Speed governors?

[1X83Z]

I was asked this question last night by someone and it seems rather logical, given our United States government:

Since there are no speed limits in the US higher than 75mph, why aren't all cars speed-governed to, say, 100mph?

I assume one reason you guys will put out is track usage, but let's be honest: 95% of vehicles aren't used on tracks, and 80% of vehicles can't be used on tracks. Plus, if this ever became law an exception could always be made, just like with the gas guzzler tax, which excepts all SUVs, trucks, and vans.

By the way, before someone tries it: Montana dropped their 'reasonable and prudent' speed limit a few years back.

 

[pimp racer]

I was asked this question last night by someone and it seems rather logical, given our United States government:

Since there are no speed limits in the US higher than 75mph, why aren't all cars speed-governed to, say, 100mph?

I assume one reason you guys will put out is track usage, but let's be honest: 95% of vehicles aren't used on tracks, and 80% of vehicles can't be used on tracks. Plus, if this ever became law an exception could always be made, just like with the gas guzzler tax, which excepts all SUVs, trucks, and vans.

By the way, before someone tries it: Montana dropped their 'reasonable and prudent' speed limit a few years back.

Like I also said this would reduce alot of government spending and make the streets much safer. Think about this before you disagree please. I mean it could say thousands of lives. Wouldnt it suck to have a close one die because of a drunk guy speeding and ramming into someones car and making a huge crash? Now that I think about it maybe the governmnet does not want to do this because how will they make money? I heard that alot of the money police departments make is off of speeders. So maybe thats why this law is not passed becuase of money?
*EDIT* Oh and this would also take street racing off the streets and maybe the street racers such as Doug will go to the Drag Strip. I was thinking maybe they can somehow use them superchip programing things for the trucks on cars so they can somehow take off this 100 MPH speed limit when not at a race track or Drag Strip.

 

[JNasty4G63]

Good question. I have no reasonable answer. It makes sense though. I mean, why "should" you have to go any faster than, say, 80mph or so. Kind of weird. There must be some reasoning behind it. Like you said, very few cars will be track raced. I mean, I would venture to say that at least 75% of all Vettes sold never set foot on a track. They're just nice fast street driven cars. But, since you shouldn't have to go that fast on the street, what good is it??? I don't argue with it, but now that you bring it up, it is a striking question.

Hilg

 

[JNasty4G63]

Wouldnt it suck to have a close one die because of a drunk guy speeding and ramming into someones car and making a huge crash?

You could get killed by someone going 35 hitting you while you drive. The speed isn't the issue there. Sure, there are some crashes where speed is the issue, but not all are because of excessive speed.

Hilg

 

[pimp racer]

You could get killed by someone going 35 hitting you while you drive. The speed isn't the issue there. Sure, there are some crashes where speed is the issue, but not all are because of excessive speed.

Hilg

Yeah thats true but in most cases I believe that deaths are caused by usually people going over 60 MPH. Like I said the government is not doing this all because of the money I am betting.

 

[Takumi Fujiwara]

Limiting to 100MPH wouldn't accomplish much. Most accidents are at or below traffic speed. The only people who regularly crash at higher speeds are street racers, who find ways to disable such things anyway.

 

[pimp racer]

Limiting to 100MPH wouldn't accomplish much. Most accidents are at or below traffic speed. The only people who regularly crash at higher speeds are street racers, who find ways to disable such things anyway.

Yes I told that to Doug on AIM last night or today at like 12 am but I guess he thouhgt 100 MPH was more of a reasonable speed Yeah maybe the street racers will find out a way but maybe not if the government makes this electronic governer maybe more complex? Meaning if you yank out that wire or replace this wire with that wire you disable the governer I mean something way more complex that like only pros would know how to disable it. Hell make it like a Bomb or something. ( I dont mean put a bomb in the car I mean the system) I am sure not a alot of street racers know how to disable a bomb so if the government puts in a system like that maybe we will have a solution.

 

[JNasty4G63]

Yeah thats true but in most cases I believe that deaths are caused by usually people going over 60 MPH.

I highly doubt that. While I'm sure there are a good number of traffic deaths that come from excessive speed, I would venture to say more are not. I mean, if someone runs a red light or stop sign on a normal city street, they probably aren't going more than 45mph, if that. You can die in a car crash at 30mph just as easy as you can die in one going 70mph. But, you have to remember, how often do interstate and highway traffic accidents happen??? Sure, the speeds are greater, but accidents aren't as common as they are in town.

Everyone on the highway is going the same direction, roughly the same speed. But, when you get in town, you have many variables that can cause a mess. Stop lights, stop signs, 6-way intersections, turn lanes, crosswalks, train tracks, blah blah blah. You get the idea. Any one of those variables could be cause for a bad accident if not taken properly. I mean, how often during the course of a week do you see someone just slip through a light as it turns red. It doesn't take much for situations like that to go from a close call to a clean up. But, aside from people's chosen speeds differing on the highway, there isn't many factors that can lead to a big mishap. Sure, when they do happen, the results can be very bad. But the chance is much less it will happen.

As I said, I don't doubt that excessive speed causes a good deal of deaths. But, I bet if someone finds the actual numbers, you'll see that a greater number happen below 45mph, where the speed isn't the issue.

Hilg

 

[pimp racer]

I highly doubt that. While I'm sure there are a good number of traffic deaths that come from excessive speed, I would venture to say more are not. I mean, if someone runs a red light or stop sign on a normal city street, they probably aren't going more than 45mph, if that. You can die in a car crash at 30mph just as easy as you can die in one going 70mph. But, you have to remember, how often do interstate and highway traffic accidents happen??? Sure, the speeds are greater, but accidents aren't as common as they are in town.

Everyone on the highway is going the same direction, roughly the same speed. But, when you get in town, you have many variables that can cause a mess. Stop lights, stop signs, 6-way intersections, turn lanes, crosswalks, train tracks, blah blah blah. You get the idea. Any one of those variables could be cause for a bad accident if not taken properly. I mean, how often during the course of a week do you see someone just slip through a light as it turns red. It doesn't take much for situations like that to go from a close call to a clean up. But, aside from people's chosen speeds differing on the highway, there isn't many factors that can lead to a big mishap. Sure, when they do happen, the results can be very bad. But the chance is much less it will happen.

As I said, I don't doubt that excessive speed causes a good deal of deaths. But, I bet if someone finds the actual numbers, you'll see that a greater number happen below 45mph, where the speed isn't the issue.

Hilg

Now I am not saying that you can NOT die at a speed below 45 but what I am trying to say is that when people do have a crash in this case you are saying in the city area people usually have fender benders and if it is something like running a red light and crashing into someone alot of the time the driver of the other car will suffer major damage and will probably end up in the Hospital but in alot of cases the driver or passanger wont die at a speed below 50 MPH. Sure sometimes they might die but that all depends on the cars structure right? I mean things such as how strong the metal is and how strong the frame is since not all companies use the same frame right? Jaguar uses the aluminum frames while someone like KIA might use maybe all steel frame. You see what I mean? So I still say most deaths are probably caused by speeding excess of atleast 55 MPH.

 

[Lethalchem]

Why don't they limit the speed of cars to 100mph or less in America? Because people like me would revolt! Why havn't cigarettes been made illegal? They kill a hell of a lot more people then cars do. The reason is because the masses won't tolerate it. I'd like to see the poll results for the politician who tries to do away with cigarettes...or who tries to put govenors on cars.

 

[JNasty4G63]

Now I am not saying that you can NOT die at a speed below 45 but what I am trying to say is that when people do have a crash in this case you are saying in the city area people usually have fender benders and if it is something like running a red light and crashing into someone alot of the time the driver of the other car will suffer major damage and will probably end up in the Hospital but in alot of cases the driver or passanger wont die at a speed below 50 MPH. Sure sometimes they might die but that all depends on the cars structure right? I mean things such as how strong the metal is and how strong the frame is since not all companies use the same frame right? Jaguar uses the aluminum frames while someone like KIA might use maybe all steel frame. You see what I mean? So I still say most deaths are probably caused by speeding excess of atleast 55 MPH.

Well, I tried a couple times to read that, but your lack of punctuation just about made my brain melt. Please, use sentences and try to make sense.

You're still missing my point though. I never said that every crash that happens in town is a massive pile up. I was saying that in town you have just as good, if not more of chance of having a bad crash than you do on the highway.

Like I said, when people are driving on the highway, everyone is going the same direction at roughly the same speed. Only when peoples speed vary greatly do you have a greater risk of a bad accident.

But, in town there are many, MANY more chances of people coming together in an accident. And, no, not every accident is a bad one. But, when more of them happen, you have more of a probability that they COULD end up bad. And, yes, I'm sure the build of a car has a lot to do with you surviving a crash. But, regardless of what your driving, being t-boned by a car going 40 isn't going to be pretty.

Hilg

 

[pimp racer]

Well, I tried a couple times to read that, but your lack of punctuation just about made my brain melt. Please, use sentences and try to make sense.



Hilg

Sorry English is my third language. I am good at talking and things like that but not good with punctuations.

 

[1X83Z]

Okay - much of this discussion is completely irrelvant. We all know you can die at traffic speed. But since it is illegal - anywhere - to go more than 80mph, my question is simply why would the government not govern it to around 100mph? I'm sure you could stop some deaths this way, and you could definitely curb racing on highways.

 

[JNasty4G63]

Sorry, English is my third language. I am good at talking and things like that but not good with punctuations.

Ha, no problem man. It was just funny. I tried reading it like 3 times until I figured out what exactly you meant. 👍

Hilg

 

[JNasty4G63]

.....my question is simply why would the government not govern it to around 100mph?

I said earlier.......

Good question. I have no reasonable answer.

And, I guess no one else does either. Its a viable question, but with the government involved, I doubt you'll ever get a straight answer.

Hilg

 

[MazKid]

It would be impossible to do such a govern on cars. Sure, you could make it mandatory on all new cars, but there's tons and tons of people who don't buy new cars, ever.
A lot of accidents happen at slow speeds. You'll find tons of people who drive triple digits many many times who's only accident happened at 10mph. Speeds over 100mph have been proven acceptable on the autobahn. The only differences between the US and the autobahn are that the road surfaces in the US are piss poor, road angles and curves aren't speed-friendly, and US drivers, for the most part, are idiots. Even if the speedlimits on highways in the US were raised to 100mph, you'd get old farts and ignorent drivers doing 55 in designated fast lanes. They'd make improper lane changes causing chaos for the people driving fast. Even if they managed to find the accelerator they wouldn't know how to control thier cars at those high speeds.

Anyway, any future govern or anything of the sort wouldn't affect me.

 

[pimp racer]

It would be impossible to do such a govern on cars. Sure, you could make it mandatory on all new cars, but there's tons and tons of people who don't buy new cars, ever.
A lot of accidents happen at slow speeds. You'll find tons of people who drive triple digits many many times who's only accident happened at 10mph. Speeds over 100mph have been proven acceptable on the autobahn. The only differences between the US and the autobahn are that the road surfaces in the US are piss poor, road angles and curves aren't speed-friendly, and US drivers, for the most part, are idiots. Even if the speedlimits on highways in the US were raised to 100mph, you'd get old farts and ignorent drivers doing 55 in designated fast lanes. They'd make improper lane changes causing chaos for the people driving fast. Even if they managed to find the accelerator they wouldn't know how to control thier cars at those high speeds.

Anyway, any future govern or anything of the sort wouldn't affect me.

I agree with you there 100% americans wont be able to handle the speed. Now I am talking about people like Doug and them I mean younsters. They wont be able to handle it. Its like a new toy for them they will just break it.

 

[1X83Z]

It would be impossible to do such a govern on cars. Sure, you could make it mandatory on all new cars, but there's tons and tons of people who don't buy new cars, ever.

New cars eventually become used cars, my man. This was one of the absurd arguments against the airbag regulations of 1995 - now 90% of the cars on the road have federally-mandated twin airbags. 5mph bumpers too. Laws like these eventually have major effects, even if not at first.

A lot of accidents happen at slow speeds.

This is still off-point. Yes, accidents happen at slow speeds. But this would erase all accidents that happen at above 100mph, and lessen the severity of those that happen regardless. In fact, you prove my point later in your post: Americans cannot handle these speeds:

The only differences between the US and the autobahn are that the road surfaces in the US are piss poor, road angles and curves aren't speed-friendly, and US drivers, for the most part, are idiots.

I agree fully. Which is why cars should be governed.

Anyway, any future govern or anything of the sort wouldn't affect me.

Let's pretend this went into effect for the 2006 model year. In 2016, if you were looking to get another car, you'd have to buy 2005 or earlier, the current equivalent to buying a car built in 1994. However in 2026, if you were looking to get another car, you'd still have to buy 2005 or earlier - same as buying a car today from 1984. And since you wouldn't do that, this idea would eventually encompass everyone.

 

[Famine]

It's another aspect of gradual alienation of a driver from driving.

These days we have ABS, so you don't have to think when you brake. We have traction control, so you don't have to think when you boot it. We have ESP - and a whole host of other acronyms - so you don't have to worry what speed you put a car into a corner at. My girlfriend's Clio has wipers which turn on when it rains and headlights which turn on when it's dark, so she never has to think about these things (which, incidentally, is another reason why she's NEVER driving one of my cars EVER again). Now we're talking about automatic speed restrictors, so you don't have to worry when you put your foot down (incidentally, I was under the impression that all US-built, US-market cars were limited to 112mph).

I hate this anaesthetising process. Driving has become seen as a right, rather than a privilege, so now we're seeing hundreds and thousands of unsuitable people behind the wheels of cars. They have accidents, so manufacturers make safety devices to stop them having accidents, but eventually the terminally stupid find more ways to kill or injure themselves in a car.

Why, if I were a US citizen, should my freedom to rape the national speed limit, at my discretion, be curtailed because some numbnuts have no decision-making abilities and drive everywhere at 120mph, safe in the knowledge that, to quote QuickNick, "It's not unsafe to do 120mph if there aren't any police around"?

 

[pimp racer]

Why, if I were a US citizen, should my freedom to rape the national speed limit, at my discretion, be curtailed because some numbnuts have no decision-making abilities and drive everywhere at 120mph, safe in the knowledge that, to quote QuickNick, "It's not unsafe to do 120mph if there aren't any police around"?

Its kinda like what the teachers used to do in middle school. EX. Say the teacher has given your class the rest of the period free time. She has only one rule. The rule is dont get too loud. She says if you get too loud then your free time will be taken away and replaced with classwork. So some kids start arguing about something and get too loud. Well the teacher takes away the free time and the rest of the class who were doing good suffers because of some lousy kids that cant control them selves. Do you guys see what I am saying? In our case the lousy kids are the street ricers ( or racer which ever you perfer.) The teacher is the government and the rest of the kids (the good ones) are the general public. The people that have experience.

 

[Quick_Nick]

I personally can't stand automatic driving aids. You should always have complete control of your car. If the speed on my car was limited to 100 mph, then I would try to disable it.

(incidentally, I was under the impression that all US-built, US-market cars were limited to 112mph).

Wrong, but in Germany I know they have a 155 mph speed limit.

quote QuickNick, "It's not unsafe to do 120mph if there aren't any police around"?

Famine, if you're going to quote me, at least quote exactly what I said.

 

[MazKid]

New cars eventually become used cars, my man. This was one of the absurd arguments against the airbag regulations of 1995 - now 90% of the cars on the road have federally-mandated twin airbags. 5mph bumpers too. Laws like these eventually have major effects, even if not at first.

Pardon my langauge useage, I was speaking in the present, not in the future.

Let's pretend this went into effect for the 2006 model year. In 2016, if you were looking to get another car, you'd have to buy 2005 or earlier, the current equivalent to buying a car built in 1994. However in 2026, if you were looking to get another car, you'd still have to buy 2005 or earlier - same as buying a car today from 1984. And since you wouldn't do that, this idea would eventually encompass everyone.

Never say I wouldn't do that - people are still seeking out 1st gen RX-7s even though they are horribly outdated.
Further prooving that some drivers like "oldschool" cars. Maybe I'm just outdating myself by buying older cars, but they are new to me, and they are very inexpensive. I've spent under $3K total on my Protege and it's reliable, drives nice, and does what I want it to do. Yeah, I know, not having a navagation system will haunt me.

(incidentally, I was under the impression that all US-built, US-market cars were limited to 112mph)

Hah, that's because American cars are generally slow - and prefered in automatic form. Americans tend to be "along for the ride" drivers, they merely drive to get from A to B, don't care about "spirited driving", and don't know how to properly inflate tires without going to a dealership. Glad I'm not one of them.

 

[MazKid]

Famine, if you're going to quote me, at least quote exactly what I said.

Hah, even though you made a completely idiotic comment you have the gaul to tell Famine that he should have quoted you in your full poor grammer form?

 

[JNasty4G63]

Wrong, but in Germany I know they have a 155 mph speed limit.

Well, not really. It's much like the Japanese 276bhp limit thing (which also has gone away). They just all voluntarily limit their cars to 155mph from the factory. But, even then, Porsche hasn't ever stuck to that. The Carrera GT will top 200mph, as will the SLR. And in recent years, MB-AMG has been very flexible with having the limiter moved up on their cars, if the customer wants. So, yes, many of them will limit the cars to 155 from the factory, but its not mandatory.

Hilg

 

[xcsti]

and US drivers, for the most part, are idiots.

I have only read up to this point but I saw this and wanted to comment. I recently read an autoweek article where the person wrote about the fact that americans won't mind legislation making cars safer but would never pass anything requiring them to personally work to become better drivers. This is an honest truth, similar to seniors who refuse to give up driving privilages.

 

[Lethalchem]

Hah, that's because American cars are generally slow - and prefered in automatic form. Americans tend to be "along for the ride" drivers, they merely drive to get from A to B, don't care about "spirited driving", and don't know how to properly inflate tires without going to a dealership. Glad I'm not one of them.

I'm not sure who or what you're trying to describe here, but it CERTAINLY doesn't resemble the area I live in. 👎

 

[MazKid]

I didn't say it resembled ALL Americans. If you aren't the type of person mentioned in my post, why would you take offense to it?

Also notice that I live in the center of the US. Hmm...

 

[PublicSecrecy]

I thought that all American cars were electronically restricted to 155mph, providing they can even reach that speed. Doesn't the civic only top out at like 115? I mean, I think they should have acceleration censors/restrictors if anything.

 

[JNasty4G63]

I thought that all American cars were electronically restricted to 155mph.....

Nope. The Vette will top 170, Viper will get over 190, close to 200, Ford GT will top 200, the new SRT Crossfire will hit 160, and the 4th Gen F-body cars would do over 160. Those are just a few, but you get the idea. About the only time you see limiters on American cars these days is if the stock tires can't handle the speeds. But, there are a good number that will go over 160.

Hilg

 

[Takumi Fujiwara]

Hey, 240SXs are limited to 115 (or something close, it's a KPH number actually, IIRC), so that's not too far off. Of course, my 240 doesn't suffer from that particular affliction, but that's aside from the point....