pelucidor

Whenever I'm back in London I always drive the speed limit +5mph because I don't know where the thousands of cameras are anymore. My friend who is a police sergeant in the Met says that tickets for seatbelts and talking on the cellphone are the easiest ones to give out.

In the USA there are no cameras - on highways I do around 80-90 like most people (where traffic/conditions permit) and get overtaken all the time. If a cop stops me I can usually talk my way out of it (have done many times, e.g. 90 in a 55) - you can't argue with a camera.

Goldenhue22

Wow, I've been at work all day and I get back and find 3 extra pages of this thread. I wish I had the desire to pick apart some comments but I don't think I'll change anyone's mind. My first post about not being able to change car classes is straight from the government web page that I listed. It is not my opinion, however fact from the government agency. Secondly, what I'm disappointed on is the fact that everybody keeps saying that, "I want to have fun driving a car". "Why should I have to loathe the car I drive." " My daughter loves my car." "I want to experience living and weight my risks." Oh what bologna! That has nothing to do with this discussion at all and I just wish that you all would leave it at the door. Third, rollover accidents in SUV increased because #1 they weren't wearing seat belts (as already stated) and because the people driving the car were going too fast around turns because they didn't know how to drive. The SUV';s didn't get into a head on collision and then rollover my friends. I don't like SUV's at all. However, am just stating that they are MUCH safer than the majority of sedans ...let along the RX-8. For anyone to argue that is so hard-headed and biased, it just isn't worth mentioning. I'm done with this topic you all know my opinion. I want the *8* just as much as the next person and I hope I get as much enjoyment out of it as Gordon. As to NOSTATIC, you just showed your ignorance, that was the worst post I've seen in a long time. Your rant again has nothing to do with anything and you ARE nuts to use your 1988 Porsche as your everyday car. Again, people like NOSTATIC are just being very selfish to their children, so they can have more 'fun' driving their kids around in a deathtrap.

Gord96BRG

How convenient. YOU were arguing the case about safety of the RX-8 vs. family sedans, NOT vs. SUVs. YOU asked for specific facts for debate, not just flaming. We gave you that, countered your arguments with specific facts. You were asked to respond to specific points, and now you just want to gloss over the fact that your opinion is without any factual basis and pretend that now it's SUVs that are far safer??? After it's pointed out to you that family sedans are not necessarily any safer, and often less safe, than the RX-8, you're going to completely abandon your whole position and whine about US being hard-headed??? And you asked ME to respond fairly without flaming???

What a cowardly response! Your position gets punctured, so you run and hide, rather than participating in the discussion and possibly learning something. I hinted earlier in this thread that you did the exact same thing in the previous thread about RX-8 suitability for family use - you imply that it's far less safe than sedans, and when you're hit with a few questions and counters, you disappear and hide, only to resurface spouting the same old pap and drivel that is entirely without basis, trying to twist some irrelevant government statistics to prove how selfish we are to endanger our children in an RX-8.

You, sir, are an incredible coward and a loser. Time for you to grow up yourself, don't you think? I suggest that you deserve any and all flames directed your way at this point. If you want to participate in the discussion and answer the questions that were directed at you specifically as counters to points you made, then I'd be happy to continue to participate. However, you'll have to abandon the snivelling and cowardly whining for any meaningful discussion to continue. Open your mind - you might actually learn something. Don't be so afraid that you might be wrong!!!!

Regards,
Gordon

DTECH-RX

Golden,

Just give us all a break already! By your logic, we should all just get rid of our cars altogether and just shuttle our families around in public transportation buses. Those are nice, big, and safe aren't they?

Here are the facts:

1. The RX-8 was SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED by its engineers to carry 4 passengers.

2. The safety features of the RX-8 take into consideration the fact that it seats four passengers.

3. The additional weight and structural design of the RX-8 is only necessary to accomodate and protect four passengers, otherwise the wheelbase would have been shorter, there would have only been two seats, and it would have been called the RX-7.

4. YOU are the one being selfish because you don't want to share this car with people that actually want to use it for what it was SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED for....carrying up to four passengers SAFELY.

You see, it's not a matter of us being selfish despite our children, it's actually quite the contrary. A lot of us have actually chosen the RX-8 based on thoughtfulness and consideration for our families and friends. You just have such a narrow-minded, idealistic (although misguided) view of what this car is and who the owners should be, that you refuse to accept that the RX-8 is a perfectly reasonable, capable, and logical means of transporting four individuals safely, when, say it with me, it was SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED, to safely carry them.

I won't be transporting my wife and kids in the RX-8 on a daily basis, but I sure as heck will (without any guilt whatsoever) whenever I need to, or just want to take them for a fun SAFE ride in something other than the family minivan, because imagine that.....that's what it was SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED for!

Wally Llama

Holy smokes! I sure wasn't expecting 4 pages of discussion on this question in less than 24 hours! Especially for my first post ever on this board....Thanks so much for all your feedback!

Here are a few random comments based on what I've read above:

First, I'll admit that our family already has a primary kiddie hauler - a GMC Envoy. (My wife drives it) Several posters made the point that just because a family has one kiddie hauler doesn't mean that car #2 doesn't have to be CAPABLE of hauling kids. My wife and I want to know that if she's stuck at work late, I can pick the baby up from day care.

Second, (based on #1) I agree with most posters that the RX-8 is not a good vehicle for a primary/only family car. Not to say that it wouldn't work, but there's a reason that the Camry, Taurus and Accord all sell 300,000 - 400,000 per year. (Hint: it's not because of their road-hugging abilities....)

Third, 100% of my family wears seat belts.

Fourth, while I agree that an SUV is generally safer than a small car in a collision, I'm not sure that an SUV is safer overall. Our Envoy sure is a sturdy vehicle, but it handles like crap. The tires look like pillows and the suspension is so compliant that cornering, braking and accellerating remind me of my childhood days spent on those springy hamburger-faced devices in the Playland at McDonald's. OCcasionally the phrase 'Weebles wobble but they won't fall down" comes to mind. Basically, my concern is with the ability to AVOID an accident in an SUV vs. a samll car. My Envoy gives me very little confidence that I could safely perform a high-speed lane change maneuver in order to avoid something in front of me. From this perspective, I think the small car is a safer vehicle.

91vert

I am one of those guys who are buying this car because I want a sportier car than my current (boring) Millenia, without losing the capability of taking my wife and 2-year old daughter somewhere with me if need be.

I do not plan on my RX-8 being our main kid-hauler. We'll use my wife's 4-Runner for that. I only have to drive about 2 miles one way per day with my daughter in my car with me to get her to the daycare. That is all at speeds of below 45 mph (in town), so I'm not as worried about the safety concerns of a high-speed collision with her in the car. I then drive about 30 miles round trip per day to work and back. Why the hell would I want to buy another sedan or big SUV just to have the convenience of easily getting her in and out of her car seat for 2 miles out of my 32 mile trip per day? Screw that.....I want to have fun driving those other child-free 30 miles per day in a more exciting car.

Those of you are flaming those of us with families for buying this car need to understand that just because we ask about child safety seats and how they fit in the back seat, does not mean that we will constantly be trying to haul around the wife and 3 kids in the back. If that were our situations, we would most likely not even be considering this car as even a secondary vehicle.

Just because you have a child does not mean that you are sentenced to 18 years of driving some boring family car.

I agree with Wally Llama....safety is more about overall control a driver has over their vehicle than size, weight, and how well it does in a crash test. If I had the same 2 impending accident situations in front of me and I could pick between avoiding them with the RX-8 or the 4-Runner, I would definitely pick the RX-8. The 4-Runner would most likely be involved in the accident, while the RX-8 would be swerving gracefully around it or stopping quick enough to avoid it.

Goldenhue22

Gordon you are an idiot. You are so stubborn and biased.

1) I don't want to argue this anymore because people like you are so biased you will never change your mind. Therefore my time to respond to ignorant comments are over. It's funny, people are STILL saying that they don't want to drive around in something not fun to drive. As I said before...selfish and has nothing to do with the conversation here.

2) I'm not changing my arguement you idiot. Can you not understand English. People were getting on SUV's and saying that they weren't safe. I was just saying that they were wrong. SUV's rollover via going too fast around turns. In a head on collision the SUV will still be standing and your sports car will be cream cheese with a deflated airbag.

3) You said this idiotic statement, Really? Where has anyone pointed out the sedans are less safe? If you are talking about the SUV's I already torn that arguement up. Get me the stats that show me % of deaths in sports/sedan/SUV PER 1000 VEHICLES. If sports cars come out on top I'll effing buy your you *8*. Enlighten me.
You want to prove your point get me that stat, I dare you.

4) My point has always been the the *8* should not be used as a primary family car. I NEVER said that under no circumstances should anyone sit in the backseats of a moving *8*. The majority of people have said that they WON'T use it as a primary car, but use it sometimes to drive around their families. Fine. I have NO problem with that. But you don't see that. They say that but don't come out and say that it should NOT be used as a primary family car. I have the ***** to say it. Hmmm, guess what their primary family car is...a sedan or SUV you dilweed.

5) I got you the OFFICIAL reason why you can't compare safety ratings between classes from a governmental source and I have GORDON here saying no that is wrong. Hmmm, I'm wrong and they are wrong huh. Gordon is always right? Biased? Hard-headed? Closed-minded? Stubborn? All of the above.

6) Ok as if you can't figure out the obvious, common sense things on your own I'll practically spell it out for you. Weight is not the ONLY reason why you can't compare cars of other classses. Space is another reason you jag. What the hell is the difference between a sports car and a sedan and a mini-van or SUV? Weight but even more so, is SPACE. I thought you could figure that one out on your own. The more space inside the car you have, the larger force the collision must have to damage the passengers inside the car. Simple physics. Are you going to make fun of that too? Where you one of those book smart people? Those people that got A's in school becuase they could memorize a textbook, however were complete idiots if there wasn't a rule or a law for an equation?

7) ALL accidents are avoidable huh? As long as the car handles well and the driver is knowledgable about driving, all accidents are avoidable. Isn't that what you said? Go tell that to any Nascar driver that lost his life. Go tell that to anyone driving an RX-7, or Porsche or Lotus or Corvette or Ferrari (et al) that lost their lives. Since these cars have great handling and speed and have the ability to get out of ANY situation...are you saying that everyone of those drivers didn't know how to drive? Or are you saying that they wanted to die? So then it's suicide? Oh sorry, I forgot. Gordon is the best driver in the world. He is invincible. That statement by you is the most ludacris comment I've ever read.

8) I'm done with you Gordon. Your name calling is immature and your unwillingness to STOP repeating the same ol' thing is absurd. I've explained myself over and over and over again and your responses are sublime. It's like you just respond without reading. You are in the minority here. MOSt people won't use the *8* as their PRIMARY car. That is all that I have argued since day one on the premise that they aren't as safe as sedans and SUV's. There is one way for you to win this arguement...get me those damn numbers that show PER VEHICLE, the % of deaths between the car classes and show me the the sports cars have a lower death toll....ACTAULLY, I just did a quick search and came up with something interesting take a look at the following website.

http://gulliver.trb.org/publications...s/carlabel.pdf

I especially find the following interesting:

- page 1, paragraph 4: "When deciding which type of new car to buy, consumers would benefit from information about safetydifferences across various classes of cars. For example. new-car buyers today can't compare the safety ofa mid-sized car to a sport-utility vehicle. Existing crash test results can be compared only among vehiclesof similar size and weight. Information about vehicle safety "is not always timely, accessible, or in aform that readily supports comparison shopping," the report notes."

- page 2, paragraph 6: "Stress the importance of vehicle size and weight."All else being equal," the report notes, "big andheavy cars offer more protection to their occupants than small and light cars" during a crash. The probability of a fatality, when averaged over all types of crashes, is 2 to 3 times greater for the driver of'a lighter car than for a driver of a heavier car. Consumers need explicit information about the importanceof vehicle size and weight, and they should fully understand the benefits and proper use of safety featuressuch as restraint systems."

And in case you didn't believe here is another website to check out:

http://www.bankrate.com/brm/news/aut...?prodtype=auto

The following is an excerpt from this webpage:

"And size does matter. Small cars have twice as many occupant deaths each year as large cars," Rader says. Heavier cars usually will give passengers a better chance of surviving a wreck. That's because a larger car provides a longer crush zone to absorb the crash," he says. "The weight protects you in a two-vehicle crash because the heavier vehicle drives the lighter one backward, which means the crash is focused on the smaller car."

Argue with that jack. Now you quit your whining and name calling. You defense is pathetic and selfish. You obviously don't know the meaning of the word (selfish). Take some reading comprehension classes and you wouldn't get yourself in this situation. I'm done responding to this thread UNLESS you find me those numbers asked for.

Without regards,
Goldenhue22

Sputnik

Alright, this thread is going around in circles, nothing new is being said, and now people are getting pissy instead of debating. I think we're done...

---jps