Having owned a Vortech S/C, I certainly wouldn't pay to have one for free! Comptech, maybe, but my Vortech experience was a miserable, stressful, expensive one, and their customer service blows.

 

For me personally, I would say 400-450. More then that and it would be too much for me. I would end up doing something stupid. Heck, 400 would probably be too much.

 

I remember hearing a story about a kid actor who was driving a "vintage" mustang. He turned left and got hit by oncoming traffic.

The kid was an actor and he busted up his face badly. Broken teeth, lacerations on his face, etc.

His car didn't have headrests or airbags. He smashed his face on the unpadded steering wheel.

He may have thought he was "cool" driving a vintage car, but modern safety advances of the past 30 years would have allowed him to walk away with just bruises.

My AP1 doesn't have available traction control. I wish it did. I only drive the Honda in nice weather, so not as much of a concern... but still. You never know when you could use more safety.

Braking distances in the past 10 years have dropped dramatically on the best production cars. In the 90s, a stopping distance of 120 was considered excellent. In 2002, mags were amazed by 60-0 stopping distances of 115 feet. Now there are a few cars that are down to 108ft.

In 10 years, there may be cars that can stop in 95 feet. That's two car lengths shorter than the best cars of the 90s.

Mercedes has infrared for night visibility. I think Lexus and BMW have similar things.

BMW has self-drying brakes in wet weather and Lexus pre-pressurizes the brakes when anticipating a panic stop.

Multiple manufacturers have the ability to to full braking stop at the touch of a pedal when sensing an impending crash.

Lexus has blind-spot monitoring to warn you if someone is approaching from a blind spot.

Porsche has pillar side-curtain airbags on their Boxster.

Who knows what safety features will arise in the next 10 years.

But if they had GPS monitoring of road conditions and long-range surface cameras to alert of oncoming obstacles, I'd feel safer.

I'm not advocating that we rely on technology to compensate for reckless driving.

But the hp of a SC in a S2k is still less power to weight than a tame sport bike... I think not "scary fast" unless driving too fast for conditions. Maybe technology in the future will help us better assess what those conditions may be.

I'm still killing time at work.

 

have to give you credit. good points. guess time will only tell how the S holds up over time.

although, have you seen the studies that show people driving more recklessly when they think their tech safety cars will save them?

i've avoided a few accidents in the S only because it had quick turning reflexes. if i was in a more normal car, i would have been in trouble.

 

My father, among others, argues that safety is really the only thing that matters in the long run, and criticizes my decision to drive a convertible. And the post just above reminds me: I love our little, stripped-down roadster, but I would trade it if I could get full curtain airbags, and maybe also for some combination of those other features.

However, there's a hidden safety benefit of convertibles, at least for me: I drive much slower with my top down than in a roofed car, because (I guess) my need for a sense of speed is being satisfied. My normal cruising speed is usually in the 80's, occasionally 90's, but when I've had reasonably competent hardtops it's been at least 10 mph faster than that. Again, if I were completely rational this would be no issue -- but I'm not.

I think with 500 horses I still wouldn't drive a lot faster, except when it was moderately safe to do so...

 

I'll happily give up some life expectancy to have a fuller, happier life. What would you rather do, live to 90 in boredom, or to 70 having a blast the entire time?

Driving the S2000 is a great safety benefit for me, b/c w/o it I'd probably still be street riding motorcycles (and it takes away some time from dirt biking).