Quantcast

U.S. Stalls $1M Italian Supercar Over Airbags: Are Regulations Too Strict?

SodaHead News 2011/08/11 13:59:44
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Now what are rappers going to drive?

Even as President Obama signed off on a historic pact to raise fuel economy standards for the nation's trucking fleet, federal safety regulators have put the kibosh on the sale of a new $1 million, 700-horsepower Italian supercar called the Huayra.

But according to CNN, carmaker Pagani wasn't bounced because of the vehicle's environmental impact. In fact, the car meets European emission standards and boasts reduced CO2 emissions and fuel consumption that makes it top among V12-powered exotic vehicles.

Believe it or not, the reason is because safety regulators rejected Pagani's application for an exemption from federal auto safety rules requiring child-safe "advanced" airbags. Yeah, child-safe airbags in a 12-cylinder carbon-titanium car built to zero to 60 in about 3.5 seconds.

Pagani said complying with the rules would cause "substantial economic hardship." The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration didn't buy the financial hardship angle and didn't think the company had made a serious effort to comply.

The NHTSA sometimes makes temporary exemptions from some safety rules for automakers who only sell a small number of cars and Pagani was trying to break into the U.S. market with the car, which it figured on selling five of in 2012.

The small independent automaker built and crash-tested the hand-made vehicles to meet safety standards in the U.S. and Europe and it asked for the exemption three years ago, but only got word of the NHTSA decision as it was preparing for the car's official unveiling in Los Angeles last week.

The official sale date for the vehicle in the U.S. has now been pushed to 2013 as engineers work on an advanced airbag system.
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • halfmiletrack 2011/08/15 00:49:30
    Yes
    halfmiletrack
    It's my opinion that only safety items that protect OTHER drivers should be enforced....anti-lock brakes, steering mechanisms, fuel containment etc. BUT the sale of all non-compliant vehicles, new and used, should require a thorough disclosure.
  • Cptfreakout . 2011/08/12 21:30:32
    Yes
    Cptfreakout .
    Some rich nerk who wants to kill them self is bad how ?
  • Yes
    LibertyBella ☮ Ron Paul 2012 ☮
    +2
    It is nonsensical to put airbags for children in a car that would not have them as passengers. Government regulation cripples innovation.
  • holdenferall 2011/08/12 21:02:54
    Yes
    holdenferall
    +1
    This only affects the very wealthy, so this problem will be cleared up in no time at all.
  • GINGERBREAD 2011/08/12 21:01:40
  • sherry 2011/08/12 20:27:52
    Yes
    sherry
    +1
    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration must be owned by the insurance industry & they don't want to pay out claims. The government doesn't care about Americans losing their lives - that just reduces the surplus population.
  • jeepster4 2011/08/12 19:44:06
    No
    jeepster4
    A million dollar car can't meet the same requirements as a twelve thousand dollar KIA? The rich are supposed to be smarter than the rest of us.
  • jon 2011/08/12 19:32:15
    Yes
    jon
    But O will say WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT SO DO THEY ts boys
  • NidStyles 2011/08/12 18:41:15
    Yes
    NidStyles
    +1
    That's not a car for driving to daycare with.
  • TheTailor 2011/08/12 17:45:27
    Yes
    TheTailor
    +1
    Stupid, what else can be said?
  • John 2011/08/12 17:17:24
    Yes
    John
    +1
    Regulate, regulate, regulate....It is nobodies business but their own as to how safe they choose to be. Isn't refreshing, we have these bureaucrats who "determine" what is good and not so good for us? Safety, translates to mean control, because we/I am too stupid to make our/my own decisions.
  • FatherLiberty 2011/08/12 17:09:50
    Yes
    FatherLiberty
    +1
    If I want to drive a car that doesnt have airbags that is my choice. If other people want safety they can drive a car with airbags. Mine not having airbags does not put them in more danger, only myself.
  • mac9 2011/08/12 17:03:11
    Yes
    mac9
    +2
    All regulation is too strict in the US. That's why we make nothing. But as for me....if I had a million dollars I would buy a collection of 60's American Muscle Cars!
  • j zano ☮ R ☮ P ☮ 2012 ☮ 2011/08/12 17:01:37
    Yes
    j zano ☮ R ☮ P ☮ 2012 ☮
    +2
    uhhh!! if you have a car like this you most likely don't have kids! who could afford something like that with kids! hahaha
  • Charles E j zano ... 2011/08/15 13:44:55
    Charles E
    +1
    And if you did have kids, most likely the chauffeur or nanny would be driving them around, not daddy or mommy in the "good" car.
  • Racefish 2011/08/12 16:10:18
    Yes
    Racefish
    If I was the owner of the company, I'd say;

    Looka dis Obama. Uppa U.S.
  • Wahvlvke 2011/08/12 16:07:51
    Yes
    Wahvlvke
    +1
    If the regulations made any sense there would be seat belts on a school bus and air bags on tractors and motorcycles ... oops ... hope I didn't give someone an idea.
  • Racefish Wahvlvke 2011/08/12 16:12:09
    Racefish
    +1
    Too late. Seat belts are already on school buses. I'm looking at them being required on motorcycles and bicycles. Airbags too.
  • Postmas... Racefish 2011/08/12 18:51:57
    PostmasterOfDystopia
    There are no seat belts on a school bus. I've ridden one to school each day and will continue to until I graduate and never have I seen a seat belt on the bus.
  • Racefish Postmas... 2011/08/14 15:40:24
    Racefish
    Must be some old buses.
  • Charles E Postmas... 2011/08/15 13:47:02
    Charles E
    Except for the driver.
  • Charles E Wahvlvke 2011/08/15 13:46:37
    Charles E
    You're too late. They already have the idea. They just need a time when no one is paying attention to issue the regulations.
  • Chido 2011/08/12 16:00:14
    Yes
    Chido
    +2
    They're only going to sell a couple and it is not really a family car.
  • Racefish Chido 2011/08/12 16:12:36
    Racefish
    +1
    If I had that car, I wouldn't let a kid in it.
  • Charles E Racefish 2011/08/15 13:47:37
    Charles E
    I wouldn't let a kid near it.
  • Racefish Charles E 2011/08/16 21:01:01
    Racefish
    Good idea.
  • Chido Racefish 2011/09/06 14:20:01
    Chido
    My point exactly.
  • Fred 2011/08/12 15:48:32
    Yes
    Fred
    if you can afford one of those, chances are you will not (and probably can't) have children
  • Orangedragan 2011/08/12 14:47:38
    No
    Orangedragan
    These regulations are there to protect us. Can you imagine how many more deaths per year there would be if cars weren't required to have airbags, or ensure that the car won't blow up when you start it? If there's one thing history has proven, it's that manufacturers will cut every corner they can to cut down on their cost.
  • Fred Oranged... 2011/08/12 15:44:43
    Fred
    +1
    It's an Italian supercar, if they didn't explode when you turned the key it just wouldn't have the same personality.
  • John Oranged... 2011/08/12 17:20:04
    John
    +2
    Yes, let's thank those Washington Regulators for ridding us of those exploding cars.
  • waddlec... Oranged... 2011/08/12 17:53:39
    waddlecaudle
    +4
    In this case, I seriously doubt that the carbon composite, V12, aluminum/titanium engine that cost in the six figures are worried about cutting corners as much as being realistic. These cars are made like Formula 1 cars. The subframe breaks down and absorbs impact while the cabin is reinforced. If all cars, like Honda, did this then they could keep their $1,000 special child protection airbag and give me the $150,000 race engineered cockpit. I bet if you get in a crash going 60 those 4 point safety harnesses paired with the cockpit frame and support are going to work just as well if not better than a bag of air slapping your kid in the face when it deploys faster than the blink of an eye (literally, I think it is .04 seconds to deploy). If Ford starts kicking their airbags to the side I will be right there beside you to complain, but this is like asking an Indy driver to put an airbag in his car.
  • Flowers 2011/08/12 14:04:37
    No
    Flowers
    what business does this car have on our highways??
  • darthtbone Flowers 2011/08/12 14:40:52
    darthtbone
    +2
    It's really no one's business what someone else drives.
  • Flowers darthtbone 2011/08/12 14:53:00
    Flowers
    when it puts the safety of others on the line, yes it is.
  • FatherL... Flowers 2011/08/12 17:13:02
    FatherLiberty
    +1
    My car having airbags has nothing to do with anyone elses safety. If your car has airbags you will be safe... mine having airbags or not doesnt make a difference for your safety. It is same with vaccines. People try to force vaccines on other people saying you will put others at harm if you dont... that is complete BS. If you get your vaccine you dont have to worry about me not having one. It makes no damn sense.
  • Flowers FatherL... 2011/08/12 17:41:28
    Flowers
    The US may be stalling the approval bc of the lack of airbags but I was talking about the fact that it's a overly powerful car that has only one purpose... To go really really fast. THAT is why I asked why does it need to be on our highways in the first place. There is no where that a car like that would be able to safely speed, except on a racetrack and it's not being marketed to track owners as far as I can see. It shouldn't be driven on our streets tempting the driver to go faster, and that puts us in jeopardy.
  • FatherL... Flowers 2011/08/12 18:00:01
    FatherLiberty
    +2
    The car can still go the speed limit. It is no different then a Ferrari Enzo or porsche. Many of these other cars will go nearly 200 mph and anyone can argue that it might tempt people to go fast, but it shouldnt mean you cant drive them. It is up to the driver to obey the speed limit, if he doesnt he will get the penalty. That argument is no different then saying a person owning a gun might tempt them to shoot someone so no one should own guns. I know some actually believe that argument but it is ridiculous. They can ban anything by that reasoning.
  • Flowers FatherL... 2011/08/12 18:23:05
    Flowers
    +1
    *shrugs* I still think it's overkill for that kind of car to be over here.
  • Charles E FatherL... 2011/08/15 13:53:21
    Charles E
    +1
    Banning anything other people might enjoy is probably flowers goal.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 8 Next » Last »

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2013/06/19 11:13:17

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals