreme. I don't think we have to look at 500 hp cars to find examples of where the horsepower race has gotten ridiculous, we could look to cars like the 300C SRT at 425 hp for another, heck even the 300C at 340 hp is unexploitable overkill for a daily driver.

    And BTW, no fair with the F-250 example - multi-ton monster-diesel trucks were not really what was being considered here. I thought we were talking more about common transportation cars.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • boaz47boaz47 Member Posts: 2,747
    well the F-250 was simply to make a point. Sorry if I took a different tack. *S* But the question still remains, if you now have 108 ponies and you like your car. When it came time to get a new one would "you" be willing to pay more for the new model if they gave it 130 HP or would you be willing to pay more for a new one with 90 HP? It is a numbers game for sure and we know they more than likely aren't going to decrease the cost of the new car so what can they offer you to make it more worth trading up? Or would you consider less HP a move up?
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    less hp acceptable as long as they held the weight the same and increased the car's agility and fuel economy. In fact, for a power DECREASE, I would expect huge leaps in FE to make it worth it. And then yes, it would be acceptable.

    The reality, of course, is less attractive. The next-gen version of my car is going to increase weight by 300 pounds, while keeping the same engine size and power output. The FE will remain the same, but so what? The same power for more car, and FE stands still? And the weight gain is to make more content (starting with A/C) standard. Not a big improvement in my book. Now it is still at the auto show stage. If it gets to dealerships and handles great, with better low-end torque and cleaner emissions, then those improvements begin to offset what on paper looks like not much of a step forward.

    So the answer to your question is a complex one in my case, and not the slam-dunk it is for you.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • boaz47boaz47 Member Posts: 2,747
    At this point we may have to agree that we see eye to eye. The real world verses the one you would like to see. Much like our discussions on manual transmission. I may see your point and even feel your pain. I just don't see the buying public moving in your direction.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2006-01-16-auto-usat_x.htm

    The Lexus LS460 sounds interesting, whereas despite how good the previous generations may have been, they lacked class-leading power and panache. More hp, probably a great, loud sound system, and a better economical 8-speed automatic. Give me MORE !

    On a more practical side, I also like the new RAV-4 now that it has a V-6. Maybe my X-Type isn't looking so good anymore. Though an Xterra Off-Road would be better for me in deep snow. We had 5" of snow Sun. and the plows never got around until 8 hr later. I'd hate to have seen if we had 15" how late they would have been.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    no its not "those that have bullets, and those that dig" - Clint Eastood to Eli Wallach at the end of The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.

    There are people are get better everyday and those that get worse. There really is no staying the same. If you don't want to get better, than you might want to check for other signs of depression. ;)

    Having a more powerful car, more wealth, more knowledge, and becoming more fit/healthy are my goals everyday. For instance last year I got an MS in Management to go with my BS in Engr., I earned more wealthy, and saved and earned on investments. I decided that 35 years of eyeglasses was enough and just got my eyes improved to better than 20-20 thru state-of-the-art Zyoptix Lasik. I do not intend to go backwards in any manner, including auto-transport.

    I want the maximum capabilities in everything I buy (that I can afford). I want James Bond's car type capabilities if I can get it. More power sure fits in there.

    Using a quote from another famous British institution - or is that German now? - Rolls Royce - the power of their engines used to be what? answer: "more than adequate". That summarizes what I like whether it be an automobile, or a rifle I may take hunting.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    If people want to continue to get cars with the same or more power than my Firebird, then the competition has just begun. I believe the ZZ572 would be a nice choice instead of my LS-1. Take that Hemi's and turbo-4's.

    http://www.gmgoodwrench.com/perfpartsjsp/featured.jsp#12498772
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    you: well the F-250 was simply to make a point.

    me: don't apologize for your true feelings. Be like me and Jim Carrey in Liar, Liar! Tell the truth and don't be ashamed by the politically correct.

    If you want to add some more power to that F-250 ( you must be talking a diesel with that torque?); if so check out this website: http://www.bankspower.com/ Don't miss the twin-turbo section (up to 1100hp!!)
  • boaz47boaz47 Member Posts: 2,747
    I wasn't apologizing for the F-250. we got it for just the purpose I said we use it. The Banks kit is pretty cool but I am thinking of propane injection first. It is a bit like NOS for diesel. But trucks seem to be headed in the same direction don't they? More power and bigger trucks. I hear very few people calling for smaller less powerful trucks. At least other than Nippon. And there aren't enough like him to cause manufacturers to produce them. The last Mini-truck I remember is the Baja. Not exactly flying out of the lots in the truck market now are they? "He says with a friendly smirk cast in nippon's direction."
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    right on smirking there boaz! :-)

    You, of course, represent the majority (with kernick perhaps representing the extreme end of the spectrum?!).

    I will continue to rant on in the darkness about how little we consider all the long-term ramifications of these pointlessly powerful vehicles we buy, and people will go right on wanting more more more at all times.

    I read with some amusement a blurb from Jay Leno at the back of last week's Autoweek: he took someone out for a ride in his 1000-hp (that's ONE THOUSAND) '66 Toronado, then a back-to-back ride in his McLaren, and when he asked the guy afterwards what he thought, he said "yeah, the McLaren is pretty cool, but it aint no '66 Toronado!".

    I imagine that as small a minority as I am in, Jay's Toronado will have lots of similarly-powered peers at a dealer's lot near you by around 2020. :sick:

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • starrow68starrow68 Member Posts: 1,142
    The question is how many people can afford too much HP, and I'm not talking 250/300HP. When you get past 400hp the current cost is over $35k and more likely up in the $50k range. That has to be somewhat of a limiter. Many suggest that you can't use all the HP on public roads but 0-60 is still legal and I can get my foot on the floor every so often with 350hp, so it can be used even if not all the the time. And it gets low 20's in mixed driving which which is close to the former econobox it replaced, which I did drive foot on the floor most of the time.

    As to modded engines, they are everywhere, another good reason to take it to the track and not mess around on the streets.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    yes, but what those expensive 400+ hp cars do is set precedent. Then they gradually become more common and lower-priced, until one day 20 years from now some magazine article somewhere will read: " while the previous generation Corolla had a LOWLY 400 hp, the new 2021 model with 425 hp can finally accelerate in decent fashion".

    For every driver there is a car with a perfectly matched power level. For all the pedal-to-the-metal folks, I imagine that perfect power level is fairly high. But just know that you will be able to employ that power for shorter and shorter bursts as the years go by and cars get "better" (read: more powerful).

    I will say it again: :sick:

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    One of the side-benefits, I see of people buying more powerful vehicles, is that these vehicles cruise along at rather high speeds; many people unwittingly so. I believe that when enough people are ignoring the speed limits, which I think we're pretty close to, more people will pressure their lawmakers to make some realistic speed limits. When enough people get tickets for during 75mph in a 65 mph zone, maybe we'll get the cops out of their speed-traps, stop harassing commuters and work on catching dangerous criminals. If there are unsolved murders, robberies, and rapes, I think the police should prioritize their time.

    No more 55 or 65 mph speedlimits on a 2-mile straightaway in clear weather. Then yes we'll be able to use more of that power.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    you: while the previous generation Corolla had a LOWLY 400 hp, the new 2021 model with 425 hp can finally accelerate in decent fashion".

    me: that is the general trend; but there is a physical limit to how much power you can get out of an engine without affecting mpg; and CAFE doesn't appear to be going away. So as long as CAFE doesn't go away you're going to need high mpg vehicles to offset the even higher power cars.
    Unless of course hybrid technology allows the high power for short-periods of time, and gives the higher mpg.

    But there should be higher mpg / lower power cars always available, as some people who buy "new", can barely afford the car they buy. So if you're counting every $, you're obviously not going to be able to afford much money for gas. So what are we left with? Poorer people driving the smaller, higher mpg cars, and people who have money buying the powerful, don't care about mpg cars. Poorer people will still wish for more, not really wanting a small slower car, but economically not having a choice.
  • tpetpe Member Posts: 2,342
    I read a week or so ago that the EPA was going to modify their formula for establishing mpg estimates to better reflect real world values. This is going to result in significantly lower mileage ratings. What will this do to CAFE since most automakers are barely meeting this standard?
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    They will continue to do the old test for CAFE compliance purposes. The new test will only determine what appears in the new car window sticker.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    They will continue to do the old test for CAFE compliance purposes. The new test will only determine what appears in the new car window sticker.

    The thing I wonder is if this will cause a major shift in consumer buying patterns, after their cherished V-6 sedans are rated around 18 mpg, with even the class-leading 4-cyl midsizers rated only around 25. Will they shift away from the more powerful cars, or even go a step further and downsize for their next purchase?

    A year will tell the story - they have to have the new ratings ready for the 2008 model year.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • starrow68starrow68 Member Posts: 1,142
    Just what I remember reading but the sticker mileage numbers are not what is used for the CAFE calculation. That may not make any sense but it is what I understand, they have another set of data. Therefore, the change to a new EPA approach won't make any difference.
  • starrow68starrow68 Member Posts: 1,142
    Just what I remember reading but the sticker mileage numbers are not what is used for the CAFE calculation. That may not make any sense but it is what I understand, they have another set of data. Therefore, the change to a new EPA approach won't make any difference.
  • boaz47boaz47 Member Posts: 2,747
    I am sure you were just tossing that out as a conversation starter. No one pays attention to what the rating is on their vehicle. No one believes they will get the city and highways averages they see posted. They know they will get less mileage and will always ask other owners what they get even if they know what the sticker says.

    To be honest I think it will take something pretty drastic to get people moving in a new direction. I don't the EPA will be all that drastic. I know my vehicle get way better Highway mileage than what it was rated under the old system.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Hold it! I will have to counter your statement by stating emphatically that I ALWAYS expect to make the EPA rating I see posted, and in fact I have never failed to. Even in sporty cars where I never spared the horses if I felt like speeding things up.

    In 20 years of car-buying, I haven't bought a single one where I did not get at least the city rating for my around-town-driving, and could not exceed the highway rating for long drives. Not one.

    Now I hope this new system will provide that level of information accuracy to the majority of consumers, but I am not convinced EPA has the ability to pull it off, and that even if they do, there will not be politics in the way of downgrading the bulk of most manufacturers' fleets to sub-20 mpg ratings.

    I am a cynic, I know! :-)

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    "...I ALWAYS expect to make the EPA rating I see posted, and in fact I have never failed to. Even in sporty cars where I never spared the horses if I felt like speeding things up."

    I'm sufficiently acquainted with your postings to know you're credible, nippononly, but the comments of others, and the admission by the EPA, regarding the realism of the current mileage ratings, has me puzzled. How do you account for the divergence (?!) between your experience and that of others?
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,545
    I've always been able to get the city and highway ratings in the said uses. That does exclude -10 degree type starts and idling to melt ice which occurs rarely here in beautiful Ohio. My LeSabre is doing 23 in lowest short trip driving - equivalent to city driving; rating is 19.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • socala4socala4 Member Posts: 2,427
    From the original post:

    Should this divergence be addressed through horsepower adjustments, raising speed limits to reflect handling, braking and electronic safety advances, or is there little cause for concern?

    I don't personally see a divergence between horsepower and speed limits, but I do see a divergence between the speed limits and the capability of cars (and accordingly, drivers) to maintain higher speeds more safely.

    The modern car is much safer than its predecessors. Not only do they have better active safety equipment (tires, brakes, handling), but they also benefit from improved passive systems (airbags, seat belts, better crush zones, etc.

    Studies show that drivers drive at speeds at which they feel comfortable, which is a function of the vehicle they drive, road conditions, and the design speed of the highway. When the cars improve, the improvements effectively increase the design speed of the highway for that driver, because the car can maintain a higher speed than can an inferior car at a lower speed.

    Horsepower is more of a symptom than a cause. A person who buys a V8 Mustang is more likely to want to drive faster than one who buys a Kia. That doesn't mean that all Mustang drivers have a desire to drive more quickly than all Kia drivers, but to the extent that the choice of car reflects the attitudes of the owner, we can expect that horsepower is an indicator of attitude and behavior, not a motivator. As horsepower becomes more ubiquitous, more drivers who won't bother really using it will have it, too, so it won't mean much -- the V6 Camry driver is not likely to behave much differently from the owner of the four-cylinder version. Drivers will gradually increase their speed on interstates, but that's largely because they are able to stop and turn more effectively, not due to their improved 0-60 times.

    Where there is a greater divergence is between horsepower and the price of oil and fuel. I have to wonder whether the horsepower wars will ultimately be halted because of higher priced gas. We can use turbocharging, hybrid technology, etc. to improve fuel economy to a point, but at the end of the day, a more powerful engine is going to burn more gas.
  • tpetpe Member Posts: 2,342
    "but at the end of the day, a more powerful engine is going to burn more gas."

    I'm not sure that I believe that. To me higher power indicates the potential to burn more gas. A 400 hp car can burn gas a lot faster than a 150 hp car. But if these two cars are cruising down a highway, side by side, at 70 mph and it only requires 50 hp to maintain that speed I don't see why the 400 hp car necessarily has to be burning more gas. I think about 5 years back the Corvette had the same highway mileage rating as the 6 cyl Accord even though it had roughly twice the horsepower. The 3.0L BMWs are rated the same or higher than their 2.5L counterparts. I agree that high powered cars tend to not be the most fuel efficient. I just don't agree that it has to be that way. At least the corellation doesn't have to be that significant. Meaning a bump of 10% in hp shouldn't reflect anywhere near that kind of sacrifice in fuel efficiency, unless you regularly drive in a manner that utilizes most of your available power.
  • socala4socala4 Member Posts: 2,427
    But if these two cars are cruising down a highway, side by side, at 70 mph and it only requires 50 hp to maintain that speed I don't see why the 400 hp car necessarily has to be burning more gas.

    Good point. But the more powerful car is most likely to use more power even during routine operations.

    There are ways to reduce the effects, such as with turbocharging or shutting down portions of the engine during cruising, and better aerodynamics, improved gearing, etc. can help. But for the most part, the more powerful motor is more likely to use more power most of the time, and that power usage is going to use fuel. If an engine makes its peak power somewhere within a relatively low portion of the powerband, the engine will spend much of its life in this range.
  • nitromaxnitromax Member Posts: 640
    A 400 hp car can burn gas a lot faster than a 150 hp car. But if these two cars are cruising down a highway, side by side, at 70 mph and it only requires 50 hp to maintain that speed I don't see why the 400 hp car necessarily has to be burning more gas.

    It's probably safe to say that the higher HP car will be running at a higher HP to maintain the 70 mph than the lower HP car.
    Bigger eingine, bigger tranny, more rotating mass (4 extra pistons, heavier duty components) more friction.

    So in your example, if the 150 HP car is cruising 70MPH with 50 HP, the 400 HP car is cruising 70MPH at *say* 100 HP. All hypothetical of course.
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,351
    I do see a divergence between the speed limits and the capability of cars (and accordingly, drivers) to maintain higher speeds more safely.

    Cars? Yes..... Drivers..... HAH! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Not a chance. With regard to drivers, the only difference over time is the speed at which the less apt drivers wreck their cars by not respecting the limitations of the environment. Well, the other difference is that often those same drivers more frequently get a second chance nowadays. ;)

    This is not to say that there are not plenty of good, capable drivers out there. It is only to say that a major component of being such a driver is to know and act based on the limitations of oneself and one's automobile at all times and in all conditions.

    In the age of "it's not my responsibility," do you truly think that the average driver is more capable than in years past? I would argue the opposite.
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Well, when we have had threads about driving habits and fuel economy tips and whatnot in the past, I have observed that my driving style, which I follow unthinkingly as it is second nature after 20 years, is actually very conservative when viewed against the backdrop of how most drivers drive.

    I don't do jack rabbit starts ever, I know they won't get me where I am going any faster most of the time. I let the speed drop without my foot on the gas if I know the light ahead is red and I will have to stop anyway. I do my best (without getting over-the-top about it) to combine trips so that no trip is super-short (less than 2 or 3 miles). And I hold my speed down to the posted limit on the highway (which usually puts me in the slow lane going 5-10 mph slower than the flow of traffic).

    I live in the burbs, so folks living in the city will have a harder time than I will getting good mpg in town.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • socala4socala4 Member Posts: 2,427
    In the age of "it's not my responsibility," do you truly think that the average driver is more capable than in years past?

    I never claimed that current drivers were better, but that they are less likely to get into trouble given the improved technology and engineering at their disposal. As noted on the speed limit thread, average travel speeds are increasing slightly over time, yet fatality rates fall.

    I realize that people like to complain about other peoples' driving, but statistically, it is actually achieving better results over time. As I noted there, people who get righteous about their driving tend to fixate on other peoples' perceived flaws and complain, while assuming that they aren't part of the problem. (The average driver considers himself to be above average, which is statistically impossible.)
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    the real crux of this whole thing is embodied in something you said: "Studies show that drivers drive at speeds at which they feel comfortable, which is a function of the vehicle they drive, road conditions, and the design speed of the highway"

    The fact is, cars are designed to higher and higher limits, so that drivers are less and less aware of the danger they are posing as their speeds increase.

    Highway design speeds, OTOH, have not changed one whit since the interstate system was proposed in the 50s. Which means the higher speeds and additional hp pose more of a threat to public safety with every passing year.

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • boaz47boaz47 Member Posts: 2,747
    I would have to ask if you are representative of any form of majority of buyer who looks at the MPG sticker on the car window, and I contend that most people only use it as a gross generalization, then why would the EPA have to change the rating system. If we for a minute believe the rating system has any effect on real life driving habits how did someone ever decide to investigate the rating in the first place?

    I just don't think many people care and they assume the mileage may differ as the car adds most often point out.
  • socala4socala4 Member Posts: 2,427
    The fact is, cars are designed to higher and higher limits, so that drivers are less and less aware of the danger they are posing as their speeds increase.

    I am not going to rehash the other thread, but the association of speed and danger is a common mythology not demonstrated by decades of study. When appropriate for conditions and when modest levels of speed variance are maintained, cars can travel at higher speeds while having fewer accidents. Most accidents are not speed related, and we would better off if we addressed driving holistically, rather than assuming in a kneejerk fashion that Speed=Death.

    Highway design speeds, OTOH, have not changed one whit since the interstate system was proposed in the 50s.

    Not true. Design speeds, particularly on freeways, are largely a function of the ability of cars to perform on the highways. With improved tires, handling and braking, cars go faster more safely than they once could. Implicitly, those improvements increase the design speed of the road.

    Or in simple terms, you can drive a new Honda Accord faster with greater safety than you can a Model T. Even if each had identical engines and acceleration capabilities, the Honda would be a far safer car.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    Okay, good explanation. I also, with rare exception, accelerate slowly to moderately and anticipate conditions so that, where possible, I let up on the accelerator rather than apply the brakes to decelerate. My speed on the highway is less conservative than yours, however.
  • tpetpe Member Posts: 2,342
    I'm not an automotive engineer so a lot of my posts are pure speculation on my part. About 8 years ago I rented a Geo Metro, don't ask me why, I think it was all they had left. Anyway, I drove it for about 300 miles, non-stop, at around 70-75 mph with the air conditioner on. I didn't even average 30 mpg, more like 28. At the time I owned a 1994 BMW 325 that weighed about 1200 lbs more and was rated at, I think, 180 hp as opposed to the Metro's 80 hp. From experience I guarantee that I would have gotten the same or better mileage in the BMW. What's my point you might be asking? Engines are not their most efficient when pushed to the limit of their power. Therefore as speed limits continue to climb having engines that can maintain that speed while somewhat loafing might be the most efficient way to go. Certainly doesn't represent a big penalty. On the other hand, stop and go city driving will almost alway result in the smaller car getting the better mpg. With hybrids not such a big difference.
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,351
    Sure, a current driver is less likely to "get into trouble" in terms of losing control of a vehicle, but only when comparing similar speeds to years past. Once you start changing all the variables (speed, vehicle, technology, etc), comparison is no longer possible.

    The statistical results are better, and that is wonderful, but it is not due to added capability on the part of the driver.

    The only "problem" I see in terms of a divergence between horsepower (or, probably more appropriately, vehicle capability) and speed limits is when and where a person chooses to utilize the capability of the machine at hand. That is a driver problem and has nothing to do with speed limits or horsepower.
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • socala4socala4 Member Posts: 2,427
    Engines are not their most efficient when pushed to the limit of their power.

    That's true, and your Metro may well have been maxed out and wheezing at would have been a normal performance range for your BMW. (FWIW, I drove a Metro once, and it was an awful car.) But there are a lot of other differences between them, such as gearing, as well as the driving style you likely used, i.e. you likely drove the Metro harder because you were trying to extract more of its performance than you would have from the more enjoyable BMW.

    Nitromax gave a very good answer. I realize that there are exceptions, i.e. 944 Turbos were using the same amounts of fuel as Corvettes during rallies, because at 10/10ths, both were producing roughly equal amounts of power. But in real world cruising, a 2.0 liter 4 cylinder motor should get better fuel economy than would an 8-cylinder version of the same car.
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,351
    Much agreed.

    I have found that when driving at 69-70 on a 65mph roadway, I get about 25 mpg in my '96 Subaru. But, if I try to kick that up to around 75 or 80 on highways with higher SLs in the lower 48 (such as Washington, Montana, Wyoming), my mileage drops considerably and is not worth the time saved to me. I end up driving at 70 anyway just to keep my vehicle within a more efficient operating range. And that is with a 4-cylinder engine! I am certain that there are 6s out there, and maybe even 8s that could claim at least that mileage at those speeds.
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • socala4socala4 Member Posts: 2,427
    That is a driver problem and has nothing to do with speed limits or horsepower.

    Exactly right, the driver is the ultimate determinant of how power gets used or abused. Horsepower may give the driver more room for abuse, but it is perfectly possible to drive dangerously with minimal horsepower.

    And let's bear in mind that dangerous driving is possible without ever "speeding." Most accidents are not speed-related, and DUI remains the largest cause. Taking away keys and licenses would more helpful than would taking away horsepower (although admittedly, the horsepower doesn't help.)
  • socala4socala4 Member Posts: 2,427
    I have found that when driving at 69-70 on a 65mph roadway, I get about 25 mpg in my '96 Subaru. But, if I try to kick that up to around 75 or 80 on highways with higher SLs in the lower 48 (such as Washington, Montana, Wyoming), my mileage drops considerably and is not worth the time saved to me. I end up driving at 70 anyway just to keep my vehicle within a more efficient operating range. And that is with a 4-cylinder engine! I am certain that there are 6s out there, and maybe even 8s that could claim at least that mileage at those speeds.

    Assuming equal driving behaviors at both speeds, your experience is typical. In Europe, fuel consumption is measured at both 90 and 120 km/h cruising (56 and 75 mph), and fuel consumption is almost without exception better at the lower speed.

    Now, that does not mean that drivers in the real world will always get better results, because the individual's driving style may differ at 55 than at 75, but in large part, there should be some modest benefit if all things are kept equal.
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Member Posts: 4,600
    I once rented a Metro 1.3L 4 cylinder. In defense of the disappointing mileage of these cars, the rentals were equipped with 3-speed automatics, with a low geared final ratio, so they ran at very high rpms on the highway. I'm not saying they were great driving cars, because they weren't, but the 5-speed manual ones delivered outstanding fuel economy, and felt much more relaxed at highway speeds.
This discussion has been closed.