Cars that won't let you speed?

[Barkeep49]

So according to an ad in my Business Week DaimlerChrysler is developing cars that will monitor your driving and help you know when there are traffic signs, INCLUDING speed limit signs, and then help me "prevent dangerous situations". Now I agree that speed limits are there for a reason but if I'm on I-90 driving up to school early in the morning, as I often do, I don't want my car telling me I can't go 80 when there isn't another car on the road. Of course it would be helpful to be alerted to stop signs and such, but how far of a jump is it from a car that monitors your driving to a car that reports your driving to the authorities? The whole thing is rather disconcerting for me.

[Chief Rum]

I hate to sound like nitpicker, but those speed laws are there for a reason. They're not just there to protect you from other cars. They are there to protect you from yourself. Screw other cars. What happens to you if you lose control of a speeding car for some reason and head straight for a concrete divider in the center of the freeway? Or maybe through a railing and down a hill?

I don't like the idea of cars controlling speed, because I think that's a little too Big Brother-y for me. But I don't think it's justified to throw this out just because you want to speed to work. If you need to, you need to change your time management habits. If you don't need to, but you want to, you need to reassess your driving priorities.

I would be much more for cars that checked a driver's alcohol levels by breath than for one that stopped you from speeding, although I would imagine that would be hard to do, and easy to fool.

Chief Rum

[jerem77]

Looks like he was only 20 years off.

[stkelly52]

Personally, If you are driving 80 early in the morning, and no one is around, then you are speeding and you deserve a ticket. Speed limits are there for a reason, and failure to follow them is one of the leading causes of trafic accidents. Like it or not, a car that would not let you speed would save lives, to me that is worth it.

[astralhaze]

There are actually cars now which make the driver pass a breath test for alcohol before allowing you to turn on the engine. I do believe that some state recently made having one of these devices installed on your car a punishment for drunk driving.

[mrskippy]

Chief Rum is just jealous because he'll never get anywhere close to 80 on I-5. Heck ... he's lucky if he gets to 10 mph.

Skippy

[GrantDawg]

My concern would be being able to pass when needed. Passing a car, you often need to go above the speed limit to make the pass in a timely manner. A car should let you have control because you know what you need when you need it.

[oykib]

Of course, drowsiness is supposed to be an even bigger killer than drunkeness or speeding. When are we gonna build a car that makes sure you got a good seven hours sleep and have been following the food pyramid for the past three days?

[IMetTrentGreen]

well its not like you're entitled to any privacy on a public road, so i don't think this is big brother-y at all

however i did always wonder why they even make cars that can exceed 80 at all

[Blackadar]

Actually, statistics prove that driving 15 MPH below the Speed Limit is far more likely to result in an accident than 15 MPH above the Speed Limit.

[QuikSand]

One of my biggest concerns is the driving of stupid people. Maybe we need cars that adminiter a straightforward "rules of the road" quiz before ignition, just to make sure that the operator won't be a menace.

[ShovelMonkey]

I have a 2002 Chevy Silverado which, while I can still speed, shuts me off at 98 mph. Most new cars/trucks are governed at some speed limit. Reducing that limit would be simple.

And as for the whole speeding debate, I speed, I've had wrecks. Not one wreck was caused by speeding. As some one here mentioned going under the speed limit or even going THE speed limit when everyone else around you on a major interstate are moving faster is more likely to cause an accident.

The State Police (at least in PA) have been quoted as saying that you are safer maintaining the speed of traffic around you. Now if you are the one lone gunman doing 80 while everyone else is doing 65 then that is different.

Also there is a difference between speedy driving and ignorant driving. Ignorant driving causes accidents.

[Fidatelo]

I can think of a lot of reasons why you might want, or need, to speed. Sometimes to avoid an accident you need to speed up a bit. Someone already mentioned passing in a timely manner. What about if your life is threatened and you need to get away? OK, that's a little far fetched, but still, while speeding may be dangerous I think it would be far worse to have the lack of control something like this would imply...

[sabotai]

I don't like the whole shutting the engine off because of speeding. What if you are on a highway and go over the limit and your engine shuts off? I think that might greatly increase the risk of an accident.

But then again, everyone who is speeding should be ticketed. There is no excuse.

Blackie, I would point out that most people who are driving 15 mph below the speed limit are old people who have bad reflexes and it's their bad reflexes, not their slow driving, that makes them cause accidents.

ShovelMonkey, if you are doing the speed limit on a major highway and everyone around you is speeding, the most likely cause is for one of the speeders to smack into you, and they would be at fault.

From the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:

"Speeding reduces the time drivers have to avoid crashes and lengthens stopping distances, increasing both the likelihood of crashing and the severity of the crashes that do occur. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), speeding is one of the most prevalent reported factors associated with crashes. Speed is a factor in 30 percent of all fatal crashes, killing an average of 1,000 Americans every month. In 1999, more than 12,000 people died in speed-related crashes. NHTSA estimates the economic cost to society of speed-related crashes to be $28 billion each year. Health care costs alone are about $4 billion per year."

[Bonegavel]

There is a lawsuit in here. We can blame the car companies for allowing the cars to go above speed limits. When you get a ticket you can say, "Hey, I'm not responsible. My car let me go fast."

Personal repsonsibility is so overrated these days. Oops, a landmine just went off in my yard again. Damn, pesky neighborhood kids. Better call my lawyer so he can get on the horn with the landmine people. The packaging never explained that they would explode after being placed in the ground.

[ShovelMonkey]

Originally posted by Sabotai
I don't like the whole shutting the engine off because of speeding. What if you are on a highway and go over the limit and your engine shuts off? I think that might greatly increase the risk of an accident.

In my truck the engine doesn't shut off it merely kills your RPM's. Yes having the engine actually shut off would be dangerous as the possibility would exist of losing power steering and braking.

But then again, everyone who is speeding should be ticketed. There is no excuse.

I'll agree with this. Speeders should be ticketed. I'll risk it however. ;)

...I would point out that most people who are driving 15 mph below the speed limit are old people who have bad reflexes and it's their bad reflexes, not their slow driving, that makes them cause accidents.

This is partially true. Bad reflexes do cause accidents. But making yourself and obstacle by driving 15 mph under the speed limit also causes them.

ShovelMonkey, if you are doing the speed limit on a major highway and everyone around you is speeding, the most likely cause is for one of the speeders to smack into you, and they would be at fault.

Yes they would be at fault. However it would still be safer to go the speed of everyone else unless it is an absolutely outrageous speed. I would rather prevent the accident than allow it to happen and the bitch that "it wasn't my fault."

And before you say that, "Well everyone should be going the speed limit then," let me say that, yes they should be. However this'll never happen without radical changes to cars, as previously mentioned, and or enforcement.

From the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:

"Speeding reduces the time drivers have to avoid crashes and lengthens stopping distances, increasing both the likelihood of crashing and the severity of the crashes that do occur. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), speeding is one of the most prevalent reported factors associated with crashes. Speed is a factor in 30 percent of all fatal crashes, killing an average of 1,000 Americans every month. In 1999, more than 12,000 people died in speed-related crashes. NHTSA estimates the economic cost to society of speed-related crashes to be $28 billion each year. Health care costs alone are about $4 billion per year."

This is also true and emphasizes that speed kills. However, it is my belief that there are degrees of speed. All over the country speed limits are being raised as DOT's are realizing that higher speeds are indeed safe on many of the country's road systems.

A reasonable amount of speeding is perfectly safe in many situations. Outrageous amounts of speed are what get people killed, however. Foolish speed kills.

[Fritz]

Originally posted by Chief Rum
I hate to sound like nitpicker, but those speed laws are there for a reason. They're not just there to protect you from other cars. They are there to protect you from yourself.

I stuck a potato stick in my nose when I was 6 and got a nasty infection. There should be a law!

[Craptacular]

Originally posted by QuikSand
One of my biggest concerns is the driving of stupid people.

The FIRST thing my father taught me about driving ... assume every other person on the road is a complete idiot.

People do drive too fast these days, but it's not up to Joanna Soccermom to use her minivan to slow people down. Notice how the signs on the freeway that say "Keep Right Except to Pass" or "Slow Traffic Keep Right" look just like speed limit signs?? That's because they are regulatory signs, and are enforcable law. I wish I'd see police pull people over for that!

[Qwikshot]

People think that its a right to drive, it's only a priviledge, I have had numerous officers say that to me.

I have only been pulled over once and it was around 2 in the morning on I-80. I did and 81 in a 65.

I knew a girl in college that got pulled over 3 times in one day, on the same drive, she talked her way out of the first one...but she got two tickets.

Because no one is on the road doesn't make it okay, everyone is in a hurry these days but I don't think anything has changed exception a greater awareness of what speed can do, cars are faster and lighter these days than the gashogs of yesteryear. You hit something in a Chevy or Ford of the 60 or 70's you are going to put a hurt in something...you hit something with your miata or civic, good luck to you....

I had a greek advisor tell me that giving a freshman a beer was like putting a gun to their head (really) but she grumped about how she got a speeding ticket on the way to college...it's why I never took the college adminstration seriously when I was a fraternity president.

[sabotai]

Enforcement is the thing that needs to happen. If cops would just enforce the laws, we wouldn't have this problem in the first place.

But they don't, not consistently.

My girlfriend's brother just got onto a police force and was riding around with one of the cops to, I guess, get a feel for what they do.

The guy pulled over 2 people for speeding (maybe more, these are the ones he let off). One woman was doing 90, but he let her go, without a warning, because she had one of those "a famility member is a cop so I can do whatever I want" cards. (I forget what they're called.)

Another guy was doing 100, yes 100 mph (in a 65 mph zone) and the cop let him go with a warning. Why? Because he was a bagboy for the grocery store that the cop frequently goes too.

I agree with somethings people have said. Yeah, it's probably safe to go 75 even when the speed limit is 65. But there are limits for a reason. Yeah, it's safer when everyone is doing the same speed. But that's why we have limits. That is the speed that they want you to do.

And if all the speeders here did do the speed limit, you'd be AMAZED at how many people actually drive the speed limit on a highway. Seriously. I do, and I usually get passed once every 2 or 3 minutes. That is not a lot at all.

So to all those who say it's faster to speed since everyone else does...everyone else doesn't. In fact, from what I've seen, the vast majority does not speed at all.

At least in my part of the nation. I live in South Jersey. The drivers in North Jersey are absolute nutcases. Everyone wonders why NJ has the highest insurance rates...well, North Jersey is why. They don't know how to fucking drive up there.

That that's a rant for a different topic.

[Cringer]

Originally posted by Blackadar
Actually, statistics prove that driving 15 MPH below the Speed Limit is far more likely to result in an accident than 15 MPH above the Speed Limit.

Thank you, now please tell the various state governments out there that insist on having split speed limits for trucks and cars, CA, OH, IL, MI...and others that are not as bad...Cars at 70 and trucks at 55 is insane and dangerous.

As far as only going certain speeds, i would actually be used to it and have some problems with it. As a truck driver i am used to my company using governors on the trucks and currently can only go 65 mph (can increase up to 69 depending on mpg but it is unrealistic and therefore never obtained by our drivers). As someone brought up, passing is a BIG problem. When your truck goes 65 tops, and the guy you wanna pass keeps going up and down between 62-66 or something like that, it drives you nuts that you can't hammer down for a minute to blow by them

[ShovelMonkey]

Originally posted by sabotai
And if all the speeders here did do the speed limit, you'd be AMAZED at how many people actually drive the speed limit on a highway. Seriously. I do, and I usually get passed once every 2 or 3 minutes. That is not a lot at all.

So to all those who say it's faster to speed since everyone else does...everyone else doesn't. In fact, from what I've seen, the vast majority does not speed at all.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I don't know where you drive but it must be a traffic Utopia. I live in Central PA and I can safely say that in my regular commutes of I-80, I-99(Route 15), 220, and even the smaller roads of the areas that people who follow the speed limits are a minority.

Down south coming out of Miami last month everybody, and I mean EVERYBODY, was doing at least ten mph above the speed limit. And this was during rush hour!

As I said, we'll have to agree to disagree.

[sooner333]

Just drive through Norman when the Speed Limit goes from 70 to 60 on I-35 and everyone keeps going 75. I'm not going to sit here and say that everyone should speed, but I also don't want to be told that a car will stop me from doing so. There are some situations where it is okay to do so. As mentioned before, passing...while technically still against the law, you need to be able to on two lane roads, otherwise you may be stuck behind a 90 year-old man going 50 in a 70 for 100 miles. Also, if there is nobody on the road, and the only person I am endangering is myself, it should be my choice whether I want to risk the ticket or my life.

By the way, I usually travel about 5 miles over the speed limit on the interstate and no more. I have broken that rule in the middle of Kansas and about two or three times in a hurry, but usually I am just with the flow of traffic. I find it to be much more scary going under the speed limit when everone is going 10 over.

[sabotai]

"Down south coming out of Miami last month everybody, and I mean EVERYBODY, was doing at least ten mph above the speed limit. And this was during rush hour!"

Traffic was moving during rush hour!?!? Now THAT is traffic utopia. You can't even drive on the NJ Turnpike for more than 2 minutes without stopping during rush hour.

"we'll have to agree to disagree."

I don't agree to that!

(little Simpsons reference for the kids)

[sabotai]

"Down south coming out of Miami last month everybody, and I mean EVERYBODY, was doing at least ten mph above the speed limit. And this was during rush hour!"

Traffic was moving during rush hour!?!? Now THAT is traffic utopia. You can't even drive on the NJ Turnpike for more than 2 minutes without stopping during rush hour.

"we'll have to agree to disagree."

I don't agree to that!

(little Simpsons reference for the kids)

[Mac Howard]

Just a few comments on a number of the things mentioned above.

Implicit in some of the above posts is the idea that speed limits are an intelligent assessment of the "safe" speed of a particular road.

About 20 metres from where I am now there's a new road. Twelve months ago it was a two lane single carriageway. It had a speed limit of 60 mph.

They've now upgraded to a four lane, dual carriageway. Great. Much more space, much safer.

They've reduced the speed limit to 50 mph!!!

A four lane duel carriageway carrying the same traffic as a two lane, single carriageway is only as safe with a 10 mph reduction in speed limit. Could there be just a element of arbitrariness to these limits?

The safe speed (and surely speed limits are concerned with safety) should surely be related to the road conditions.

On New Year's Eve I went to visit relatives about 80 miles away from here. I came back early New Year's Day (7 in the morning) to avoid the traffic. I came down a freeway virtually free of traffic. You could see for a couple of miles down a straight road and there wasn't a car in site.

I kept my speed down to the 70 mph limit of the road quite unnecessarily.

Well, I thought I had. A couple of weeks later I received a summons. Apparently I had drifted up to 73 mph and had been picked up by a police radar trap set up on one of the bridges over the freeway that morning. Automatic fine, no defence!

Doubtless the police have explained to house holders that were burgled that night that the police don't really have the resources to chase up burglaries as a recently burgled friend of mine was told recently.

Of course not - the police were busy setting up speed traps to prevent speed maniacs doing 3 mph above the speed limit on wide open freeways with no traffic!

The authorities continuously dump the responsibility for the road toll on drivers while disregarding the influence they themselves can have on the accident toll.

Speed, in itself, doesn't kill. Speed combined with hazard is what kills. That's why the freeways, at least here in Australia, are the fastest and the safest roads. They have little in the way of hazard!

About 2 miles from here is one of the worst black spots in Australia. Go through this junction and anyone with a single brain cell can see precisely what's wrong.

You have two roads intersecting, one a 6 lane, dual carriageway town bypass with high speed traffic, the other a four lane, dual carriageway with low speed local traffic. Seventy yards from this junction is the primary entrance and exit of the main shopping mall for this town.

The junction is controlled by the most painful traffic lights I've ever experienced.

People die at this junction on a regular basis.

The answer is obvious. At best a fly-over for the bypass traffic. At the very least a large roundabout that allows the traffic to mingle at reduced speed to reduce the seriousness of crashes.

For years now the authorities have done nothing. I've just seen plans for the next 10 years of road developments in this area. There is still no intention to do anything.

The authorities fall back all the time on "Speed Kills!" That way the responsibility is on the driver and they have no responsilbility at all. Who can do anything about these crazy drivers?

Well, THEY can. All this bypass traffic passes down the freeway without accident. It can cross this junction without accident also if only the local politicians had the guts to tackle the problem and fix the junction.

A recent report about road safety reveals the duplicity of the authorities. They have recently reduced the speed limit on local roads from 40 mph to 30 mph. They tell us that such a reduction can result in a reduction of the death toll by 30%.

That's an interesting figure because 75% of all deaths on WA roads take place on county roads with limits of 70 mph. To get a reduction of 30% of overall deaths will require a 115% reduction in local road deaths.

So, that reduction in limit from 40 to 30 mph will not only remove all road accidents locally that lead to deaths but presumably see a few people resurrected as well. An interesting proposition.

No doubt that speed is a problem. But it's certainly not the only problem and as long as we pretend it is we won't fix the accident toll.

[Ksyrup]

Originally posted by IMetTrentGreen
however i did always wonder why they even make cars that can exceed 80 at all

I've often wondered the same thing. Why do I have a car with a speedmeter that registers well over 100? Is it so that when I'm speeding, I can actually see how fast I'm going?

Speedometer readings in excess of 100 and car commercials that show off a car's abilities doing things that would get you killed and/or arrested, are two things I don't understand. "Here's how great this car's acceleration and handling is, assuming it was legal to do any of the things these 'professional' drivings are demonstrating." They might as well be selling beer to teenagers with those ads.

[ShovelMonkey]

Originally posted by sabotai
"Down south coming out of Miami last month everybody, and I mean EVERYBODY, was doing at least ten mph above the speed limit. And this was during rush hour!"

Traffic was moving during rush hour!?!? Now THAT is traffic utopia. You can't even drive on the NJ Turnpike for more than 2 minutes without stopping during rush hour.

"we'll have to agree to disagree."

I don't agree to that!

(little Simpsons reference for the kids)

Obviously it wasn't downtown Miami, but yes once we were on the outskirts heading north on I-95 it was ten mph above the speed limit all the way. Same thing coming in on I-75 across aligator alley. I suggest you try it sometime, it'd be an enlightning experience for you.

Oh, and by the way, several time Florida State Police cars passed us all seemingly unconcerned by the mass speeding.

[Bee]

Speed limits have very little to do with safety. Yes it is a factor, but the much larger issue is financial. It costs less to design highways for lower speeds, it generates income by allowing increased enforcements, and it lowers fuel consumption.

Most roadways are designed for much greater speed limits than what are posted. Although reaction time is an issue, if you can't react in time to avoid an accident at 75 mph, the majority of the time you won't be able to avoid it at 65 mph.

Excessive speeding (going more than 15 mph over the speed limit) is a different story IMO. Even with that though, there are more dangerous things on the road than speeders (like drunk drivers, sleepy drivers, distracted drivers, drivers with poor vision or insufficient reaction times, etc.).

[sabotai]

"Oh, and by the way, several time Florida State Police cars passed us all seemingly unconcerned by the mass speeding."

What are they supposed to do? Stop them all?

And I never said that cops pull over all speeders. I said the SHOULD. I never heard of a cop pulingl someone over for doing 65 in a 55 or 75 in a 65. But anything over 10 mph above the speed limit seems to be what they look for.

It's like drugs. They don't really care about the kid carrying a dime bag, they want to find out who his dealer is and bust him. Let the minor offenders go and wait for the big one.

If the cops pulled over someone for doing 5 over the limit all the time, they'd just be pulling over those guys constantly and may miss the one doing 90 because they're stopping the ones doing 70.

And I did not say that all people around me do the limit. I used to speed a lot too. When I was on 295 in NJ or the NJ Turnpike, I would always got between 70-75 (limit 65). ANd it seemed to me that everyone was going that fast. I eventually slowed down, dunno why really, but the point is now I do around 65 and I was kind of surprised to see that the majority of the drivers actually do the speed limit. Sometimes a little slower. But obviously not everyone is doing the speed limit.

That's all I was saying. I wasn't saying "You're an idiot for thinking everyone speeds." but you seem to act like that is what I said. All I was implying is that you may be surprised at how many people don't speed.

[ShovelMonkey]

Originally posted by sabotai
"Oh, and by the way, several time Florida State Police cars passed us all seemingly unconcerned by the mass speeding."

What are they supposed to do? Stop them all?

What I wasn't saying is that the cops don't seem to mind so I guess it's ok.

Obviously they can't stop them all. But they could stop some of them. This was an illustration of my earlier point that if speeding is to be toned down, enforcement needs to be changed.

And I never said that cops pull over all speeders. I said the SHOULD. I never heard of a cop pulingl someone over for doing 65 in a 55 or 75 in a 65. But anything over 10 mph above the speed limit seems to be what they look for.

Again this is an enforcement issue. If they really want people to start slowing down they need to pull people over for even this minor speeding. This is an area I agree with you in, and really don't know why we're disputing it.

It's like drugs. They don't really care about the kid carrying a dime bag, they want to find out who his dealer is and bust him. Let the minor offenders go and wait for the big one.

This is something for another debate. ;) Which is what I hope you realize this is, a friendly debate. No hurt feelings here, right?

If the cops pulled over someone for doing 5 over the limit all the time, they'd just be pulling over those guys constantly and may miss the one doing 90 because they're stopping the ones doing 70.

Under state law, at least in PA, 5 mph over isn't really considered speeding. It carriers a minimal fine and if you are caught no points are placed on your license therefore carrying no incentive not to do it again.

Therefore I'd agree that it would be a waste, currently, to pull people over for 5 mph. I don't agree that they should pass up the little guy, however, because they are worried about getting the big fish. Speeders are targets of opportunity. Take 'em when you can get 'em.

And I did not say that all people around me do the limit. I used to speed a lot too. When I was on 295 in NJ or the NJ Turnpike, I would always got between 70-75 (limit 65). ANd it seemed to me that everyone was going that fast. I eventually slowed down, dunno why really, but the point is now I do around 65 and I was kind of surprised to see that the majority of the drivers actually do the speed limit. Sometimes a little slower. But obviously not everyone is doing the speed limit.

On this I think it must be a matter of location. My experience is completely different.

That's all I was saying. I wasn't saying "You're an idiot for thinking everyone speeds." but you seem to act like that is what I said. All I was implying is that you may be surprised at how many people don't speed.

No offense, but this is simply foolish. As I stated earlier this is, to me, a friendly (and so far civilized) debate. I hope you take it in the same manner.

Edited for spelling and grammar.

[cuervo72]

Originally posted by sabotai
ShovelMonkey, if you are doing the speed limit on a major highway and everyone around you is speeding, the most likely cause is for one of the speeders to smack into you, and they would be at fault


Yes, that would be of great solace after you've been crushed from behind or side-swiped by a tractor trailor.

It's not the speed that is the problem, it's the buffer zone needed between cars that drivers won't often allow, even if going 55 or whatever the speed limit may be.

[Craptacular]

Just a few points to throw out:

In theory, the general rule-of-thumb is that speed limits should be set at the 85th percentile speed of free-flowing traffic (although many would argue that this is a moving target). There are obviously many reasons why this is not always followed (other safety considerations, politics, etc). Most people will travel at what they think is a reasonable speed for the type and condition of roadway they are on, regardless of what the posted speed limit is. The "design speed" of a roadway is based on driver comfort and safety, and is often 10 mph higher than the speed limit.

There have been a lot of studies trying to relate speed differential between cars and trucks an accident rates ... the results have varied. I remember one graph showing that the accident rate for trucks really starts to increase exponentially at a 10 mph speed differential or greater. However, it really depends what kind of road you're on (controlled access divided highway or two-lane rural). Common sense dictates that requiring vehicles to travel at different speeds will lead to some safety issues. Perhaps the biggest reason some states have slower limits for trucks is that they do a lot more damage to the pavement at 65 mph than they do at 55 mph.

The driving public overestimates the amount of excessive speeding that really goes on. I recently saw a study (from Europe) that compared the public's perception to the observed speed. On average, drivers thought that more than 50% of all other drivers were going at least 10 kph (about 6 mph) above the speed limit, when the actual observed percentage was only 22%.

Finally, my personal opinion is that most speed limits on interstates and other controlled-access freeways should be raised (70 or 75 in rural or semi-urban areas, 65 or lower in urban areas), but with stricter enforcement. Nab the 10 or 15% at the highest speeds, and we'll all be better off.