BS: speed restrictions in cars

Subject: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: The Sandman
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 03:16 PM

Here in Ireland,many drivers are getting killed, the main problem is excessive speed on unsuitable roads,many of the drivers are young and post mortem examination shows no trace of alcohol.there is a speed limit in this countryt off 63 miles per hour 80 kilometres,many of these drivers were going over 100 mph.
if car manufacturers were forced to make cars that did not exceed the national speed limit,all these accidents could be avoided. for england, no car faster than 70 mph etc.ireland 65 mphetc
2.governors or speed restriction devices to be fitted to the cars of all drivers under the age of 25...50 mph would seem sensible[theris only one small motorway in Ireland].
gardai /police officers are at the same time freed to do other crime Prevention.
what is the point of making cars that break the official national speed limit,its only encouraging lawbreaking and indirectly Manslaughter.
Sometimes innocent law abiding motorists get involved,badlymaimed and killed.
Society has right to be protected from these idiots,and CAR MANUFACTURERS HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO SOCIETY .

Subject: RE: BS: spped restrictions in cars
From: wysiwyg
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 03:17 PM

I don't care how fast they go INside the cars, as long as the cars themselves don't go too fast.

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: spped restrictions in cars
From: Peace
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 03:20 PM

80 km/hr = about 50 mph.

Subject: RE: BS: spped restrictions in cars
From: Rasener
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 03:33 PM

I feel that if you restrict the speed of a car, people will get killed when they try to overtake and then find that they haven't got the acceleration to get in front of the car they are overtaking.

Its very difficult.

I almost got killed once because a bus I was overtaking, put his foot down as I got halfway along the bus. It was up a hill and a car appeared over the hill, and I had to make a decision. Could I go, or could I get back in behind the bus. My decision was to go for it. I had a Scorpio Estate at the time and it was a 3 litre car. That car saved my family and myself and the oncoming car. I had the power to get myself out of it. The bastard of a bus driver had caused a major tailback and when I was clear to overtake decided to be clever and risk our families life.
With a car with less poke we would have been done for.

Its all about road sense and a lot of the youngsters seem to think that they are infallible.

B an them for life if they don't learn to drive more carefully.

Obviously its too late when they kill themselves, but if they knew they would be banned for reckless driving and it was enforced,they may think twice.

Subject: RE: BS: spped restrictions in cars
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 03:40 PM

Youngsters will just find another way to kill themselves. It's nothing to do with the speed of the cars, it's because at that age they think they're immortal.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Rasener
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 03:47 PM

Thats fine Giok if they kill themselves as long as they don't involve innocent people.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 03:48 PM

I agree wholeheartedly mate.
G

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Amos
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 03:54 PM

Denying the exercise of judgement will simply inculcate people of little judgement. Better to cleanse the gene pool.

A

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Scoville
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 03:55 PM

My first car wouldn't go over 70 even without government-imposed restrictions. Actually, that was a speed hazard, too, because I couldn't accelerate fast enough to maneuver through traffic (car went from 0 to 60 in about three days. More if I had to run the fan on a hot day).

How about better driver education and better enforcement of existing speed laws? Around here, the police speed worse than anyone and I see people do all sorts of idiotic things on the freeway without getting ticketed. Fine the pants off them and boot the car until something sinks in.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Sorcha
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 03:56 PM

And they'll decide how to remove or override the governors.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 04:00 PM

Damn stupid idea.

Rolls Royce made and experimental car once, in teh days when the UK speed limit was 20. It was called the Legalimit. Guess how many they sold?

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: katlaughing
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 04:05 PM

I think the age limit should be raised. Kids in school, high school and younger, should not be driving. Anyone caught using a cellphone while driving should face severe fines. And, I agree, we need better enforcement of existing speed limits, etc.Of course, that means we have to spend more on hiring officers, equipment, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 04:07 PM

Agree with Richard and The Villan.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: bobad
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 04:17 PM

Here in Canada many transport companies govern their rigs and it seems to work alright.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 04:29 PM

0 to 60 in 10 seconds    -    60 to 0 in 0.5 seconds

It's not speed that kills drivers – it's the sudden stop that does the damage

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 04:29 PM

All rigs/lorries over 7.5 tons are governed to 100 KPH in the EEC, it takes years to get any where, and about 2 Kms to overtake each other. They are also limited to 64 KPH on all non motorway roads. Great fun up here in the highlands where 2 lane roads are the norm.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Leadfingers
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 04:37 PM

Its NOT fast cars that cause accidents - Its the drivers !!

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Rasener
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 04:44 PM

Agreed LF

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 05:16 PM

It's not just youngsters - the driver who killed my cousin, himself, one of his own sons and injured his other two children and wife was a man in his 40s. He couldn't be bothered to wait for a line of traffic to move and overtook it on a single carriageway road that bucks up and down like a rollercoaster. It was the speed he was doing (60-70+) that made the injuries so serious.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: The Sandman
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 05:17 PM

but why make cars that go 140 mph ,when there is nowhere safe to drive at that speed. and its breaking the law. RICHARD BRIDGE says its a silly idea.
The state thinks it necessary that we are protected from ourselves and others by having drink drive laws.
dont innocent people have a right to be protected from speeding drivers, the day will come when people wil be charged with manslaughter, for dangerous driving when thay are sober.
this Radical scheme would deal with the problem straight away
the amount of accidents would be reduced ,if people couldnt go faster than the official speed limit,
fuel consumption will decrease, having a marginally beneficial effect on the environment.
police officers will be freed for other crime prevention .
to leadfingers.
its drivers, driving cars faster than the official speed limit.if a car cant go faster than 75mph accidents will be reduced,the faster one goes the greater the braking distance neededto avoid an accident.
Look at all the idiots on english motorways,who drive and tailgate at 80 mph plus,not leaving the correct braking distance between vehicles.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: The Sandman
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 05:22 PM

the state deems it necesarry that drinkers are protected from themselves and other people are protected from them. WHY should not the state find it necessary to protect people from speeding drivers, by removing their ability [in englands case to go] 70 to75 mph plus.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Gurney
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 05:39 PM

Governers/rev limiters need practise, because as The Villan said at the start, sometimes you get yourself in a position where , if you haven't got performance, you are dead.

Sometimes you are dead anyway, of course. But trucks are driven by professionals, cars usually by amateurs.

Governers could, theoretically, be computer controlled to give perhaps two ungoverned bursts of power per hour.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: kendall
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 06:13 PM

The VW bug was limited to 68 mph and they sold millions of them.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 06:33 PM

Since cars are so computerized nowadays, a device which would allow one to briefly accelerate above the legal limit for purposes of overtaking slower traffic, but which would return the car to legal maximum speed afterward would be quite feasible.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 08:11 PM

I've always wished they could come up with a device that meant that anytime you went over the local speed limit on any road a siren would start sounding on the roof of your car until you slowed down. Together with a law requiring people to have such a decvice installed and working, the same as seat-belts.

It wouldn't stop you accelerating out of trouble - but it'd mean if you were driving along over the limit you'd be advertising the fact, and you'd have no kind of legal defence at all.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: catspaw49
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 08:31 PM

There are those individuals out there, gearheads, with gasoline in their veins who will circumvent any and all attempts at slowing a vehicle down. These folks enjoy motorcycles that will exceed the legal speed limit in ANY gear and cars that make them feel a part of the assembly. Even those who race on tracks and off road are still hard wired into hard accelerating and high G cornering on the highways at least some of the time.

Many of them understand your concerns and as they age, if they age, better sense takes over for at least part of the time. But even so the 60 year old in the high performance 4 door sedan, the wolf in sheep's clothing, can still be seen screaming past, out on the occasional proficiency run. This phenomenon is probably a bigger factor in the U.S. where cars are a more integral part of the culture.

For this group, at any age, there is nothing you can do.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Tom Hamilton frae Saltcoats Scotland
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 08:42 PM

it is not the cars that are dangerous but the people that drive them.

because when it parked it can't kill.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: catspaw49
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 08:48 PM

Actually they can.

Ford recently had a huge recall centered around an electrical problem on their Pick-Ups and several other models using a specific switch in the cruise control. They were a fire hazard and had been the cause of several house fires with resulting deaths.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Dec 06 - 09:03 PM

Helped take a fellow just like this from a vehicle a few months back.

My hope was that he'd died before the flames got him.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Gurney
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 01:19 AM

Kendall's point about the VW is well taken, and illustrates how much more powerful modern cars are. I listened to someone bemoaning the fact that his (company) car was 'only' 1600cc. He was ignorant of the fact that the Monte Carlo Rally was twice won outright with cars of that capacity, and even smaller engines triumphed, too.

In Britain around 1970, my first Mini had 850cc, the Morris Minor 1000 was called that because that was its engine size, anything over 1800cc was once considered suitable for towing, and capacities between 1100cc and 1500cc were the biggest sellers.
The bodies around those engines weren't made of kitchen foil, either.

Many modern family cars around 1800cc would show anything of that era a clean pair of heels, including Jaguars and Astons and Healeys.
The drivers, unfortunately, haven't advanced.


There was a time that the tax, as well as the insurance, penalised larger-capacity cars.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 01:52 AM

McGrath says

"I've always wished they could come up with a device that meant that anytime you went over the local speed limit on any road a siren would start sounding on the roof of your car until you slowed down. Together with a law requiring people to have such a decvice installed and working, the same as seat-belts".

In Singapore the taxis have a light on the roof which flashes when they exceed the (very low) speed limit. It seems to work well (unless you are late getting to the airport, of course).

As to governors being dangerous, a 7 series Beamer I had a couple of cars ago was limited to 145 mph by the car's computer (though I didn't ever test it to see if it worked!). The point is that a governor can be made independent of the acceleration power of the car - it simply doesn't start to take effect until the desired limit is reached, so you can have all of the normal acceleration for overtaking but can't exceed the governed maximum.

Just an observation, but Captain Birdseye you sound like one of those drivers I'd rather be in front of than behind. And arguably, creating the "need" for other drivers to overtake you could be said to be a dangerous way to drive.....

cheers, Terry

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: s&r
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 03:50 AM

Is there really only one motorway in Ireland? I seem to remember the M1 M50 and M9

Stu

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 06:27 AM

"...who will circumvent any and all attempts at slowing a vehicle down. But my sirens wouldn't slow the vehicle down, just announce to the world, including the police, that it was going over the limit.

I imagine the speedhogs would quite enjoy it, until they were arrested.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: catspaw49
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 06:37 AM

Aw c'mon Kevin......How long do you think it would take to bypass that?

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 06:46 AM

In France for example 5000 people are killed every year from cars and 50,000 injured , If anything else was causing so much death and destruction in society it would be banned .
The human race got by for thousands of years without cars and if cars were banned we would still get by.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 06:48 AM

How about a law that, if you get done for speeding and they find your siren has been bypassed, they confiscate your car and ban you from driving for life? A bit of zero tolerance where it might actually help...

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 06:51 AM

My father was a terrible driver. He learned in the army in 1944 when all you had to do was point a lorry across a parade ground and not hit the colonel. He never took a formal driving test.

He never had an accident, he never exceeded the speed limit, he never got a parking ticket or his license endorsed and he never tailgated.

He did however, drive perfectly legally at 45mph in the centre lane of motorways. He regularly blocked smaller roads by travelling at 25mph regardless of the actual limit. Whilst doing this, he would be swearing and shouting at all the other drivers who were wanting to pass him.

He ignored every other vehicle on the road unless they were in his way. He didn't know that his last car had a 5th gear. He would never pull over into the side of the road to let anyone else pass. Cyclists would overtake him and he'd swear at them. A 60 mile journey would take him nearly 3 hours. He must have caused so many fender benders, road rage rants and sharp rises in blood pressure to those people behind him.

It wasn't until I had passed my test, I realised just how bad a driver he was. I only ever got in the car with him once more after that... my nerves wouldn't stand it. Trouble is... he wasn't actually doing anything against the law.

It has to be every persons judgement on what speed they are doing. I agree that building and designing cars capable of 150+mph for ordinary road use is ridiculous. But I would also agree that the capacity for rapid acceleration is also necessary. It's the drivers who need the re-education and awareness of what excessive speed does. I've always said, even as a pedestrian (actually, particularly as a pedestrian!) that everyone should have a re-test every 5-10 years, as you have when you reach 70yrs. If you fail, your license is taken away right there and then, and you take lessons again til you pass. That might help cut out a lot of those bad habits we all get into.

So might taking cassette players out of the dashboard.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Grab
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 07:00 AM

"Why make a car to do 140mph"? Mostly because a high top speed is a standard side-effect of high acceleration ability at lower speeds. Most cars don't do 140mph, but most will happily do 100mph.

I second the argument about speed sometimes helping you get out of a situation - been there, done that. Most people probably have.

The problem isn't speed per se, it's inappropriate speed. There are plenty of country roads with bends where 20mph would land you in the ditch. So do we limit the entire road to 20mph? Or do we try to fit an ultra-accurate GPS and measure the maximum safe speed for every bend on every road in the entire country?

And on the other hand, who says that 70mph is the right speed? The only reason the 70mph national speed limit exists at all is down to the Oil Crisis in the 1970's. With modern cars, there's no earthly reason not to have a higher speed limit on motorways - Germany shows that there isn't a problem with that. "Appropriate speed" on an empty motorway with dry tarmac is however fast you want to go.

You want to blame someone, blame the government for setting unreasonably low standards on driver training.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Paul Burke
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 07:09 AM

There's a very good reason for 70mph or lower speed limits on most British roads. That's because there aren't only fast cars there, and you have to share with lorries and other slower vehicles, and people who just don't want to drive fast. It's often not speed as such that creates a dangerous situation, but the speed differential. We don't have many empty motorways at any time of day or night, and a common hazard is a lorry doing 60mph trying to overtake one doing 60.5mph. If it weren't for the ban on the use of the third lane, you can bet they'd be in there too. And then there are the roads that look like motorways but aren't, and the blithe unconcerned driver suddenly sees a tractor pulling a trailerload of muck pull out of a 90 degree sideturning straight into his path.

I agree about the driver training. No one should be allowed to drive until they understand why speed limits are a good thing.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 07:10 AM

Top running speed for a human being is around 23 miles an hour.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Cluin
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 08:01 AM

And how often do you hit that?

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: The Sandman
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 08:42 AM

How many more people have been killed by excess speed,than by not being able to accelerate out of a situation, please get things in perspective.
car manufacturers have a responsibility to society as do cigarette manufacturers,it can be argued that vehicle manufacturers are encouraging drivers to break the speed limit by making cars that do this.
   society has rules. in the case of speed,the faster you go themore braking distance is required, the faster you go the more likelihood of death and serious injury.
society is protected by the state.the state deems it not suitable because it leads to death,to take drugs like heroin and crack.here in ireland the state deems it not suitable to smoke cigarettes in public places,because of death from passive smoking.
society needs to be protected from drivers breaking the official speed limit,the most effective way to do this in my opinion,is for car manufacturers to be forced by governments,to make cars that are fitted with electronic governors connected to the fuel system,so that it is impossible to go faster than each countries speed limit. at the present moment, ambulances in england have this device fitted at 100 m p h,so the technology is there.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Skipjack K8
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 09:14 AM

I understand that the technology being considered by the Guvverment is based on satellite navigation, in other words, when a car enters a 30mph zone, an electrically operated governor immediately makes that the top speed, opening up commensurately on entering a 40,50,60 or 70mph. I'm told by car buffs that the car manufacturers will have to comply with this sort of legislation, probably within the next decade.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: catspaw49
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 10:26 AM

Just an opinion Skip, but we'll be out of fossil fuels before that technology happens in the States.

And Birdseye.....Just where are you proposing all this happen? Ireland? UK? Europe? Worldwide?

It won't happen here anytime soon. This country is way too deep in the car well.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Phot
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 11:26 AM

I have two vehicles, one is a 17 year old Landrover Discovery 3.5 V8, the other is a Triumph Daytona T595, the top speed of the Disco is around 105, and 0-60 takes around 12 seconds, the top speed of the Triumph is around 180, 0-60 is 2.4 seconds, just because they can reach these speeds, it dosn't mean to say I have the right to drive them at speed on the public highway. Thanks to the freedom of choice that I have at the moment I can enjoy these vehicles. Why do so many people see somthing that they don't like and then want the goverment to legislate against it? What is needed is education, not legislation, I have a lot of experience driving restricted vehicles as I hold a Class1 PSV licence (Coaches and Buses)Which is probably the hardest driving test to pass in the UK.

I was overtaking another coach on a dual carrageway, when my coach hit the limiter, which was probably 1-2 mph higher than his, so the distance to overtake was probably around half a mile, as I was about two thirds past his coach, a police car came up behind me at over 100mph, I couldn't go any faster so I was in the dillema, of carry on trying to overtake, which would hold him up, or ease off, hit the brakes and pull in behind the vehicle I was trying to overtake, casuing him to brake, and possibly hold him up even more. Modern coaches if unrestricted can hit around 90, and more importantly have the suspention and brakes to cope with the power and speed that they could achieve. I'm not advocating that all coaches and buses drive at 90mph, but if the one I had been driving had not been restricted I would have been past the one I was overtaking, before the police car had been in my mirrors.

If we were to legislate against everything in this world that held a risk of any sort, we would never even risk getting out of bed! Drivers need to be better educated, bad drivers are the risk to society, not the inanimate objects they drive. Though by the comment of, "CAR MANUFACTURERS HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO SOCIETY" surely the Royal Navy has a responsility to me to stop sending me places where I keep getting shot at, rocketed, mortered.............?! Ah, but you volnteered, you may say. Did the car manufacturer make you buy a car.......................?!

Wassail!! Chris.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Dazbo
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 11:41 AM

"Governers/rev limiters need practise, because as The Villan said at the start, sometimes you get yourself in a position where , if you haven't got performance, you are dead."

Yeah, and in most of these incidents it's the performance that put you in that peril in the first place.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Grab
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 11:46 AM

How many more people have been killed by excess speed,than by not being able to accelerate out of a situation, please get things in perspective.

We don't have figures for the second one, so you can't get a perspective either way. And I repeat, the problem is excess speed *for the situation*. Excess speed over 60mph or whatever arbitrary number has been chosen is *NEVER* the problem. Have you seen corners in Ireland where 20mph would be dangerous? Of course you have - you have country roads over there, the same as we do in Britain. But I repeat, limiting the whole road to 20mph is not an acceptable solution.

the faster you go themore braking distance is required

This is true.

the faster you go the more likelihood of death and serious injury.

This is false. You could make it true by saying "the more likelihood ... *if* you happen to crash", although this wouldn't support your argument. Speed and crashing are independent, and are only linked by the current driving conditions (dry/wet roads, bends, visibility, other traffic, etc).

the most effective way to do this in my opinion

This is your opinion. The opinions of people who drive long distances regularly are opposed to yours. The opinions of people who know how well the arbitrary speed limit reflects safety of driving conditions are opposed to yours. The opinions of people who've worked in the automotive industry and know the legal problems involved with arbitrarily limiting speed are opposed to yours. The opinions of people who have some idea of the technical difficulty to implement a limiter which can calculate the "safe" speed for every corner are opposed to yours.

Short answer: You may have this opinion, but as a minority in a democratic society, you're SOL mate.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: Peace
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 11:50 AM

Experience shows me that cars that impact at higher speeds have more chance of injuring or killing the occupants than those that impact at slower speeds. Before anyone gets pedantic with that, think about it.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: kendall
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 12:07 PM

No law or gaget will ever take the place of judgement, and the lack of judgement is what gets people into trouble in the first place.

I drive a 33 foot motorhome that weighs 16,000 pounds. It is a typical large motor vehicle and it will not stop on a dime. I don't need a governor (limiter) to keep me from speeding, what I have is the desire to avoid killing someone.

I don't know how many times I have had idiots pull right out in front of me with inches to spare because they don't know how hard it is to stop such a rig. After about the third close call, I wired the burglar alarm ( siren)to the horn so when I lay on the horn now, I get their attention.

In other words, don't rely on gagets, use your head for something besides a knot to keep your back bone from unravelling.

Subject: RE: BS: speed restrictions in cars
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Dec 06 - 12:11 PM

If I was a coach passsenger, I'd really sooner the driver didn't go in for overtaking other coaches which were travellig at 69 mph.

I think any limiters ought in fact to be set a few miles faster than the speed limit, to allow for emergencies. But I'd like them to be supplemented by flashing lights or sirens to indicate to the world at large - and to the driver and passengers - that the limit is being exceeded, which shouldn't ever be for more than a few seconds.