As I say, believe what you want. You may not have noticed, but this is the internet; I couldn't care less whether you believe me or not.

 

I haven't really had a big position in this debate until the last year and a half, during which I've made a few trips to Asia. Seeing the massive pollution in cities like Shanghai and Penang, w/ smelly 2 stroke scooters everywhere, really made me appreciate the impact that the EPA has had. Sure, they killed muscle cars in the early 70's and increased costs for everyone, but industry took the challenge of their regs to make cars more powerful, yet cleaner and more economical, than ever. Furthermore, carbs and point ignitions have been replaced w/ highly tunable electronic ignition and fuel injection, for which EPA regs spurred their development.

I'd like a faster car, but not as much as I'd like cleaner air. It's not necessary to create excess pollution to have fun in a car.

 

Dude, logic is all about "if P then Q". It doesn't matter what P and Q are, it's either logical or its not.

I just substituted a different P to demonstrate the point.

 

Your testpipe has nothing to do with global warming. It's amazing how many people are willing to have opinions about something they obviously know nothing about.

The catalytic converter is about local air quality, not global climate.

 

[QUOTE=124Spider,Jan 21 2007, 08:18 PM]As I say, believe what you want.

 

I still find this debate to be comical in it's scope. 124Spider, I refuse to believe that you do not speed. Sorry. I know you "don't care" what I think as this is just the internet, but making obviously false claims in an attempt to further your argument just ends up hurting it. My 85 year old grandmother has been known to speed occasionally.

As for speeding contributing to traffic fatallities, I just did a simple google search for "speeding deaths, speed limits" and every link it showed me contradicted the "speeding increases deaths" argument that has so far persisted in this thread. Here's a sample:

Safe at Any Speed
With higher speed limits, our highways have been getting safer.
The Wall Street Journal
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/fe...ml?id=110008621

I think it's ridiculous that you're nannying people for speeding and polluting on an internet car enthusiasts web board. If you were as concerned about the environment as you claim, I don't think you would have an interest in motorsports, don't think you have ever purchased an S2000 and I know you wouldn't be tracking your car. What if everyone ran a test-pipe? What if everyone tracked and autocrossed their car?

You're no prince.

I think you're just bored today, don't have anything else to do and are looking for a little entertainment. If you really feel as strongly about environmental protection as you're acting like you do, there are far better ways you could have spent your day today than arguing over test-pipes here on the internet. The livestock issue is a perfect example. There are SO many other more relevant and pressing contributers to pollution than the group of S2000 owners who run test pipes.

 

There would be more tracks and better drivers.

Note, there is no reason one cannot track the car and still have the cat on it.

 

Mike, I know you're a smart guy as I see your posts in the politics forum (although I usually don't agree with your politcs). Don't act like you don't see the double standard.

 

Oh, I do. But I'm used to it. My job is to (simultaneously) reduce emissions from the products my company sells at the same time as it is to encourage people to buy and use our products.

I happen to think those are compatible goals -- the more I can help us reduce the environmental impact of out products, the more of them we can sell.

So you see, I'm familiar with the conflict.

Part of the way I resolve that, however, is reserving my environmental impact for things that are important to me. In my case, I think tracking the car is important enough to my pleasure that I do it, even though it is purely a waste of energy to drive very fast in circles and get to the same place you started from. But I don't rationalize it away -- I recognize it is a selfish impact on the environment.

Partially to compensate for that, I also do other things to help the environment.

In this particular case, though, there really is no justification for removing the cat on a street car -- in my opinion, anyway. You don't need to do so, it doesn't really help you much, it's illegal, and it pollutes the air for your friends and neighbors.

 

Thanks for the explanation. However, when doing any of the things you mention, it is quite possible to exceed the speed limit. Even if only briefly. Even if only by a little.

Accelerating in a "sporting" fashion from a stop light in say an urban setting and not exceeding a 35 or 40mph speed limit means you have fun in 1st and maybe 2nd gear and if you are watching your speedometer so closely that you would not incur in speeding I have to think this is quite a distraction, no?