The demise of small cars...

[henk4]

I would want one for the track too, but not for the street ... no room for a 500kg car in a world full of 2200kg SUVs. I think the safest place for racecars is on racetracks, at least until they cap the weight of passenger vehicles to level the playing field.

It's the nail on the head and goes back to the first 10 posts of this thread. We (or for me "they", the americans) are imposing once more there way of life on people.

[fpv_gtho]

just be glad for SUV's like the XC90, wheels had this article where volvo crashed an XC90 into the side of an S40 and you wouldve thought it was 2 cars that hit each other, not an SUV and a car

[henk4]

just be glad for SUV's like the XC90, wheels had this article where volvo crashed an XC90 into the side of an S40 and you wouldve thought it was 2 cars that hit each other, not an SUV and a car

Yes and that's why the S40 is 300 KG's heavier than it should be

[Alcomet]

I would want one for the track too, but not for the street ... no room for a 500kg car in a world full of 2200kg SUVs. (...)

I Couldn't agree more with that idea! I think the newer and heavier products are starting to make people have a wrong feeling of security... make it immunity...its starting to spread to a big group of inconsequent drivers.....

I had an accident were a women it my girfriend Citroen AX (small car) from the left side....... the little womem was driving a newly bought Mitsubishi Strada with those chrommed bars in the front bumper......luckly it was at low speed, no personal injuries......well we still don't understand how she managed to it us in a broad turn with 2 lanes... she came from our left and behind and rammed the small car. *Scary*

[Egg Nog]

SUVs raise more safety concerns than the dampen. In today's Vancouver Sun newspaper, there was an article that was discussing this, that said the lowest vehicle fatality rates are posted by minivans and compact/midsize cars.

SUV owners who don't go off-roading can suck it.

[jones.dk]

I dont think its a good thing to build those huge cars.... i think that the idael sportscar would be: Aston Martin DB9´s design, the performance of a Aston Martin DB9 and the price of a Lada Niva....

[Egg Nog]

I dont think its a good thing to build those huge cars.... i think that the idael sportscar would be: Aston Martin DB9´s design, the performance of a Aston Martin DB9 and the price of a Lada Niva....

= more teenage deaths & bankrupcy for Aston Martin

[Falcon500]

Back on the origonal subject i view that smaller cars are a necisity for dayly living...while i much prefer a larger car for many reasonsgood mpg and other such things are a good thing and quite nice to have in a dayly driver.
That said I also totally agree with henk ive got my 71 falcon wich weighs in the vicinty of 1400 kg and ive had people in subarus of a similar weight refer to it as a tank! it may be a heap bigger but its quitelight given its size compared to modern cars. And also compared to a modern falcon the base model wieghs a full 200 kilos more and v8 well thats another 100 to 200 kilos more! (depends on SOHC OR DOHC)
AS for SUVs i more then likely would never own one i view them excecdingly heavy and impractical for dayly driving and also their harder to park i personally dont see what the problem of a station wagon is but i guess thats the current trend with new car byers inst it?
I also view a sports car is unto they eye of the beholder i view the lotus is a sports car and is what i personally define a sports car no luxuaris and good purpose built.

[icezdragonz]

personaly i like small cars but not too small, i like to have a 5 seater and some room in the boot to put some subs in but not too roomy thou~!, but i dont realy like smalllllllll cars that only fit 2 people and can barely fit anything in the boot, their not realy my type of car. and i dont like those huge cars that use V8 engines and up, a inline 6 with twin turbos would produce enuf power to make u wet your pants 10 times over

[HemiCuda500]

I believe the best handling cars are those with the lowest center of gravity, not those with the lowest weight. As for performance, a low kg:hp ratio is preferrable, wheels pushed out to the corners as much as possible, a 50:50 weight distribution front/rear, grippy tires, and a firm dual double wishbone suspension. Large cars typically have more suspension travel, and more inertia, which make them very cushy, but with tremendous body lean/sway in corners.

Factors that affect center of gravity:
- engine location and type
- drive (front, rear, awd)
- drivetrain (solid axle, live, transfer case, shaft, differential, etc.)
- transmission (manuals weigh less)
- suspension
- general design of the car (lower and wider is better)

[henk4]

partly agreed, but handling is also influenced by the unsprung weight, the heavier the car, the bigger wheels and tyres are required. Furthermore, mass tends to move straight on until you change direction, and the higher the mass the more force is required to make that happen. Finally, mass also needs to be slowed down, so the heavier the car, the heavier the brakes (also part of the unsprung weight, unless built on the dif)

[HemiCuda500]

P.S. I love small cars. They typically are agile, quick, and cheap with good cornering, handling, mileage and are easy to park!

my fav small cars:
Austin Mini
Honda Civic
VW Rabbit

I also love the outright power of some bigger cars

my fav bigger cars:
Plymouth Hemi 'Cuda (it was considered to be a "small" car when it was introduced)
Chevy Corvette
Dodge Coronet 440 Convertible

(you just can't beat the sound of these big-block monsters, when they start up it sounds like a dragon coming to life; whereas when small cars start up, I look around for my fly swatter!)

[henk4]

(you just can't beat the sound of these big-block monsters, when they start up it sounds like a dragon coming to life;

Having been present at various rolling starts of vintage Can-Am races I can only confirm this.

[HemiCuda500]

partly agreed, but handling is also influenced by the unsprung weight, the heavier the car, the bigger wheels and tyres are required. Furthermore, mass tends to move straight on until you change direction, and the higher the mass the more force is required to make that happen. Finally, mass also needs to be slowed down, so the heavier the car, the heavier the brakes (also part of the unsprung weight, unless built on the dif)

also agreed, but performance parts and the car's construction to handle increased performance increases weight as well. A quick-accelerating, excellent handling car will need to have a strong drivetrain, and be constructed with materials and of a design that will limit flex. Because of this quantry of strength vs. weight, all modern supercars are made with the continuing battle of making the fastest, best accelerating, best braking, best cornering, best handling, reasonably safe car but also at the lowest weight possible. The Mclaren F1 has one of the best (if not the best) power to weight ratios in the world at 1:4.17 (hpounds)

Theoretically, if a car has a better ratio, (including better aerodynamics) it can beat the McLaren's record of fastest road car in the world

[HemiCuda500]

Having been present at various rolling starts of vintage Can-Am races I can only confirm this.

Ever since my brother took me for a ride in his 1966 Dodge Coronet 440 Convertable and wound it up past 160kph in about 10-15 seconds, I've been addicted to big-blocks. It's not just a sound, it's an experience