Are we headed for a second mid-nineties?
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,148
Likes: 0
From: SLC, UT
Originally Posted by triman54,Nov 20 2007, 04:07 AM
Higher gas prices don't necessarily mean that there will be a mass extinction in performance cars. First, as a percentage of total auto production, performance cars are rather low. I bet that world-wide Honda for instance sells substantially fewer than 10,000 S2000's. So these cars always appeal to a more limited number of consumers. If sales drop the manufacturers may be forced to use components that are used in other models such as engines, accessory components, etc., but many manufacturers do this already anyway.
Second, higher gas prices may not be bad for the performance car market, but they may cause buyers to change the paradigm of what constitutes a performance car. Big engineed cars, like Vettes and Vipers and Mustangs appeal to our sense of speed, playing off that old troupe that there is no substitute for cubic inches. But is this true? I recently drove a Lotus Exige for the first time. While I don't think I ever would buy one (the build quality really is Neolithic), I would be hard pressed to name any other car that is more entertaining for the driver. The S2000 is another car that does the same, albeit to a lesser extent than an Exige which has a surfeit of driver involvement. Even the MX-5 is a fun car with a great gearbox and agile reflexes. Each of these cars can be driven economically if the need be.
Cars can be entertaining and fun without having engines powerful enough to generate electricity for a Third World Country.
Second, higher gas prices may not be bad for the performance car market, but they may cause buyers to change the paradigm of what constitutes a performance car. Big engineed cars, like Vettes and Vipers and Mustangs appeal to our sense of speed, playing off that old troupe that there is no substitute for cubic inches. But is this true? I recently drove a Lotus Exige for the first time. While I don't think I ever would buy one (the build quality really is Neolithic), I would be hard pressed to name any other car that is more entertaining for the driver. The S2000 is another car that does the same, albeit to a lesser extent than an Exige which has a surfeit of driver involvement. Even the MX-5 is a fun car with a great gearbox and agile reflexes. Each of these cars can be driven economically if the need be.
Cars can be entertaining and fun without having engines powerful enough to generate electricity for a Third World Country.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 7,029
Likes: 2
From: In the heart of the USSA!
Originally Posted by Legal Bill,Nov 19 2007, 04:14 PM
As someone who lived and drove through the 70s and early 80s, I can tell you that a repeat of the mid 90s is the least of our worries.
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,863
Likes: 125
From: Pawtucket, RI
Originally Posted by YoZUpZ,Nov 20 2007, 08:48 AM
last I checked, Vettes get better gas mileage than s2000s
S2k = 18/25
I'd bet that for 99% of all usage (i.e., just about anything other than the EPA highway cycle), the S2k will get better mileage.
FWIW, my '95 Z28 convertible was rated 17/26, and my '01 S2k is rated 20/26. For my ~85% highway, 15% city commute, I got 22mpg in the Camaro, and I get 27mpg in the Honda.
GM's CAGS and super-tall 6th gear give the Corvette more optimistic EPA mileage ratings. Thankfully Honda didn't inflict these gimmicks on the S2000!
Still, the Corvette does get *remarkable* mileage for a car that weighs 3250 lb. and has a 430hp big-displacement V8.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 15,323
Likes: 28
From: Longmont, CO
Here's an interesting data point. It's the gas milage from R&T's Best All-Around Sports car comparison a while back. Notice that the S2000 is the ONLY car that does better than its city EPA rating?
Car - EPA - their observed
Z4 3.0i - 21/29 - 18.2
Corvette - 18/28 - 12.9
Viper - 12/20 - 10.0
S2000 - 20/25 - 23.3
Elise - 26/38 - 19.2
SLK350 - 18/25 - 16.4
350Z - 20/26 - 14.4
Boxster S - 19/26 - 15.4
Carrera S - 19/26 - 16.2
Car - EPA - their observed
Z4 3.0i - 21/29 - 18.2
Corvette - 18/28 - 12.9
Viper - 12/20 - 10.0
S2000 - 20/25 - 23.3
Elise - 26/38 - 19.2
SLK350 - 18/25 - 16.4
350Z - 20/26 - 14.4
Boxster S - 19/26 - 15.4
Carrera S - 19/26 - 16.2
Former Moderator
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 59,195
Likes: 1
From: Ventura, California, USA
Those cars in the 90s, especially the 300zx and Supra essentially were overengineered and priced themselves out of the market. They were running 60k for the top ones. That was a lot of cashola considering the prices that the 350z and the gtr are going for.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 15,323
Likes: 28
From: Longmont, CO
1996 Supra Turbo (last Supra sold in the US): MSRP $50,400
In 2007 dollars, that's $67,115. 320 hp, automatic only.
Heck, the 220 hp N/A version was 38,600 new - that's $51,401 today!
A 1995 RX-7 was $37,800 new - that's $51,822 it today's dollars, for a car only somewhat faster than an S2000.
In 2007 dollars, that's $67,115. 320 hp, automatic only.
Heck, the 220 hp N/A version was 38,600 new - that's $51,401 today!
A 1995 RX-7 was $37,800 new - that's $51,822 it today's dollars, for a car only somewhat faster than an S2000.
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 11,950
Likes: 474
From: MAHT-O-MEDI
I see that a lot of people mentioned gas prices, but my other point was that insurance was one of the major factors that put the 90's cars into extinction. It is hard for me to guage what rates are for some people because I am now 37 and as a second car, my S2000 rates are really low. But start to put affordable 300hp Hyundais into the hands of the masses and how many get wrapped around trees?
Yeah, there are a lot of performance models out there and on the horizon, but as was noted, they sell in small numbers compared to average cars. They also bring small profit numbers, and would be easy to ax.
I personally don't see it coming with all of the models coming out, but it makes me wonder that with the plethora of choices, the automakers will all be competing for a small number of performance car buyers. Maybe that could make profits on high HP cars razor thin.
Dunno. Just thought there was something in the air that is not quite right. $9 trillion in national debt, Chinese own a lot of it, record consumer debt, housing in the tank, stock market falling, oil and gas rising, and maybe even HILARY!!!!!
Can't be good for performance models.
Yeah, there are a lot of performance models out there and on the horizon, but as was noted, they sell in small numbers compared to average cars. They also bring small profit numbers, and would be easy to ax.
I personally don't see it coming with all of the models coming out, but it makes me wonder that with the plethora of choices, the automakers will all be competing for a small number of performance car buyers. Maybe that could make profits on high HP cars razor thin.
Dunno. Just thought there was something in the air that is not quite right. $9 trillion in national debt, Chinese own a lot of it, record consumer debt, housing in the tank, stock market falling, oil and gas rising, and maybe even HILARY!!!!!
Can't be good for performance models.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,287
Likes: 1
From: UCF Knights!
There's a simple solution to all of this, and one that will save our environment as well. Gut the gas tank and fuel lines, and replace with a 7500 psi carbon fiber tank and fill it with hydrogen gas, derived from a small electrolysis machine at your house that separates distilled water (or filtered rain water) into hydrogen and oxygen gas via electricity from solar panels on your roof. Add a pressure regulator to reduce pressure in the gas line to the injector rail, do the math on the internal energy correlation between 93 octane and H2, retune your AEM injector duty cycles to account for the difference in hydrogen vs gasoline to burn at the same air/fuel ratio, and run your friggin car on water. Done. I'm going to do this to the S in a few years, after a few more thermodynamics classes
Former Moderator
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 59,195
Likes: 1
From: Ventura, California, USA
Originally Posted by wildcardtrd,Nov 21 2007, 12:21 PM
There's a simple solution to all of this, and one that will save our environment as well. Gut the gas tank and fuel lines, and replace with a 7500 psi carbon fiber tank and fill it with hydrogen gas, derived from a small electrolysis machine at your house that separates distilled water (or filtered rain water) into hydrogen and oxygen gas via electricity from solar panels on your roof. Add a pressure regulator to reduce pressure in the gas line to the injector rail, do the math on the internal energy correlation between 93 octane and H2, retune your AEM injector duty cycles to account for the difference in hydrogen vs gasoline to burn at the same air/fuel ratio, and run your friggin car on water. Done. I'm going to do this to the S in a few years, after a few more thermodynamics classes
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 11,950
Likes: 474
From: MAHT-O-MEDI
I saw the guy who did that on science channels "ECOTECH" to a ford Taurus. Would be great to have a little runabout Civic/Corrola style car that does this. You would never have to worry about not having fuel unless it is cloudy for a month. He says he built it all with "off the shelf parts" but it was still several hundred grand for all the stuff he had at his house. Silicone solar panels make it too expensive but cheap plastic ones are right around the corner.