Honestly, once 0-60 times started dropping below 4 seconds and top speeds were above 200mph, I stopped seeing a need for better acceleration. Today most cars use an ecu that dials down acceleration because, while they need the number to make headlines and garner interest, nobody can handle acceleration that fast all the time. The cars that don't you only drive when conditions are perfect.
Anything faster than the milestones we reached in the 90's is just advertising and not useful in any practical way. Sure, it can go around a ring real fast. I know many sportscar owners, and only one of us has ever taken their car to a ring to run it.
If you could pick period in history to stop making all road cars more powerful or faster, as they feel fast enough, like the famous "Gentleman's agreement", at what point would you stop?
Poll created by JustSomeDude 1 week ago. 121 views.
More polls you should vote in
■ What would you say is the WORST Mercedes E-Class generation?
■ What do you think is the greatest Cadillac V model? (excluding race cars)
nomoreZ 5d ago
humana 6d ago
Why would you stop the horsepower wars? Malaise sucks, and you get great cars out of the deal
JustSomeDude 6d ago
Regarding malaise, it's because I'm curious about probing people's definition of quick or "quick enough". I've previously polled about this and it's something we all have different subjective ideas about and land at different parts of the spectrum over. There are road cars from any of these eras that are considered in their own right "fast" based on the driving experience and not pinned to the power factor alone, but I'm basing it from a generalist point of view, not focusing on niche picks like say a Tesla Plaid or a Lotus Elise which at their release bucked the traditional trends of making cars fast during their time (Though a lot of EVs seem to follow the Plaid approach these days).
It is purely curiosity for what people feel is "fast enough". Innovation is always welcome, but the "Gentleman's agreement" was fast but not "too fast". It's an idea that attaches some relativity to safety (and comfort, somewhat), rather than just pure speed and performance, which encompasses most of the meaning behind my poll.
gt 1w ago
10s because C6 ZR1 650HP started 103k $
Now 265/35R19F 295/30R20R RE71RZ
TH400 gearbox 1480kg 6:33 nordshleife
gt 4d ago @LotusFan
U understand that at that time you needed to pay 250k usd +inflation for a 530hp gt2 that wasnt faster at the ring right? First c6 zr1 went for a million dollars btw. 200k is lots money for a zr1 inflation or not. A taycan turbo gt will laugh at you if you decide to do say 30 laps @ laguna seca on a hot day
Corvolet3 1w ago
Late 2000s, or rather, 2009.
Think about it: the average hatchback could reach up to 300 hp back then and it really was more than enough to run with.
The average sedan like M3 or RS4 got up to 420 hp which is also a solid number: not too much, no lack of power.
And the average supercar was in the 550-650hp territory. And I gotta be honest, who really needs more? This is basically the perfect power bracket for cars. Who needs a supercar that has 1200hp because of some rinkey-dink hybrid system when it can only reach 330kph anyway?
koenigseggjesko 1w ago @Corvolet3
This car is what I travel in a lot.
https://fastestlaps.com/models/toyota-ractis
It’s honestly a tuff car, it’s fast enough and very big.
