160mph cars

because if they start putting the top speed they’re really capable of, then we’d see a lot more speedos top out at 85 mph, like we had in the 80s.

Every Corvette made in the last 15 years or so will easily do 160 MPH. From the C5 on,even the base model Corvettes were good for well over 160 MPH. It’s pretty common knowledge. As I mentioned before. the 80 MPH limit on the Autobahn is an advisory limit. It’s not enforced.

Well, a poster was carping recently about only being able to do 105 MPH in an Expedition while ferrying blood.

Why?

Well, so that all of those economy cars, hybrids, etc can exist.

when a manufacturer starts building high end sports cars or, in the case of nascar, begins a racing team they can test new theories…like new aerodynamics, new engine designs, etc. racins will directly lead to diplacement on demand designs that actually work. then that 30 foot long, 12 foot tall excursion your idiot neighbor has will be able to get gas respectable mileage

Then, all of that data trickles down into your average family and sports cars. Thats how we now have cars that get 35-40 mpg rather than 8-10. thats why those yuppies who like to feel so self important can buy thier little hybrids.

I think that after the underpowered garbage that passed for economy cars in the '80’s, people want more. I’ve mentioned in previous posts that I live in a hilly area. I had an '87 Ford Escort and after 7 years of it I was so sick of not being able to accelerate uphill I couldn’t stand it!

We now have the ability to build cars that are much more satisfying to drive and can still get good gas mileage and pass emissions standards.

I said European Autobahn. Did you interpret that as German or are you just adding something? BTW, in Germany, the speed limit across any bridge is 100 kph regardless of whether it is posted or not, and that is not advisory. They have a lot of bridges.

You actually state “autobahns in Europe”, the only countries with nominated autobahns are Germany, Switzerland and Austria. The Swiss and Austrian versions are very small, therefore yes, I interpreted your term as generally meaning the original German autobahns.

"A vehicle that can do 160 is more stable at 80 than a vehicle that tops at 90.
Then there’s that Ford Expedition… "

This makes the most sense to me. Cars/trucks that can’t go 80 that I’ve driven were poor handlers at lesser speeds. Friends BMW, very capable of higher speeds than my Corolla, is also more capable of making evasive maneuvers at lower speeds.
That doesn’t explain the poor handling muscle cars of old…but that was a different era and car companies weren’t running scared from regulations.
I thank Ralph Nader…handling is better due in no small part to his efforts.

Every car/truck I’ve owned had a speed limit of 110 or higher…and I know of no road in the US where you can go 110mph (legally).

A Corvette that’s capable of over 150 mph, also pushes 30 mpg at 60 mph because of that same gear ratio. The same with trucks…you don’t want that big push rod v8 spinning at 3500 rpm at 60 mph with nothing in tow. I would argue that because they are capable, they are much safer at 60 than trucks of old that weren’t.

I’m not so sure Ralph Nader was a big factor there. I think it was primarily due to being exposed to the foreign cars that hit the market in the 1970s gas crisis, which made us realize what we were missing as far as handling.

In this country, we don’t deter crime, we punish it, if we are lucky enough to catch the violators. What you seem to be proposing I would consider crime prevention, and we Americans have no interest in preventing crime. If we were interested in preventing crime, every vehicle would be governed so it could not exceed the posted speed limit, and the governor would be automatically adjusted when you passed from one speed zone into another.

I can think of a few PRIVATE roads where you can drive legally as fast as you want.

Yes, but preventing speeding would kill a major revenue stream (speeding tickets) for many local and state governments. For that reason, it will never happen.
They don’t want to stop speeders, they want to take their money. It’s just a different kind of tax.

I can think of a few PRIVATE roads where you can drive legally as fast as you want.

car manufacturers don’t build vehicles based on what private road they’re going to ride on.

“I’m not so sure Ralph Nader was a big factor there. I think it was primarily due to being exposed to the foreign cars that hit the market in the 1970s gas crisis, which made us realize what we were missing as far as handling.”

And our response was the tuck and roll Corvair and the exploding Pinto. We debated this before, and I’m content to be on the short side with few in agreement. I’ll thank him if no one else does.

car manufacturers don’t build vehicles based on what private road they’re going to ride on.

Isn’t a race track a private road? Bugatti, Ferrarri, Lamborghini, Ascari, Camparo, McLaren, and Porche design their cars for use on private roads, don’t they? If they designed their cars with only public use in mind, I think they would be designed quite differently.

Because there are playboys out there that cannnot afford the 256 MPH Bugatti Veyron.

I don’t think the OP is talking about limited production race cars…But street cars…Those cars you design for the street…NOT a private road/race-track.

Yes, but preventing speeding would kill a major revenue stream (speeding tickets) for many local and state governments.

In Massachusetts…Towns actually include in their budget the money they’ll get from speeding tickets…and how to INCREASE that revenue. This will continue until someone is killed then they’ll start really cracking down on the speeders which forces people to slow down and then revenue drops.