RAGE

[Irish Death]

That sure beats my first car...75 Fiat 128...with rusty motor mounts...took about 3 months for me to break those mounts going around a corner and the whole engine/transmission shifted slightly allowing my drivers side axle to come out of the transmission...weeee

Good thing car was light and i just had to shift the motor back to its original position and stick the axle back in...

[beechbone]

I worked all summer and bought a 65 Plymouth Fury III for a grand when I was 16. Guttless POS but it looked cool. Now my son is looking at cars 5-10 grand for his first. WTF?!?

[BLKmomba1]

yea i worked off books since i was early 14. it allways felt good to buy my own stuff, and keep some cash on stash. you appreciate things more. but we all work hard hoping one day we can provide for our kids...true?! i plan on buying my kid a yacht!

[Bmore-coupe]

You are spoiled my friend. I've been working since I was 14..

THIS

Oh, and I bought every car that I've owned.

My parents decided to spend their money on something way better for me than a car...........my education

But congrats to those that can get away without working.

[BLKmomba1]

see this is why i like being part of nico family. everyone here seems focused and knows what they want in life... im sure like i did, u guys did massive research on the coupe before u purchased it. most of us are hard working down to earth people who love what they own. and you guys only get realer as i read more. wish we all lived close so the meets can be rediculous but one day it shall go down! and bmore i feel u man... i had to pay for school by myself... no one is rich but it pays off in the end to all of you guys and gals!!!

[6bang]

Damn a little bit spoiled? Nice car man but i forgot the days have come and gone where kids had to work hard for things...cute kid

[hexapod]

Wow...you guys had some pretty nice cars when you guys started driving. I started out with a Honda Odyssey. Upside was, I was the first one out of all my friends to get a license so all my friends and I could pile into the car and go everywhere

[crayzitalian3]

Wow...you guys had some pretty nice cars when you guys started driving. I started out with a Honda Odyssey. Upside was, I was the first one out of all my friends to get a license so all my friends and I could pile into the car and go everywhere

lol i think I can top yours. I wish i had a pic of it but my first car was an 87 Suburban back in November of 06 when I was a senior. It was red and grey with blue/dark blue fenders. It was horrible. It was all rusted up with really dark tints. It was so bad lol, my friends called it the molestormobile haha, but it was the best ride cause no one ever messed with me cause it was a tank. when i used to park in parking lots no one would ever park near me, i had a lil system in it, 2 6x9's and a 15" Sub, I had a mattress with a sleeping blanket for when me and my hunnies got cold. i had curtains so when i parked some where and hopped in the back no one could see me. It was the most fun car I have ever had to be honest, i miss it to this day

[hexapod]

LOL!!! That's pretty molestormobile. Curtains...mattress...blanket....LOLOLOL!!

[downedzephyr]

The molestormobile huh? my friend had one of those vans with no rear windows or anything, and it was black, old, and beat to s***. he might have you beat on that title. but i would kill to have a mattress in my car, i used to put the seats down and sleep in the back of my ford explorer

[crayzitalian3]

well i didn't molest any body, but the mattress wasn't used for sleeping if you know what im saying .

im not trying to brag, but if your friends van could top my truck, i'll give that kid all the props. i gotta try and find a pic so i can how you how ugly this thing was. It was nice and loud though had a fully rebuilt and restored 350 cubic inch dodge motor with a fully rebuilt transmission with straight exhaust. it was the loudest thing I have ever heard! i miss that truck so much, wayy to many memories lol

[hexapod]

lol TMI

[crayzitalian3]

lol my bad

[hexapod]

Lol it's. Okay. I have a lot of guy friends that like to share that info so I'm used to it

[crayzitalian3]

lol i usually don't, but i felt i needed to clarify that

[hexapod]

lol it's cool

[J Russ]

When I got my lisence at 16, I got my sister's hand-me0down 2007 Honda Fit. Now, for my 18th birthday I got a 3.5sr Coupe!!!! I know I'm lucky and very spoiled.

However, I saw some kid at ASU driving a bright red... GTR. Now how spoiled is that? Kids in Scottsdale are sooo spoiled, kids at my high school drive srt8 challengers, range rover sports, and one kid has a totally murdered out M5!!!

[lavon_andy]

rage, my first car was a 2000 dodge dakota paid my mom 3k for it (had a job since I was like 15 lol)

[CoupeVQ35CVT]

Funny, I wonder what these parents are thinking buying their kids fast powerful cars that have more than 2.0L of displacement and over 150 hp. I know of a family we're friends with, who have a son. The dad bought the kid a Honda Civic, wasn't good nuff, so later it was a Z3, which was totalled by the then 17-18 year old kid, then some other fast car, totalled, and then a BIKE, totalled, and now finally the parents bought him a '92 Honda Accord at 18-19 years of age.

Not hating, but I blame teenagers as much as their parents for high insurance rates due to stupid STUPID decisions like that.

You are very lucky YOU can AFFORD that 3.5SR at 18 considering the insurance it'll cost alone, never mind the monthly $400-$500 payments.

As for the kid driving a GTR, someone take that car away and just give him a bazooka and tell him it's actually a Quake 3 rocket launcher replica and not real. Let's see what he does then, at least it'll be more exciting.

[J Russ]

I am a really safe driver and have never gotten a ticket or driven recklessly. I hate how every person stereotypes 17-19 year old boys. They always say " oh bad driver this, reckless driver that" , I don't know about that, yes, some kids are like that, but me, no way Jose. I recieved the car as a birthday present from my parents and they pay the insurance for it. However, I do pay the gas bill, so if I want to floor the car, I gotta pay the consequence.

Yes, I know I'm very spoiled, but as I said, and as you can see above, The Altima is not the stupidest car you can get for a teenager, I really wanted a used G37 or Mitsubishi Evo, or even a STI, but I didn't fit into any of them, 6'10". Luckily I wasn't shorter, or I'd be dead and my parents would be broke!!! haha

[DReed86]

When I was 16 in 2005 I got a 1995 Carrolla which I blew the engine... then I got a Sebring Convertable 1997 totaled... another Sebring trans blew.... then a Saturn 1994 still have... then finally in 2008 I got my AC 3.5 and since Im a racer at heart its why I pour every penny into my beautiful car!!! Oh and Ive been working since I could stand... my parts thought children was another word for slave... lol

[DReed86]

I am a really safe driver and have never gotten a ticket or driven recklessly. I hate how every person stereotypes 17-19 year old boys. They always say " oh bad driver this, reckless driver that" , I don't know about that, yes, some kids are like that, but me, no way Jose.

You get that repuation because of people like me because your definition of reckless and mine are very different.... I have enough space to make every move I want to and I will not do it if the gap is closing... but some people dont like it.... so...... thats why I do it to them again... just to prove my skills :-)
i would say I along with most other "reckless drivers" are much better than "safe drivers"... we are more aware of our surrounding than the average person (you have to be when your 30 over the speed limit there is no time to check my texts when Im doing 90 in 60) my dad for example is a terrible driver he drives slow as $h!t but he is more of a dange than I am on the road.

[CoupeVQ35CVT]

I am a really safe driver and have never gotten a ticket or driven recklessly. I hate how every person stereotypes 17-19 year old boys. They always say " oh bad driver this, reckless driver that" , I don't know about that, yes, some kids are like that, but me, no way Jose.

You get that repuation because of people like me because your definition of reckless and mine are very different.... I have enough space to make every move I want to and I will not do it if the gap is closing... but some people dont like it.... so...... thats why I do it to them again... just to prove my skills :-)
i would say I along with most other "reckless drivers" are much better than "safe drivers"... we are more aware of our surrounding than the average person (you have to be when your 30 over the speed limit there is no time to check my texts when Im doing 90 in 60) my dad for example is a terrible driver he drives slow as $h!t but he is more of a dange than I am on the road.

Well, I hear this a lot from people, that going faster means they are more aware of their surroundings. While I'm no speed demon NOR a granny driver, I think going 90 in a 60 zone, or even 80 in a 60 zone, is more lethal than going 60. It's pure physics. At 90 mph you are going 50% faster than 60 mph. Your potential and kinetic energy are not simply 50% higher, but exponentially more, so when you wreck, you do real ugly damage. Your reaction time is cut back, you make one miscalculation, and it's over. Your peripheral vision is narrowed due to the focus in front of the road. People, like myself, are more likely to be pissed off, or just even startled, causing momentary loss of concentration, by a car zipping by at 90 mph out of the blue, which itself can be a danger as I have been in that situation far too often.

You may justify your need for speed, but the truth is, going faster while everyone else around you is going slower, is probably more dangerous. There is a reason why even the Autobahn has speed limits, because drivers cannot simply "go as fast as they want" when there are other factors in play out of their thought process, or dare I say it, lack of judgment/mistaken presumptions, especially when there is heavy traffic (relative to the speeds being driven) and drivers think weaving in and out to find the fast line down the road is OK, when it is clearly increasing the driver's chances to make a mistake and lose control if the tires give way (even if the driver thinks they gotz mad skillz).



Just some food for thought.

[J Russ]

I only go 5 to 10 over because there are soo many cameras in AZ. My dad on the other hand drives like a maniac! He has a 2010 Jaguar XFR and he floors it pretty much every time. It's fun to ride with him, until he starts taking turns at 40plus... haha plus he would KILL me if I got a ticket. So I'm fine with what I do, but I've already raced a GTI and a 545, and beat them both! hahah

[Hussain]

Well, I hear this a lot from people, that going faster means they are more aware of their surroundings. While I'm no speed demon NOR a granny driver, I think going 90 in a 60 zone, or even 80 in a 60 zone, is more lethal than going 60. It's pure physics. At 90 mph you are going 50% faster than 60 mph. Your potential and kinetic energy are not simply 50% higher, but exponentially more, so when you wreck, you do real ugly damage. Your reaction time is cut back, you make one miscalculation, and it's over. Your peripheral vision is narrowed due to the focus in front of the road. People, like myself, are more likely to be pissed off, or just even startled, causing momentary loss of concentration, by a car zipping by at 90 mph out of the blue, which itself can be a danger as I have been in that situation far too often.

You may justify your need for speed, but the truth is, going faster while everyone else around you is going slower, is probably more dangerous. There is a reason why even the Autobahn has speed limits, because drivers cannot simply "go as fast as they want" when there are other factors in play out of their thought process, or dare I say it, lack of judgment/mistaken presumptions, especially when there is heavy traffic (relative to the speeds being driven) and drivers think weaving in and out to find the fast line down the road is OK, when it is clearly increasing the driver's chances to make a mistake and lose control if the tires give way (even if the driver thinks they gotz mad skillz).



Just some food for thought.

well the problem with that is, who is the 50 MPH speed limit designed for? It's designed for ANY vehicle to be able to drive safe at that speed. Its common sense that a Ferrari or GT-R could stop faster and avoid an accident better then a 18 wheeler semi truck. But 50 MPH is the speed limit at which ALL vehicles can drive safely. That being said, maybe 90 MPH is safe in a car like ours. semi trucks carry tons and tons of stuff. for them to be able to stop while going 50 MPH and having to stop all those tons and tons of pounds their towing will require a much greater braking distance, BUT it is still "safe" requiring that braking distances. Of course a altima coupe going 50 MPH will stop faster then a altima coupe going 90 MPH BUT the more important question is, will it take a altima coupe a longer distance to stop at 90 MPH then a big rig semi would going 50 MPH? the question is relevant because IF the altima coupe CAN stop shorter at 90 then the big rig at 50, it means that the altima coupe going 90 is SAFE enough and is not driving recklessly..... it's still illegal to go over the speed limit and you'll still be in a lot of trouble if you got caught doing that but this is just a theory I have.

[downedzephyr]

everytime you say big rig, i imagine adam(big_rig) running and then squealing like he's breaking. yeah, i know i'm wierd lol.

[Blackmobile]

i'm with the ragers, my first car was a 96 mercury sable station wagon that i bought off my parents for $4k. after that i bought myself an 04 sentra spec v which i crashed 2 years later, then i bought my sister's 98 rav4 for $2k. then traded in the rav for the alti. i have no problem with parents buying their kids cars, as long as it's a modest car. kids should have to learn earn things, not have expensive extravagant things just given to them. i'm sure as hell going to try to buy my future kid a car when he gets his license, but it'll probly be some $5k-10k car for starters, maybe upgrade to something nicer after he's got a few years on the road. might even get him to chip in half so that he's got something invested in it too

[CoupeVQ35CVT]

well the problem with that is, who is the 50 MPH speed limit designed for? It's designed for ANY vehicle to be able to drive safe at that speed. Its common sense that a Ferrari or GT-R could stop faster and avoid an accident better then a 18 wheeler semi truck. But 50 MPH is the speed limit at which ALL vehicles can drive safely. That being said, maybe 90 MPH is safe in a car like ours. semi trucks carry tons and tons of stuff. for them to be able to stop while going 50 MPH and having to stop all those tons and tons of pounds their towing will require a much greater braking distance, BUT it is still "safe" requiring that braking distances. Of course a altima coupe going 50 MPH will stop faster then a altima coupe going 90 MPH BUT the more important question is, will it take a altima coupe a longer distance to stop at 90 MPH then a big rig semi would going 50 MPH? the question is relevant because IF the altima coupe CAN stop shorter at 90 then the big rig at 50, it means that the altima coupe going 90 is SAFE enough and is not driving recklessly..... it's still illegal to go over the speed limit and you'll still be in a lot of trouble if you got caught doing that but this is just a theory I have.

Most average cars take anywhere from 120-140 ft to stop from 70 mph. Now add another 20 mph and exponentially more kinetic energy, and you have a much larger stopping distance. I'm sure a semi takes longer to stop than a car, but I imagine they're built with proper spec braking system so they don't stop like a train. Sure, a semi stopping quickly can jack knife and take a few cars out, but again, if he is driving SAFELY and following a good 3-4 seconds behind the car in front, he will have more time to stop and react.

Stopping a shorter distance alone does not dictate safety (and I understand that's not your only reasoning for being safe). Going 90 mph in average traffic on the fast lane in a Lambo does not make it any safer than a Suzuki FX or Altima Coupe. It may stop a few feet shorter, but it all hinges on the DRIVER'S reaction time, and going 90 mph means you're covering over a 132 ft per second while you are thinking/reacting, vs 88 ft if you are going 60 mph. So even if the Lambo going 90 mph stops in 150 ft (a total conservative guess and it probably takes longer to stop) and an Altima going 60 mph takes 140 ft (worse case), it may take the DRIVER a second to react to the situation ahead, slam the brake pedal etc.. In that total time from reacting 1 sec. and then stopping 90 mph to 0 mph, the Lambo driver in my example takes 132 + 150 = 282 ft to stop? The Altima coupe in the next lane over sees the same problem, takes a second to react/slam the brakes and finally stops 60 mph to 0 mph, in about 88 + 140 ft, or 228 ft from reaction to stopping. That's 54 ft that the Lambo took extra to stop, meaning the Lambo probably hit something, or came very close to danger, while the Altima having been slower at 60 mph was a whole truck length behind, had more control over the car and situation to react/swerve and less potential to do lethal damage.

In any case, my argument or point of view in the previous post was about people driving recklessly, following too close, zig zagging with next to zero warning (turn signal on the INSTANT you change from lane to lane is not helping really...) and fitting in between cars to change lanes inches apart from front and back is not safe even at 30 mph. The guy in front could slow down suddenly, your car trying to fit through from behind and change lanes would hit his rear bumper, along with the other guy behind you in the next lane you were trying to change to. You'd be sandwiched between the two and cause way more damage.

I think when people want to go fast, as with anything, they will justify it in their heads with their reasoning. It really doesn't matter what the facts say, because in their minds they are always the better driver than the moron in the next car over, or have better brakes, or better tires, or better reaction time, etc. Or they simply admit to taking risks, and live with the consequences in any case. Myself, I admit to driving fast, but usually don't stray above 10-15 mph of the speed limit, and try to stay around 70-75 mph at worse on the highways (60-70 MPH zones), simply because I don't find its worth risking life and reducing MPG.

But back on topic, my first car I drove was a '92 Olds Cutlass. A used 4 banger my folks bought in '98 for $4k for my mom, in decent shape, turned POS by my family over the years that was good for me to learn on back in late '99, but not so good reliability wise. My second car was my own '00 Dodge Neon which I paid for with my money 90%. My second was a '05 Altima 2.5s lease which was my first true "nice car" and then an '06 Sentra 1.8SE as the only one I could afford, and now finally my Coupe which should have been another econobox if I was wiser.

[Hussain]

those are some good points.... I myself usually drive about 5-10 over on the hwy. I'll do 70 in a 65 or 75-80 in a 70 zone.... but it all depends, i5 can be crazy. taking I5 from sacramento or elk grove to the bay area, theirs almost never any cops and the slow cars do 80 and fast drivers do 100+ continuously. me and my mom did a trip while averaging 100 MPH the whole time. sometimes we slowed to 80, sometimes we went up to 120. but thats on i5 where people actually understand the concept of slower traffic move to the right lol other hwy's around here I wouldnt even think of doing that. CHP would be all over me, not to mention it wouldnt be safe with some people doing 60 MPH in the left lane when theirs no one in front of them and the speed limit is 65