5 Reasons Why Government Regulations Are Ruining Cars #IOCT

Introduction
This article applies to petrolheads across the globe, whether it be in the USA, England or Australia. There are bound to be laws that hinder your driving pleasure in some way. Most of the time, federal governments are overblown and interfere in our lives like an invasive traction control system. Here are some ways that the federal government poisons the water hole of the car community.

One: US Import Laws
Many of you are probably familiar with US Import Laws, being that it makes it illegal (most of the time) to import a car like the R34 Skyline GTR (insert rage comment here). Here is a clip from US Customs explaining those laws. “As a general rule, motor vehicles less than 25 years old must comply with all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) in order to be imported permanently into the United States.” Basically, if you want to import a car that’s less than 25 years old, it has to meet US safety standards and emissions standards in order for it to be imported. For those of us who want to hear the swan song of an S15 or an R34 Skyline in the US, we’re out of luck. A possible solution to this dire problem is to put a warning sticker on imported cars, saying that this imported car is potentially less safe and pollutes more. Besides, most people who buy an S15 Silvia in the US don’t give a hoot about emissions and safety.

Two: European (and US) Emissions Laws
Car guys want to hear that VROOOOOOOM and BRAAAAAAP STUTUTUTU! Unfortunately, emissions laws can get in the way of this (this can be a bigger problem for VW TDI owners). To quote Road and Track in their article Why Ferrari engineers hate turbos, “By all rights, Ferrari shouldn’t give a flaming tailpipe about mpg. But governments are cracking down on CO2 emissions, and the only way to emit less carbon dioxide is to burn less fuel. So even Maranello is looking to the turbo to reduce fuel consumption.” Because of emissions laws, many sports cars that once had big engines with natural aspiration have had to switch to small engines with forced induction; don’t even get me started about the VW emissions scandal. Granted, we shouldn’t over pollute the planet, but maybe our federal governments should step back and take a better look at all of this.

Three: Speed Limits
Apart from lucky Germany, almost all countries have speed limits on all their roads. For the most part, this is a good thing, the last thing we need are idiots in riced Citroens going 100 MPH down a residential street. However, sometimes, we petrolheads just want to drive fast on an empty road in the middle of nowhere. This reminds me of the multiple times that Top Gear has gone to America and every time, they complain about the speed limits. “What are we going to hit? There’s nothing. No wildlife, no people. It’s shtupid! It’s shtupid!” –Jeremy Clarkson. Also, if you’re going 66 MPH in a 60 MPH zone, a cop can pull you over and write you a ticket, even if the majority of traffic was going the same speed. Speed enforcement can be too strict, and can be very irritating. In my opinion, straight highways in the middle of nowhere should have very high speed limits, or no speed limits at all.

Four: Safety Standards
Safety standards have increased in scrutiny over the years, and that has had some impact on the cars we drive. Cars are safer to drive and crash, but there are a few downsides to more strict safety standards. Modern cars are heavier, bigger and have lower visibility compared to classic cars. Petrolheads don’t want cars that are heavy, big and have low visibility, we want the opposite of that; that’s why the Mazda Miata sells so well. Also, because of the added weight, it means that modern cars can’t be as fuel efficient as they could be. It’s common sense that lighter cars usually get better fuel economy. Strict safety standards have in certain ways hurt performance cars.

Five: U.S.A. CAFÉ standards
In 2012, US News reported “The Obama administration released new Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards this week, requiring automakers to raise the average fuel efficiency of new cars and trucks to 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025.” Basically, the US government is forcing automakers to make more fuel efficient cars, and they’ve been doing this since 1975. Many American cars used to have glorious V8’s but V8’s have slowly been phased out of cars where V6’s and Inline 4’s have taken their place. It shouldn’t be the government that forces car makers to make more fuel efficient cars and trucks. It should be competition among car makers and consumer demand that makes cars and trucks more fuel efficient.

Conclusion
Don’t come away from this article thinking that the government is absolute evil and that all regulations should be done away with. What I want you to learn is that government can sometimes be too overbearing and that these regulations have negative consequences towards us gearheads. Thank you for reading this article and let me know about anything I missed in the comments.

Sponsored Posts

Comments

Mustafa Hafeez

I pretty sure it states in the Declaration of Independence that the government is supposed to work for the people while today it’s the exact opposite. We the people should have a say as to how this country as a whole is run.
For example if everyone here feels the speed limits are set too low we should be allowed to voice our opinions and vote to raise it. Also, no more fearing the authorities. They should work FOR US NOT AGAINST US.
And I’m pretty sure this isn’t just America that’s being run this way. So why can’t we have a system as was planned 200 years ago??? (I’m not 100% how long ago so apologies if I’m far off)

12/10/2015 - 15:40 |
1 | 0

The system hasn’t failed us, we failed the system.

12/10/2015 - 15:44 |
0 | 0
Anonymous

So what you are basically saying is that we should revert to tech used 50 years ago because it ‘s just cooler ? A 150bhp v8 is still a wasteful ebarasment to engineering , oh ferrari wants to use big engines in the highly exotic expensive cars they make , that’s really a shame that they have to regulate a centerpiece of automotive history , but when you have a no ncap 1 billion litter v1million piece of living room rolling at 120km/h towards your brand new amg merc or insanely fun (measly 2 l) subaru and you know that scrap metal will stop only 10 m after you .. yeah i don’t see any pleasure in that … Reevaluate , cars can be fun and not idiotic … Ok i’m all against putting a turbo on a ferrari but all for reducing the number of obsolete useless vehicles you tend to keep arund just because your gradfather used to have one when he was 20

12/10/2015 - 16:16 |
1 | 1
status_error

To be honest, I don’t mind the import law in the U.S because it gives me hope that there will still be a good skyline for me to buy when I can afford it. Guess how much the prices will go up and how more difficult it will be to find a good one when ‘murica is in the game…

12/10/2015 - 16:39 |
0 | 0
Evan Moe

While I get that emissions standards can be tough on the manufacturers and all that, they are necessary. Climate change is a real issue that’s going to only get more serious and that’s an easy way for the governments to combat it because they don’t have to pay for it. I know we would all rather drive around with straight through exhausts and as much power as we can but in reality it’s not feasible.

12/10/2015 - 17:40 |
0 | 0
Anonymous

Those last two sentences in #5…#preach. Good read

12/10/2015 - 20:32 |
0 | 0
OD_Emperor

The C.A.F.E standards are why I’m locking down a Challenger as soon as possible. Eventually these cars are going to become discontinued and the replacements wont nearly be as exciting.

12/11/2015 - 01:05 |
0 | 0
Senator Chinchilla

I really dislike the safety regs for cars. We had Saab and Volvo for that long before regulations were the thing to do.

12/11/2015 - 02:33 |
0 | 0
Anonymous

I feel that certain cars should be excused from these restrictions. I do not mean though daily drivers, for example if you buy a honda civic it should be fuel efficient and have limited emissions, but other high end sports cars should be emitted. For example if someone wants a big V8 camaro that’s put out 500 hp and is unsafe, they should be allowed. However they should have to pay a premium on top of said price for fuel effciency and clean energy research or something so where the car may normally run 40k have them pay 60k with some amount going to research to produce safer more fuel efficient cars for the general public. It could essentially cause an offset and paradigm switch in the market. Some people would be priced out of new premium cars and will have to wait for used ones if they want it, but at the same time manufactures may see this opening in the market and offer sporty fuel efficient safe cars that more of the general public could purchase such as lower end models of the premium. It already is this way where you pay more for premium, but essentially just charge more and have it go to research.

12/11/2015 - 03:14 |
0 | 0
Anonymous

safety standards I agree a lot, where I live there is almost no mods that are legal, my friend has a ‘10civic si he uses on track days and he put 4pot acura TL-S calipers and s2K rotors (bolt-on no mods needed) and it is not legal for “safety” reasons, cheap 10$ pads are legal but not big brakes….hopefully we dont have annual inspections so you have to be arrested to be called-out for inspection so you just have to be discrete, good for us car people but it also mean many old broken unsafe cars are on the road

12/11/2015 - 23:27 |
0 | 0