EU: Bid to ban fast cars from Europe

[Tender Branson]

There are calls for the European Union to ban the making of cars that can go at more than 101mph (162km/h).

The proposal comes in a report to the European Parliament on EU plans for a law to curb CO2 emissions from cars.

MEPs will vote on the plan this autumn but the BBC has seen an early draft of the report, which will be released to parliament later this month.

Its author, British Lib Dem MEP Chris Davies, says 101mph is 25% more than the top speed limit in most EU states.

He says cars have gradually increased in power and weight, which increases their CO2 emissions, even though people cannot legally use that extra power.

His report also suggests that a fifth of car advertisements should be devoted to cars' fuel consumption and CO2 emissions.

The European Commission is preparing legislation that would limit CO2 emissions of the average new car sold in Europe to 130g per kilometre, by 2012.

But a spokesman said it would not support moves to limit the top speed of cars.

Mr Davies says it will be costly for industry to meet the commission's proposed target of 130g/km by 2012, and suggests instead a target of 120g/km by 2015, followed by a second target of 95g/km by 2020.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6730051.stm

[Bono]

More fascism from Brussels.

[minionofmidas]

What is this - a way to get around Germany's stubborn idiocy in not passing a maximum speed?

[Tender Branson]

More fascism from Brussels.

Indeed. A limit of 300 km/h (187 mph) would be OK for me.

[opebo]

I tend to drive rather slowly, but I strongly dislike that there are police on the roads, and particularly that they have the power to 'pull one over'. 

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Chris Davies? Say no more, say no more.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Far too easy to get around unless they are also going to ban cars from being modified after being sold.  Easier and less bureaucratic to implement some sort of gas guzzler tax to drive up the price of overpowered cars and replacement engines.

[AkSaber]

More fascism from Brussels.

Totally agree.

[DanielX]

The vast majority of all cars currently sold in the US are at least theoretically capable of going over 101 mph.   

Fact: a V-6 engined, base-model Ford Mustang (NOT a GT!) is ELECTRONICALLY LIMITED to a top speed of 115 mph.  That means it can go faster; the limit just adds a safety cushion (especially re: tires, which wear out VERY fast at high speed) and makes regulators happy. And that's the base, 'secretary-model' Mustang; the GT and Shelby V-8 models go much faster (limited to 145 and 155 mph, respectively).

Another fact: 115 mph is the absolute top speed of a 1.6 liter, Euro-spec Ford Focus hatchback. A car with a 0-60 acceleration of about 11 seconds, and a 99 DIN horsepower engine (with 40 mpg highway fuel economy) considered too small for the US market (our Focus has a 2 liter engine, making 130-151 SAE hp depending on year and model). Now, I doubt you could drive it at 115 mph for long, but 101 mph should be doable, at least on a model with a manual transmission. And that's a car that isn't really meant for performance - the 'sport' Focuses, both in Europe and the US, all have an engine that's 2 liters or larger. 

This regulation pretty much bans V-6 engines in passenger cars (except maybe small diesel V-6s in large cars), and V-8s from anything but large commercial trucks. Except if they're sold with speed limiters that limit speed to 101 mph, and that basically defeats the purpose of saving fuel by using smaller engines. And limiters can easily be overcome by  mechanics - they're just electronic devices that can be removed with near-impunity.

Assuming the 'top speed limit' does not take limiters into account, you've pretty much killed the stock-engine sports car industry. Even a halfway decent 4-cylinder engine, in a small car, can get you well beyond this limit. And an engine that can only do 100 mph or less will result in a car that accelerates pretty slowly. Sports car aficionados with a good mechanic or their own garage will just buy used sports cars, or put old engines in newer cars, or just put a larger engine from a big slow car into a little slow car to get a little fast car.

Some cars that can't go 101 mph include SUVs, whose poor aerodynamics really interfere with going fast (and fuel economy too). Is this what tools like Davies really want? Same is true for automatic transmissions. Manual transmissions, more popular in Europe than the US, allow both for faster speed and higher fuel economy than most automatics.

Many public vehicles need engines that accelerate quickly and have high top speeds: police cars, ambulances, and fire engines need to have fast acceleration and be capable of near-100-mph speeds at least, and police chasers will need to be able to go over 100 mph for extended periods (police chases, where a crook may have an illegal 'hopped-up' car, or may not care that his tires are coming off in the process). Should they all be limited to puny, underpowered engines? Or do they get an exception to the rule?

Overall, this is a VERY dumb idea.