MINI (Mk II -R56) 2006-2013

[Ferrer]

I don't think that (unfortunately) speed will ever be fashionable again. My point of view is that sports and sporty cars will evolve towards acceleration and handling rather than outright speed.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Speed will definately never go out of fashion.

It's considered dangerous, the authorities hate it....It's tailor made for kids to love it.

[Ferrer]

But somewhat, speeding used to be ok in the olden days, even sometimes something to be proud of. I'm speaking of 15 or 20 years ago. Then you could do Barcelona-Madrid (~600km) in 4 hours in your BMW 535i and everything was ok.

Today though if you do the same, apart from losing your license, and therefore your job, your wife, your house, etcetera, you are regarded as a criminal both morally because you are killing the planet and physically because you are an assassin who doesn't care about life.

So yes, speed has its appeal I agree very much with that. However it seems to be disappearing from the real world.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Certainly it's being treated far more harshly than it once was, but thats kind of my point - it's being pushed underground and there are those who would speed illegally who wreck it for the rest of us.

It's an interesting comparison because the Speed Nazi's who are keen to limit everyone and keep them in line have only recently adopted a "Green" argument to their cause - Fuel consumption non-withstanding.

When the speed nazis and enviro-mentals get together to control the way we travel - and heaven forbid restrict it, there will be trouble. Remember Ken Livingstone's plan to charge 25 pounds for people to enter London city? Remember how that (amongst other things) got him voted out?

The fact remains that, for the most part, speed is relied upon by some governments for a source of income, and the margins for error are being tightened. When there are arguments made that "excessive speed" caused an accident that could very well mean that person was travelling within the limit - but not travelling to the conditions.

I'm somewhat off topic (forgive me, I am Australian) but speed is still something that advertisers use to evoke the beauty of the automobile. Speed is not the problem, it's the sudden stop that'll kill you. As will inattention and bored drivers who spend 8 hours doing a route that could 98% of the time be safely carried out in 6.

[Ferrer]

I can only agree with you there.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Well thats not very exciting, is it

[f6fhellcat13]

I will disagree then.
People are stupid and see driving as a right not a privilege, and treat it as such.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

personal transportation is a privilege of the wealthy western bourgeois, for sure.

The solution appears to be simple, and will please the green party and the speed-nazis.

Make licenses harder to get. less people on the road means less Carbon emissions, and the speed nazis know those with licenses are relatively intelligent enough to avoid speed.

[Ferrer]

I will disagree then.
People are stupid and see driving as a right not a privilege, and treat it as such.

But that's precisely the problem.

Those who do 150-170km/h in the motorway but respect the safety distance, always check the mirrors, indicate when changing lanes and never undertake are done for speeding.

And those who stick to the limit but tailgate you, never indicate or bother about what surrounds them when driving and always undertake or think the road is thiers are fine.

So it's not safety, or environment or anything. They just want to annoy us for the sake of annying (speed nazis and enviro-mentals) or get money from you (the gorvenment).

[f6fhellcat13]

But that's precisely the problem.

Those who do 150-170km/h in the motorway but respect the safety distance, always check the mirrors, indicate when changing lanes and never undertake are done for speeding.

And those who stick to the limit but tailgate you, never indicate or bother about what surrounds them when driving and always undertake or think the road is thiers are fine.

Exactly, while speed may not be the direct problem, bad drivers speeding is. Collateral damage is reduced by ensuring that the stupid people are moving at a slower speed.

Most cops I have encountered are relatively tolerant of the unspoken wiggle room within the speed limit. This is another problem with using speed cameras and whatnot. I am so glad we don't have them (except at traffic lights). Knock on wood.

So it's not safety, or environment or anything. They just want to annoy us for the sake of annying (speed nazis and enviro-mentals) or get money from you (the gorvenment).

You two seem to regard environmentalism as some sort of plot to rob toys from children, I however think it is a worthwhile pursuit and one that should be given more credence than it's being given. Surely is a shield to stand behind for these safety obsessed folks. After all efficiency is both mechanically interesting and many quantities that make a car frugal also make it fun/fast, which is why, as Ferrer said, the enviro-pack should just be standard.

[Ferrer]

You two seem to regard environmentalism as some sort of plot to rob toys from children, I however think it is a worthwhile pursuit and one that should be given more credence than it's being given. Surely is a shield to stand behind for these safety obsessed folks. After all efficiency is both mechanically interesting and many quantities that make a car frugal also make it fun/fast, which is why, as Ferrer said, the enviro-pack should just be standard.

I'm not agains environmentalism per se. I think not wasting resources unnecesarily is a good thing and that even if we don't cause global warming, I don't know if we do I'm not an expert, polluting less can only be a good thing. I'm also in favour of mechanical efficiency.

What I'm against are those eco-freaks that thing everything harms the planet and that basically you can't do anything because we've got preserve the planet. And that's fine, but if we can't do anything then what's the point of preserving the planet in the first place?

And then there are hybrids which are supposed to be green. Except that they aren't. Or at least not more than normal cars. The problems is, is that these days what's far more important than actually doing something is pretending you do and hybrids are great at pretending to be green. And I personally hate that. If you are green fine, but don't pretend to be green by driving around in your hybrid car. That's just hipocresy.

[Kitdy]

Does anyone have access to that study that analyzes the carbon footprint/ecological damage of a hybrid and a regular car?

[f6fhellcat13]

Precisely. I for one see the externality of "green" being cool as positive. Surely, even if people's commitment to it is vapid and hypocritical, that is a better worldwide fad than one that promotes excess. That is a stupid simplification on my part, but I hope you'll grant me that.

Sadly though, it it that very excess that seems to attract folks like us to cars. Performance cars are pretty much pointless from the standpoint of the automobile as a transportation module. I would even go as far as saying it is logically equivalent to a gold-plated diamond-studded toothbrush, or some other basic tool with, ostensibly, a single purpose. For us, for whatever reason, that lack of mundanity in cars is great and what attracts us to them. It is somewhat like art in that respect. Not necessary and of un-quantifiable benifits, but damn does it improve our lives...
I have no idea how i got here*

Sadly, hybrids and the like bring me back to my initial point about the general stupidity of any population and big bad evil multinational (only partially joking ) corporation's willingness to exploit it.

*Jesus, IB4R, your backwards-flushing toiletness seems to have rubbed off on me today.

[Ferrer]

I agree that objectively it's hard to justify our love of cars, but I would also say that it isn't quite as preposterous as a gold plated and diamond studed toothbrush. I would liken it more to a great expensive meal. Yes, technically you could do as well with a cheaper, simpler meal which solver hunger just as effectively in the same way a slow, bad habdling, dull car gets you from A to B just as well. But we actually derive utility from driving a good car, in the same way dervie utility by having a good meal or by going to watch a movie at the cinema.

So yes, it is unnecessary but if we start deciding what's necessary or not, is anything really necessary other than eating basic food and breathing? But then if only this is the point of life, what is actually the point? Shouldn't we all die because our life is pointless? On that basis I think we should be allowed to enjoy our lives, with our sportscars or in whatever way we want, but of course without producing unnecessary waste because that'd be egoistical us and wouldn't do un any good. So the green movemen is all well, we have to be efficient and use as little non-renewable resources while we are enjoying ourselves, precisely because they are non-renewable and the less we use them the more often and longer we'll be able to have fun.

Even, sometime we don't even need to go a million or have an ultra powerful and uber expensive car to have fun. Take the Ford Focus for instance, widely regarded to be one hell of a handling car. The green version makes it faster, more frugal and an even better handler courtesy of the sports suspension. So I'd say that being green can put you in a win-win situation, and that most definitely this is want of them.

So in conclusion, being green is good. Being a stupid ecomentalist that wants everyone to go back to the middle ages isn't.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

You two seem to regard environmentalism as some sort of plot to rob toys from children, I however think it is a worthwhile pursuit and one that should be given more credence than it's being given. Surely is a shield to stand behind for these safety obsessed folks. After all efficiency is both mechanically interesting and many quantities that make a car frugal also make it fun/fast, which is why, as Ferrer said, the enviro-pack should just be standard.

Allow me to explain my position.

I'm a bit of a sceptic on climate change, but that doesn't mean I think we should be doing nothing about the environment - I'm a believer that pollution is a serious hazard that has very real threats to our way of life. I just don't believe that global warming is a quantifiable result of that consumption.

Green organisations are often just as bad as the corporations they fight in terms of what they're willing to do to push their agenda. It's good if they act as advisors or with the major polluters to kerb damaging practices, but when they are put in a pious or combative position, I hold no respect for them as it is not a constructive solution to the problem.

A very good example is the "Sea Shepard" group, who I think are Pirates. Essentially I don't believe in an "us or them" mentality that these groups require.

The Green message has become so muddled with agendas and people trying to get their voice heard (and their research grant renewed) that I've become a real sceptic of the whole process.

Efficiency is great and what all things should be striving for, but by using the terms "eco, green" or "environmentally friendly" I can't help but think it cheapens the effect, because in reality that is not their main purpose in life - their environmental qualities are incidental.

Personal transportation has done more for humankind in the past 100 years in terms of trade, education, adventure, discovery, knowledge and political freedom than any single idea (internet excepted). It's the manufacturers jobs these days to make it more efficient, and that requires an entirely different train of thought to the process than a Hybrid or Hubcaps ever could hope to encourage.