Richard Casto wrote:
Generally I agree. But I have a slightly different opinion...
I don't know if it is a "problem", but the existance of these types of cars are a recent "fact". I wouldn't say these are "cheap', for a given level of performance, they are dropping in price and it is opening up to a MUCH larger audience of potential buyers. I don't think that they are limiting the safety gear, but rather just pushing the envelope with regards to government safety regulations. US (and probably generally the same elsewhere) regulations are geared toward your typical 2L or under econoboxes, minivans and is just now getting up to speed with how to deal with SUVs.
I agree. I'm not for government mandated safety regs. I'm for every track and club having some sense and not letting these car owners play until they have the proper safety gear for their performance level. Then either people won't buy them to take to the track, -or- they'll mostly just be garage queens. Either one is fine with me.
Quote:
Ultra high performance cars has historically been a niche that the government just lumps in with everything else. It passes the standard low (relatively) crash tests, emission tests, etc. and it is ready to go! Now who should be responsable for any additional "safety" features that fit more with the high performance of these cars? If driven within the speed limit, these cars SHOULD generally not be any worse off than anything else. So maybe the government will just wash their hands of the entire affair (right or wrong).
I dunno. I don't believe in seat belt laws or motorcycle helmet laws. That said, I'm very glad we have a government entity that does at least mandate manufacturers do adequate testing and equip cars with those features for me to use as I see fit. I have my motorcycle endorsement, and I'll always ride with a helmet on, even in states where no law requires me to do so.
Quote:
I personally think it is up to the manufactures to take the lead on making the cars safer. I don't know if this means full cages, or what, but if (for example) they beef up the brakes because of the higher HP, then they should beef up the safety features.
You can want them to do it, but the end result is they aren't going to without consumer pressure or government pressure. I don't believe there would ever be adequate consumer pressure to have developed the airbag (no, let's not start the debate on whether that would be a good thing or not).
Quote:
Interestingly enough I think the new Porsche GT3 is going to come with stability control standard (previous model didn't). I think I read that this is because there was a number of people who put their previous GT3s into tire walls, etc. because it is a "drivers car" and maybe just a bit hard to drive at the limit. Solution? Make stability control standard. Purist cry foul, but hey, if you just hadn't wrecked the car we wouldn't have had to force the computer on you and let is save your butt sometimes!
*shrug* You can still turn it off.
Quote:
The Porsche Carrera GT is a similar issue. There seems to have been a rash of guys wrecking those things. I don't think it is that they are any worse than anything else to drive, it is just that a bunch of upper crust suddenly was able to afford a car that previously was just barely out of reach. Can't afford an Enzo? Buy a Carrera GT? Bingo! We have a new candidate for getting cozzy with the tire wall or a tree somewhere.
Still, if I had the cash, I would buy something like a Carrera GT in a heartbeat.
Exactly. So now we'll have a car out there built in larger numbers than the CGT and at a cost of about 1/3 to 1/4 of a CGT. So you instantly enable an even larger number of people to get into that same trouble.
I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed to, I'm just saying that my fear is the likelihood we're going to have a truly high profile death and the blame is going to be put on the *car* by the media. There are a lot of problems with that, obviously (guns don't kill people, people do, etc), but pointing out those problems will get lost in the noise while the media lambasts the manufacturers, the lobbyists crank up against them, politicians that want to get elected start trying to "protect the kids" from these terrible menaces, and worst of all, insurance companies punish the rest of us trying to have a little relatively safe fun.
--Donnie
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
) I think that the real burden is on us as clubs and the tracks to make sure that we are doing a good job screening the people who run with us and our instructors to make sure that if someone is acting like an idiot and driving outside of their limits no matter what car they drive that we modify their behavior or don't let them participate. Unfortunately, racing, HPDEs, even AX to some extent is dangerous and mistakes will happen and people will be killed, hurt, and cars will be damaged, these events just have to be minimized and not just by having people sign a waiver. 
) is relatively low and the number that participate in high performance driving stuff (HPDE's and Time Trials) is smaller still. Most Vette owners (Steve) are waxers who keep their Vettes in the garage and race something less expensive like BMWs 
Even less really high performance cars like Carrera GTs, Ferraris of any kind etc and the number of those that have accidents that involve bodily injury are an even smaller subset. These people pay high insurance premiums anyway because of the cost of replacement parts. Bet that guy whose Ferrari got stolen and wrapped around a pole will pay really high rates from now on. 
) But the noise will die down (pun intended) in about 2 weeks when the media and the public's attention span wanders and as usual nothing will happen