Is this the peak of the modern muscle cars?
With the new C.A.F.E. standards, does anyone else feel like we're seeing the end of the modern muscle car era? I feel like the Challenger, the Mustang, and the new Camaro may be the last of their kind. The last 10 years have been amazing though. The number cars that run stock quarter miles in the 13's or less has been nothing short of amazing...
|
Probably. But if you think about it, they've already hit most of the popular muscle cars of the day. We already have the:
T-Bird Mustang Charger Corvette and the Camaro & Challenger are coming soon. So what's left? I've even seen a concept of a TransAm. The only one I can think of that hasn't been redone is the Chevelle... well Aloha Motors took a shot at the Chevelle and it looked like ass. Unless it's produced by GM I'm not counting it. I suppose it would be cool to see Plymouth come out with a Cuda based on the Callenger chassis. P.S. I'm not adding the FWD V6 Impala to my list. |
Yes, I see what you're saying, my point is just simply that I think the end of any kind of high volume affordable V8 may be coming to an end. They'll still be around I'm sure, but I'm not sure something like a 100k unit Mustang GT can exist in the new CAFE world.
|
I see exactly what your saying and I think your pretty much 100% correct. With more and more emphasis put on efficiency and regulations it's becoming harder and harder for powerful cars to exist in the numbers that we're used to. Something else i've been thinking of is what happens when we as a country switch over to an "alternative fuel" like hydrogen? From the very little reading i've done on the subject is is my understanding that a fuel like hydrogen would have substantially less power than that of gasoline. I know something like that would be quite a ways off but it's still interesting to think about.
|
Quote:
Also, for those who care enough about their cars to keep them around, there are ways to convert a gas engine to natural gas, or propane, etc. I've seen a 500hp propane injected C3. |
Oh yeah..... It's just about over; out here in Cali anyways... Tree huggers, Democraps, and the "global warming must be entirely man made and has nothing to due with normal planet weather cycles" crowd are beginning to apply the pressure.... I won't even go into the world environmentalist nazi watch dogs in Europe turning the screws.....
|
Quote:
I just finished a book you might really enjoy. Liberal Facism I'm thinking to construct a questionnaire called "Hillary or Hitler" to see if people can accurately identify the source of actual quotes. In all seriousness, I never understood why kind sensitive libertarian-conservative guys like me are called Fascists.:huh: I say if the shoe fits, stick it in your mouth. |
Quote:
The earth is 4 billion years old. How the hell could anyone know?:huh: |
Quote:
globally cooler http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com...ast-12-months/ |
Quote:
|
Quote:
At the risk of being called a Holocaust denier, the point is that the models used to back up the global warming hypothesis (because there is no statical equivalent of control data sets, like planets nearly identical to Earth but without human civilization, there is heavy dependence on computer models) predicted strong continuous trends, in no small part because CO2 RETAINS HEAT in the atmosphere. More importantly, the sudden comparatively massive shift downward in the last year is NOT explainable within the same models used as the basis of assertion, which by definition means the models do not represent a complete and accurate understanding of the phenomena being modeled. Does this in and of itself mean that anthropogenic global warming is a total farce? No. But for the love of Christ it's relevant, and you want to talk about spin to downplay it. Emotional science is no science at all. Basically, and this is where I get a bit offended, we are asked to put near complete faith in the models when they support desired outcomes, and intellectually (to be generous) assaulted with something more like religious fervor than rational discussion when daring to even raise suspicion based on rational observations. I've said it once, I'll say it again. There is a crossing point most people can agree on. Clean power generation and use is an inherently good idea. After that, reducing CO2 production in economically viable ways is acceptable to me, even though I'm suspicious about how useful it is. However, going full-tilt nuts on reducing CO2 production seems catastrophically unwise. Finally, if for no other reason than China, India, to say nothing of South America and the likely future of Africa, even in extreme case scenarios man-made CO2 production will only increase for the foreseeable future. Note I said extreme case. Let's keep in mind that Japan, home of the supposedly modest Kyoto protocols, didn't come anywhere near their target reductions. And they try hard. Oh, what do I think global warming is a lot about? This is a reasonable overview from those right wing industrialist bastards at EcoWorld. |
I want to have a couple of beers with Ben!:bigthumbsup:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
It's great to be efficient, but efficiency also counts when you're spending money. How much you wanna spend to affect what can arguably be described as minimal impact? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
While wikipedia is not always accurate, this gives a pretty good idea of what is going on. I think there is sufficient evidence to prove that we are having a big enough effect that we should actively try to reduce our emissions. Having said that, I'm not advocating anything so drastic that economic progress stops, but reasonable steps. I think for instance reducing C02 output from vehicles should always be something we strive to accomplish. |
Look at this: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1
If Bush thinks it's happening, it's almost certainly not - that dude is always wrong. Maybe I need to change my view :p |
Quote:
I knew you'd come around. Although the theory goes that the reason the administration is signing onto it is to co-opt as much regulatory policy as possible (i.e., run block from the inside.) Which, if true, I'm opposed to. If you're against something, be against it. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Now see, we're getting to the crux of the biscuit: you've said we should do reasonable things to reduce CO2 production, but have exempted yourself with regards to something you personally find fun. It's almost as good as an "environmentalist" running a gutted cat . . . (**) |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Anywho, back on subject. In the next week or so I hope to read through the Lieberman-Warner bill. I'll try to keep an open-mind, but it looks like it my be the worst of all my fears about Government trying to "save the world". Big Business ain't stupid, they'll extract massive amounts of cash out of it, meanwhile, Joe Six Pack may as well get the Astroglide out. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Anyone else think Sean ought to lead the charge here? Ill take that cobra off your hands, i know someone with a Prius you could have cheap!:bigthumbsup:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Here's but a tiny taste of the future that awaits us. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:08 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.