Safe Speed Forums

. . . . . . That's what you're supposed to do !!!!
.

Well id say just this to em if they mistakenly think they can control the likes of me:

Give it your best shot and the very best of luck, youll need it.

_________________
"Safety" Scamera Partnerships;
Profitting from death and misery since 1993.

Believe nothing- Question everything.

You might well say, slowly but shorely they are?

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

Why does it always have to be a British numpty who comes up with these stupid rules.

How true this is I don't know but for many regulations the EU churn out other countries produce a leaflet our dullwits produce a 2000 page dossier with another 2000 page addendum


Give me strength

In case you didn't realise, travelling at 101mph is currently illegal on just about every road in the world (bar some minor exceptions) - how would this translate to "being slow and taking all day to go from A to B on a motorway"?

Which would you rather have?

Car A

0-62 : 9 seconds
Power: 138bhp
Torque: 200 Nm
Top speed: 140mph
Weight: 1,800kg
Fuel economy (combined) 28mpg
Emissions band: F

Car B

Power: 80 bhp
Torque: 320 Nm
0-62 : 6 seconds
Top speed: 101mph
Weight: 1,100kg
Fuel economy (combined) 60mpg
Emissions band: B

Ahem

Ahem again

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I'll take free choice in the free market, thanks. According to criteria of my own choosing. Anything less and it's viva the revolution.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

back Jec!

Like I said "...and it's a big IF..."!

The point is, it's NOT going to save lives because there are so few people killed by cars doing over 101MPH on Europe's roads and it's not going to save any appreciable amount of CO2 because so few cars do so few miles above 101MPH on Europe's roads either. Apart from that, it's an absolutely cracking idea!

I wonder, when the green zealots have got their way and there are no cars left, what will they turn their attention to then? Bikes with more than 10 gears???

Just out of interest, what are they?

Which pulls more when you need it most: overtaking when already at 60/70?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

A - looks like a modern 2 litre turbo diesel except for the fuel consumption which would be about 50mpg.
B - some kind of low revving diesel marine engine? Though the fuel consumption would be much worse and it would be heavy.

Come to think of it swap the fuel consumption and it looks about right, except for the weight.

Power/Torque is all just gearing anyway, it is what you get at the wheels that counts not what the engine produces (within limits).

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

Mmm, I'd like to know that too-given the 700kg difference in masses, I suspect we're not comparing like for like as far as load carrying ability, creature comforts etc are concerned...
Sure, I wouldn't mind swapping my 26mpg band E (iirc) engine/gearbox combo for something that'd give me better performance in the 0-90mph band, better fuel economy and reduced emissions, but like buggery am I willing to also swap the rest of the car too. I need plenty of leg/headroom, and I want climate control, a decent stereo system, enough cabin space to seat 4/5 adults in comfort, and the load carrying ability to lug half a tonne of building materials back from the supplier whenever we're next doing a spot of DIY at home. Oh yes, and mechanically/electrically sound examples, no more than 6-7 years old, have to be readily available on the second-hand market for around 3-4k. Anyone know of a "car B" which meets all of the above?

_________________
Chris

I think this is going to end up going nowhere. Other bikers will help me out with the exact dates, but around 10 years ago the EU /EEC tried getting the motorcycle manufacturers to agree to a 100bhp limit.

Honda, Kawasaki, Yamaha and Suzuki, who were and still are the only major manufacturers, agreed and for a while the EU/EEC were happy. Til one of them, Kawasaki(?), said "F*** this for a game of soldiers!" and manufatured a bike which exceeded 100bhp by a considerable margin. Since then bikes have been getting more and more powerful.

Another thought. What are they going to do with motorracing? Are they going to ban F1/GP2/Superbikes/MotoGP because the vehicles are going too fast?

_________________
Prepare to be Judged

I'd rather have this. Oh yes, I already have it...

Power: 164.00 HP (119.7 kW) @ 9500 RPM
Torque: 119.00 Nm (12.1 kgf-m or 87.8 ft.lbs) @ 7250 RPM
Top Speed 185+mph

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

Great, a pi**ing contest.

I've got:

Power: 450BHP @ 7200 RPM
Torque: 560 Nm @4250 RPM
Top Speed 186mph
0 - 100mph: 10.6 secs

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

did you notice the + after 185?
Mine's artificially restricted by the ECU, I believe...

How come it's so slow?

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus

Probably cos it's a car not a motorbike

_________________
Prepare to be Judged

52bhp (39kW) @ 9500rpm
30.86lbf-ft (41.84Nm) @ 8000
0 - 60 = 3.76s (apparently?)
Standing quarter 12.98s
Top speed 125mph

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

Ah, but it's the way you do it!

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus