3 ms·
> new cars are generally more powerful, so tend to accelerate to dangerous speeds on small streets. Yes and no and but... Yes - Broadly speaking most new cars
by csharptwdec19 6y ago
> new cars are generally more powerful, so tend to accelerate to dangerous speeds on small streets.
Yes and no and but...
Yes - Broadly speaking most new cars are more powerful than they were in the late 70s and early 80s
No - Before the gas crisis we has a much larger lust for big powerful engines.
But - In the last 20 years especially there has been a mandated (i.e. NHSTA/etc) effort to make vehicles 'less harmful' to pedestrians in case of an impact. You can see some of this in the changes to front fascias/bumpers.
- everdrive 6y ago>No - Before the gas crisis we has a much larger lust for big powerful engines. >But - In the last 20 years especially there has been a mandated (i.e. NHSTA/etc) effort to make vehicles 'less harmful' to pedestrians in case of an impact. You can see some of this in the changes to front fascias/bumpers. You hit on some of the complexity here. Cars are actually much quicker now. In the 1950s, a V8 police car made 85-150 horsepower. So, the bigger engines prior to the 70s were quite slow compared to cars today. As you note, the speed gains must be partially offset (fully?) by the advances in safety: tires, anti-lock brakes, pedestrian-friendly bumpers, and more.
- leetcrew 6y agoin the 1950s, yes, but much quicker cars were available in the 60s. there were chevy caprice four-door sedans that made 425 hp and did 0-60 in around six seconds. that's not far off modern hot hatches (although I suspect the ones with 425 hp were probably less affordable at the time). it was possible to make plenty of power back then; it was mainly the weight that held those vehicles back. the specific model I'm looking at weighed 4100 lbs!
- everdrive 6y agoWow, I didn't realize the Caprice was so quick in the 60s. Thanks for letting me know.