neit_jnf

So then a Lancer Evo or a Subaru Sti would be great family cars eh?

Pam

I bought a MX-6 (manual 1993+) when my children were 10 and 6, with one still using a car seat. The MX-6 was just fine pulling the four of us (husband over 220lbs) for the next 11 years. It continued as a family car as the kids grew adding over 200lbs to the MX-6 workload, all though it did become more cramped for the ones in the back (who cares). I was able to get in the RX-8 at the Atlanta car show in March and it has more space in the back and overall than the MX-6. The seats are flatter and wider (better to accomodate a child's car seat). Getting into the back of the RX-8 is a breeze, even if you are carrying a heavy car seat and will certainly not be a problem for the kids to jump in and out of. As far as the trunk goes, I'm not quite sure because of all the different types of strollers out there now. The opening is small.

Smoker

Wow, what a great thread.

Well, Goldenhue22, looks like you are definitely from the old school. You are absolutely right, people used to buy sport cars to show off and as a secondary fun car. But that was then.

The whole economy nowadays are pushing for Integration. That means the current market favours product that fits as many roles as possible. For example, PDA/Digital Camera Cell Phone, Multimedia Home Threatre Systems, etc. Therefore, it is only smart for car manufacturer to provide cars that meets as many of a car buyer's need as possible. Mazda NEEDS to sell lots of their car and fast. That's the reason they designed the RX-8 as it is.

Think about it, if you only have resources to get one car, doesn't it make sense to get one car that fits all of your needs in a whole package. Sure it is not as fast as a 350Z, not as roomy as a camry. But it has got above averge scores across the board.

Both BRx8, Goldenhue22 points are that the RX-8 should be a specialize vechicle just for fun, autoCrossing and other fun stuff which I think, sure why not, RX-8 is totally capabable of that. But don't forget, Mazda DID design two very functional back seats and the car IS a very safe vechicle so you can't be offended just because other owners simply going ahead and take full advantage of all the other features that comes with along with the car (which you decides not to use).

The bottom line is, whether you are putting a Child safety seat in the back or ripping out the back seats for your Nos system, you are still buying the same car and that, my friends is smart product marketing.

Smoker

In terms of safety, my take is always favours cars with more active safety features than passive safety. ie, I rather have a car that perform well in emergency line charge, great braking, with great dynamic stability control than a car that got tonnes of airbags and got good crash test results.

RobDickinson

medcina have a look at
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd...2EARelease.pdf

National Center for Statistics & Analysis Major Findings :

2002 Early Assessment The Estimated Number of Persons Motor Vehicle Traffic Crashes Increased to
the Highest Level since 1990.

Occupant Fatalities Accounted for All of the Increase in Total Fatalities.

Most of the Increase in Occupant Fatalities
was in Pickup Trucks,SUVs and Vans.

Most Passenger Vehicle Occupant Fatalities
continue to be Unrestrained.

Alcohol-Related Fatalities Increased.

The Increase in Alcohol-Related Fatalities
was concentrated in Occupants of Vans and
SUVs and Riders of Motorcycles.

SUVs,Vans,and Motorcycles had a larger increase in Alcohol-Involved Drivers than other vehicles.

Passenger Vehicle Occupant Fatalities in Rollover Crashes Increased.

Fatality Increases in SUV and Pickup
Rollovers Accounted for:

Nearly half of the Increase in Total Occupant
Fatalities

Most of the Increase in Passenger Vehicle
Rollover Fatalities.

Passenger Car Occupant Fatalities in Two-
Vehicle Crashes with a Pickup Truck, Van or SUV Increased.

Occupant Fatalities in Pickup Trucks, SUVs and Vans accounted for 59% of the Increase in all Motor Vehicle Occupant Fatalities.
but ?

Fatalities in Passenger Cars were essentially Unchanged.

Most Passenger Vehicle Occupants Killed in Motor Vehicle Crashes Continue to be Unrestrained

Your drunken, unrestrained SUV drivers are killing themselves and other people

More bigger cars isnt your answer. Better cars (not SUV's trucks) and safer driving practices (no alchohol + use seatbelts) is what the US needs.


EDIT : missed this bit :


61% of SUV Occupant Fatalities Continued to Occur in Rollover crashes.
The Next Highest Proportion of Occupant Fatalities in Rollover crashes was 46% in Pickup Trucks

Midnight Flyer

Hi Gord,

Just wondering, you planning on getting rid of your Miata to get the 8? or is it replacing one of your other cars?

I find it interesting that people who, from what I can tell, don't have children have such strong opinions as to what those of us with children should drive.

I had the boring cars for most of my life, getting bigger and safer cars at the behest of my ex-wife and was satisfied with those cars at the time. Times change and if I had to do it again I would go a different route.

The car you drive should depend on what you are going to do with it. I have a nice big 4 door "family" car that we take when we have to do some "family" type things. My company car is a Miata since 99.99% of the time I go to work by myself. Why should I not have fun doing it. My wife drives a Jeep YJ and loves it. She hates to park the intrepid because it is so big. She also loves to go mountain climbing with it. When I had to get a car to teach my son to drive in we got another Miata. It has little power to get him into trouble and is nimble enough to get him out.

As far as getting this as the only car, why not? Most people leave the car seat in the car all the time so taking it in and out is not an issue. I have seen a lot of people with 2 door cars with kids, this will surely be better then that. In a couple of years the kid will be in a booster seat. As far as the stroller is concerned, you can get a cheap small one for the car for next to nothing, do you really need a stroller as big as your car?

As others on this forum and especially on the Miata.net having kids is no reason to give up your life.

Got to go now, the wife and I are leaving for Vermont in the Miata for the weekend, 20C and sunshine, or so I am told. Good thing the only thing it holds in the trunk is our toothbrushes and there's no room for the kids. :D

ggreen29

Since so many people disagree with you the answer is not clearly anything, let alone "clearly no". Your opinion is clear, but the actual answer is quite clearly unclear and may be just an opinion.

Back to the original question regarding the RX8 and the auto. If you get the auto RX8, you'll get a car with great handling and braking, reasonable room for four, and decent acceleration. The 210hp will be available through out a large portion of the rev range, and because of its handling it should still be a fun car to drive.

Gord96BRG

So have a look at what passes for everyday family cars in the rest of the world. Here in Canada, the top selling class of vehicle is the compact car, not mid-size - Proteges, Civics, Corollas, Focus, etc. Does the RX-8 have as much passenger room as those cars? YES. In Europe, the average family car is that same size even smaller, often being a small VW Polo etc. Does the RX-8 have more room and accesibility than those vehicles? YES. Completely as an aside, the cars driven by Europeans tend to be much more entertaining and satisfying to drive than what North Americans drive. Somehow, North Americans tend to see driving as a chore. Honda's vehicles are good illustration of this difference - Here, we get the Accord appliance. Perfectly competent car, but very boring. Acura brings over the European Accord and markets it as a sports sedan called the TSX! (and it's smaller than our Accord, too). Toyota provides an even better illustration of the differences - here, the Camry is a top seller, widely admired. In Europe, Camry sales are dismal, and it's at the bottom of it's class. It's universally derided there as being incredibly dull and boring compared to the competition.

Please explain to me why having a family must doom you to a boring car? Would you consider a BMW 3 Series an acceptable family car? Hmm, the RX-8 has more rear seat room than the E36 version... Perhaps you're hung up on the definition of sports car, vs. considering the actual space provided in the back of an RX-8. Maybe if we called it a sports sedan, as it is labelled by some of the automotive publications in the UK, it would be less offensive to you for family duty?

Quote:

so let's answer the question of CAN the RX be used as an everyday family car? well yes...the real question however, is SHOULD you use it as an everyday family car? the answer is clearly no...

I still can't see how this is so clearly no - why on earth not? It's got as much room as many compact sedans like Civics, Focuses, and the access through the suicide doors is actually OK. So why shouldn't you use it as a family car? Just because it's sporty? That's a reason TO use it... Again, is a 1995 BMW 325i an acceptable family car? How about the 4-door BMW E36 M3? Exact same body and interior room, just sportier. (Less interior room than RX-8, it's worth mentioning again).

Quote:

the original poster asked how fitting the child safety seat was...well i'm sure it fits but are you gonna want to struggle getting your child or the child seat in and out of the cramped back seat EVERYDAY?

Maybe I'm the wrong person to ask - when my son was born in 1988, our family car was a 1983 Honda Prelude. For the first 4 years of his life, that was our only family car. It's not that bad to be lifting kiddy seats and babies in and out of a coupe - the RX-8 would be much easier than a 2 door Prelude! Oh yeah, the RX-8 has much more room in the back seat than the Prelude did, too .

Quote:

as for the mid-life crisis thing, well all i can say is you have a responsibility to your wife and child to provide for them...getting a sporst car is clearly a choice for yourself...the ideal car for a family is a family car, one that COMFORTABLY seats 4 or more people and has EASY ACCESS to the back seats...a sports car should not take the place of a family car...

I'm not sure who said anything about mid-life crisis - I don't see a lifelong desire for driving interesting cars as having anything to do with the stereotypical mid-life crisis. You have pretty rigid definitions of what qualifies as a family car, but many of us aren't so closed-minded. My wife happens to enjoy driving sporty cars - she refuses to own an automatic transmission equipped car, for example. Of course, she's Irish, and only moved to Canada 7 years ago, so she much prefers the European sense of automobiles, with respect to size, handling, and the predominance of shift-it-yourself transmissions.

Have you actually sat in the back of an RX-8 and determined that it's not comfortable and that it's hard to get into? I sat in one - it's genuinely comfortable, especially for smaller persons, and it is easy to get in and out of. Easier than my father-in-law's Mitsubishi Colt that serves as his family car in Ireland.

I'd agree that a sports car shouldn't take the place of a family car - but there's absolutely no reason why a 4 passenger vehicle that will carry my family as comfortably as many small family cars can't be sporty too, is there???

Regards,
Gordon

medcina

None of this says anything of any real importance. All it says is that the number of fatalities has increased in both car and truck drivers (although the percentage of alcohol related accidents increasing more in truck drivers is a bit disconcerting but proves nothing in respect to SUV safety). This will of course happen as the number of vehicles (especially in the SUV market) on the road increase. Only the ratio of fatalities when comparing trucks to cars is important since that'll give you how likely you are to die in an accident when a car or truck is driven.

Not trying to argue since like I said I too would like to see more people buy cars and not trucks for daily driving. Trucks are exactly that: TRUCKS and should only be used if there is a real need for them.

Smoker

Gord, the man is just afraid that if everyone drives their family around in their RX-8's, it will make the the RX-8 image look too family and less sporty and they will look "less cool". Kids these days. hahhaah....

Kinda like those SRT-4 kids, worrying that if there are too many regular Neons on the road, everyone will think their car is "just a Neon".

B-Nez

Can you please quote the portion of the original post that says this will be Wally's everyday family car, because I couldn't find it. I only saw that he needed a car that would accomodate an infant carrier and booster seat, and that he was wondering if the buggy would fit into the boot. Nothing to suggest that this will be their only car. News flash for you folks who do not have children: Just because there is already a family grocery-mobile in the driveway does not mean that a second vehicle does not need to meet certain requirements. It depends on the family. In some families, the possibility of needing to transport the kiddos in the secondary vehicle is remote. In others it is almost a guarantee.

For instance, from July 2002 until the current month, my boys had ridden in my 240SX maybe twice. Since I've returned from deployment, I've been off from work, while my wife has had meetings and such to attend. So, I've been fortunate to be able to spend much more time with my boys. They've spent more time in my car the past two weeks than they had during the previous 10 months. Once I return to work, life will resume as normal, and they won't be seeing the back of that car very much, if at all.

This is a perfect of example of the sort of thing that happens with families and cars, and why a second vehicle might need to meet certain passenger requirements. Even if you don't plan on using the extra seats much, some families find it prudent to purchase a vehicle that will accomodate the family if needed. And the ones that don't - hey, that's great, too. Just means that if they get in a bind, handing off the kids will also require swapping cars - not that big of a deal. Even it is to be the family's primary vehicle - so what? If the trunk won't hold all the groceries, then I guess he can do the shopping solo and use the back seats to supplement the boot.

B-Nez

Smoker, I think you've hit the nail on the head there. We have seen many discussions here that intimate this very idea - what the RX-8 should be/should not be/is/is not. There are some who cling so desparately to the boy-racer image of themselves owning this car, that the thought of families and children riding in this car cheapens it for them. I say 'get a life.'

nostatic

The RX-8 should NOT be used as a primary family vehicle...

What a load of *****. I am 33 and have two sons, aged 1 and 3.5. My wife hates automatic trannys, as do I. For 10 months, our only car has been a 1988 Porsche 911. It has 4 seats, and we purchased car seats to fit in the tight back quarters. My wife goes grocery shopping in the 911 and puts the bags in the trunk and on the passenger seat. We don't carry strollers (obviously). My family (parents and siblings) think we're nuts--the same way some of you naysayers are coming down on people who have families and intend on using the RX-8 to transport their families REGULARLY.

What do I say to them AND YOU? "Who cares what you think!" And "What arrogance you possess to think that you can influence me and my wife with your opinions!"

We can afford any family sedan we wish (Audi S4 and M5 included), but for now, we are all having so much fun in the 911 we don't care about the (minor) inconveniences. We're not lazy people; we're fit and energetic.

The RX-8 offers a perfect blend of everyday practicality, power, and style. Don't beat people up just because they place a higher priority on one particular aspect of that balance. You only make yourself look very foolish. You know who you are...

Gord96BRG

The Miata is a keeper! :D The 8 is going to replace my wife's 97 Contour SE, and then for full family+dog+cargo duty we have the Audi allroad. All manual transmissions, and all chosen because they offered manual transmissions and were at the sportier end of vehicles in their classes when they were chosen. In late 96, between a V6, 5 speed Contour with sport suspension, or automatic Accord, automatic Camry, etc, it was a clear choice for us, even though the back seat is a bit smaller than the others.

B-Nez nailed it on a couple of points - there's plenty of occasions where either of the non-Miatas in our stable is called into family duty, so the Contour or it's replacement must be capable of hauling us all and doing reasonable grocery duty. He certainly raises an interesting point in suggesting that it's ego causing the young child-less ones to complain about an RX-8 being used for family duty - oh the humiliation, driving a family car!! :D

I'm still waiting to hear from GoldenHue about the 94 Bonneville vs. 04 RX-8 safety considerations, and regarding the relative weights of RX-8 vs. Focus, Accord, Camry, Altima, and the other much safer family cars that B-Nez mentioned...

Regards,
Gordon

Wing

I agree..... with do what YOU want with the car, that is HOW mazda designed it!

I would get a Miata or an S2000 or something of that sort, but I feel it would be usefull to have some room for groceries or things.

My g/f said, we can't get a Miata it doesn't have back seats. My reply "Dear..... how many times have we used the backseats in our current car?" Her answer: "ummmm......... 2 or 3 times?" My Question: "And when was this?" Her answer... "When my parents came to visit."

AHA! Great, so when her parents came to visit we used the seats 2 or 3 times! Wow! How did they come to visit? In their 4 door Sonata! Heck we would just take their car instead then HAHAHA. She agreed and we were off to look at the miata

The tough thing is the trunk is not big enough for groceries in the Miata I would need another car or do groceries myself. The RX-8 Solves this for me, I don't car if the trunk is small ish, because it also has backseats so I can put stuff there.

Do what YOU want with the car, and have FUN!

BRx8

wow...i didn't expect to hit such a soft spot...some of you are taking this way too seriously...and Gord knows i'm only trying to have a debate, but really, if you don't have anything intelligent to add to the debate, then you're basically just flaming and spamming...shame on you

anyways, the thread starter asked for an opinion and i'm expressing mine, i'm not telling/forcing anyone to even listen to me...i drive a sports car, i've ridden in the backseat many many cars and MY OPINION HOLDS that it's just better to get a car designed for easy access to the comfortable backseats...i've sat in the back of the Eclipse and the Prelude and unfortunately they suck...seriously, they do...and while the RX does offer more leg room than those cars, it still really isn't sufficient enough to drive for long distances without legs cramping up...

but anyways, i do sincerely apologize to all those that i have offended so deeply...i really hope your wounds heal and your sorrows go away when you recieve your RX-8s in 2 months...

desmo996

I'm palying it safe. Got my wife an X5 and gave myself the RX8. I have a three month old. We'll use the X5 to transport the baby most of the time, but it is nice to be able to transport her on the RX-8 if you have to.

Y&Y

1. Can the rear seats REALLY accomodate child safety seats? I know they're LATCH compatible, but is there enough room to pull an infant carrier in and out? Or put a toddler into a booster seat?

2. Do the front seat belts attach to the pseudo-B-pillar on the rear door (as on the Honda Element) or are they seat mounted? (as on a car that's been designed sensibly) Opening the front AND rear door to let Little Johnny jump in when I pick him up will be enough trouble.

3. Is this car worth getting with an automatic tranny? With the engine putting out only 210 HP instead of 250 HP, will performance suffer dramatically? (I know peak torque is actually higher in the ATX, but I don't know how the curves compare.)

4. Is the trunk large enough to fit a child's stroller? We've got one of those heavy-duty travel system strollers for now. Until Little Johnny's a little older I've gotta be able to lug that thing around with him.


Wally Llama,

I'll make this easier for you (if you're still reading this thread). Get the RX-8 as an auto. That would mean one less thing to worry about when yelling at your kid. The RX-8 is not a pure sports car. Its a well rounded car as many had stated already to exhaustion. As for safety issues when it comes to car accidents or should I say incidents(incidents sounds better to me), no car is reallly safe especially when there is some dumbass driving drunk at 100+ MPH. Mass and/or size does help with safety - otherwise known as crumple zone. The more of the car that gets crushed the more force is being absorbed(less force making your body fly all over inside the car, look ma no whiplash). Hopefully if ever in an accident your car doesn't get crushed too much or say bye bye to legs. I myself don't like huge cars, hard to avoid to objects or move away from incoming objects. Besides drinks gas as much a fish drinks water. Since you're way older than me you should already know that you should always be aware of your environment especially around fast moving objects (i.e. other cars)

You want the RX-8 then get it. But try to imagine what will happen when some teenager thats drunk or high on something coming your way at high speeds. If the incident isn't avoidable I'd go for something big enough to absorb as much force as possible without injuring you and your family. If it can easily be avoidable then by all means get the RX-8. Just as Gord96BRG says live your life but have safety in mind.

And to whomever made that comment about that there are more US drivers not wearing their seatbelts compared to the UK. The only reason that is true is because the US population is (I don't have a definite estimate, so sue me) something like 100 times that of the UK. You have to think of it proportionally. Of course there are going to be more US drivers not wearing their seat belts compared to the UK. I'm just trying to set some facts straight, not trying to be an ***. But I guess I was to be born to be like one, hehe.

Y&Y signing off.


Damn it someone get this monkey off my LEG!!!

HalleysComet

BTW, if you don't mind me asking: who is your father and how is he "corporate Mazda"? Inquiring minds want to know?




I don't mean my father IS corporate Mazda, but rather a part of corporate Mazda. I am not sure of his official title(I honestly have never asked) but he heads up the DC area district on the east coast. A few months back he was in Vegas for some Mazda meeting there, they stayed at the Bellagio although I didn't ask him for the details of the meeting there. Most of the main meetings for him take place in New Jersey. He occasionally travels to California or New York, and has been to Japan a few times (which he told us has small accommodations).
All I know is that he has worked for Mazda ever since I was little, and Mazda was all I drove until I moved out. Growing up we had mazda mugs, mazda shirts, hats, keychains, and all sorts of logo stuff. When I mentioned buying a bmw to him last year he told me I should hold out for th RX-8 's release, that it would be worth the wait. He has brought home just about every vehcile Mazda has had at some time. And owns all Mazda's as well. As as I told you before...his favorite is his Mazda RX-7 twin turbo which none us can drive.
I desperately wanted a white RX-8 and bugged the poor man to death about trying to get me one, but there was no way to get one here. White is not an option for USA production. He even sent me the chain of mail that shows the responses from various other Mazda heads replying to his inquiry into getting one for his daughter. The responses were all the same, its not an available option here,and the ones that are being produced overseas have the driver seat on the opposite side. So.....no white for me. If the demand is high they will make it an option later but I don't want to wait.

pelucidor

This is one of the best topics I've read in months...

First my hat is off to Gordon for so eloquently and passionately stating his case - as a new father (2 weeks now) I completely agree with every point he and HalleysComet makes.

Mazda DESIGNED this car to be a family friendly sports car - it even says so in ALL of their marketing materials. If, in the real world, real families find it unusable then it will not sell very well and I am sure Mazda cannot afford that.

For me, personally, I wanted a 2 seat convertible before we knew we were having a baby. Now we already have a 'safe' SUV (Acura MDX) for hauling our dogs and shopping etc, so according to some people here I should have got the S2000 I wanted (a dedicated sports car). However my wife and I agreed that our 2nd car needs to have 4 seats (and preferably 4 doors) for those rare occasions when the first vehicle might be unavailable - and the RX-8 was tailor made for my needs. (But you can bet a roadster will be chosen if we can ever afford a third car - perhaps a '94 Miata)

Between the RX-8 and the MDX I feel bad that my little princess will be traveling in the less safe vehicle most of the time. Although the MDX is one of the safest SUVs around (top honours along with BMW X5 and of course the new Volvo XC90) it will be much harder to avoid an accident in it as braking takes 30%+ longer and handling is much worse. Of course when metal meets metal (i.e. if an accident couldn't be avoided) then the MDX will do its duty.

Having just installed an infant base and carrier into my IS300 the day before the Rev-It-Up event (where I spent 20 mins in an RX-8) I believe that the RX-8 will be easier to install the seat in and remove than a small sedan thanks to the suicide doors. Get a base that has recline adjustment like the Graco Snugride (see JSG's comment in another thread).

Finally a comment on rollover deaths and statistics. Yes, SUVs and trucks have a higher % of rollover fatalities than passenger cars. What the numbers mentioned here don't say is that the vast majority of those rollvover fatalities are for people not wearing seatbelts (over 50% edit - should have said 25% of drivers - not passengers - in the USA do not wear seatbelts and the police don't usually stop you for this infraction, unlike in the UK etc).
Also percentages can be misleading. As an grossly exaggerated example:
Say 60% of SUV deaths are caused by rollover, compared to 30% for cars - it would appear the SUVS are worse of course.
However lets say that for ALL accidents (inc. rollover) SUVs have 20 deaths and cars have 100 - that means not only are cars vastly less safe overall but that even for rollovers there were only 12 deaths in SUVs againt 30 in cars - suddenly 60% vs 30% doesn't show the whole picture does it? This is a grossly exaggerated example to show the problem with percentages instead of hard numbers - BTW I just made the numbers up - they are not real so do not flame me for them.

Editied to correct percentage of people in USA not wearing seatbelts from 50% to 25%.

wakeech

are you kidding?? i mean, i know you're not kidding, but that's crazy...
it's once in 5 blue moons that i ever spot ANYONE not wearing a seatbelt in Canada, and the cops will ALWAYS pull you over if you're not wearing your seatbelt and they catch you... you dont' have to be doing anything else: just not being able to see the seatbelt over your shoulder is enough...

really?? more than half??? insane.

BRx8

well this is off topic, but seat belt usage is pretty low in the US as a whole...some states like California do enforce it to the fullest and seeing someone not wearing their safety belts is rare...but in Illinois, i'd say that maybe half the drivers don't wear them...it's the law but it isn't strictly enforced...

but yea, more than half the people seems a little over-bloated...

pelucidor

My 50% number is out of date - I read that when I first moved to the USA about 6 years ago. It has improved vastly since then so that only 25% don't wear a belt in the USA (compared to 8% or less in other industrialized nations like Canada). See here http://www.clarionledger.com/news/0301/31/m02a.html for more info.

Very bad estimate of populations: UK = 59.1M, USA = 272.6M so ratio is less than 5:1 not 100:1. See http://www.photius.com/wfb1999/ranki...ulation_0.html

My theory is that there are a lot of older people in the USA (say above 50 years old) who drove cars without seatbelts when they were much younger (in 1960's and earlier) and never got into the habit. In most other less affluent countries (like UK) most people couldn't afford cars when they were very young and by the time they could afford a vehicle they all came with seatbelts so they got used to wearing them.

That and of course the fact that you WILL be ticketed immediately by any cop in the UK for not wearing one, whereas in the USA you cannot be stopped purely for this infraction by the police (secondary offence meaning you must be pulled over for some other offence first).

ed hall

rubbish! the cops in the Uk are as useless as those in the US. Driving in the UK with its spead limit of 70 mph (with most doing 90mph) should be alot more fun the speed limit of 55 mph (with most doing 55mph) in the US.

Bottom line...we're going to go faster!

wakeech

ahahaha... have you ever driven in the US?? it's like a limit of 55-60 with EVERYONE (especially those POS suv's) going +80mph wherever they can...