Is speeding wrong? Should radar detectors be illegal? Let's find out! (1 Viewer)

[DaveGTP]

It wasn't a brick wall. You had another lane to swerve into. Case in point. If you're a good driver, and paying attention, at night, you should KNOW whether someone is in the lane next to you. I almost always know if someone is behind me or in my blind spot. In driver's training they teach you to watch in your rear mirrors and have an escape route. Know your surroundings. And I do.




And my main point on the speedlimits at night was, you are overdriving your headlights now on the freeway. Right now, at 65-70 MPH, on lowbeams. You are overdriving your headlights @ 55MPH on lowbeams.

Obviously, the concern about a higher speedlimit on the freeway isn't overdriving your headlights on the freeway if you are already doing it.

So you are overdriving your headlights worse. So what. Doomed now, doomed at 10 MPH faster. That's what the other lane is for in these situations. Emergency swerving.


I'm not saying NO SPEEDLIMIT makes sense, I'm just saying, why 70? Why not higher? Obviously 100MPH+ isn't really safe. Although they manage that great Autobahn in Germany

 

[Shayne Lebrun]

And like I said, if you get the speed limit raised, so that everybody knows that the limit is 150, fine.

But when a highway full of people are driving with the assumption that the limit is 100, and you decide to do 150, that's a problem. If everybody's doing 150, or they stay off the highway cuz they're uncomfortable doing that, fine.

 

[DaveGTP]

I'm in agreement with you there. I think people driving 100+ in a 70 through traffic is definitely not safe. A 30 MPH speedlimit difference when people don't expect it can cause an accident (all it takes is one Pokey driver to pull out at 65MPH to pass a semi going 60MPH). But 80-85 in a 70 isn't. Realistically, 80 is the traffic flow.

 

[D. Scott MacDonald]

I was trying to argue that there are varying levels of "doomed". If I'm overdriving my headlights at 55, I may get in an accident but it will probably be a very lowspeed one (~20MPH). If I'm overdriving my headlights at 90MPH, the accident would likely be ~60MPH. Braking times are not linear. I would much rather get in a 20-30MPH accident than a 60MPH accident. In either case, I'd be "doomed" to an accident, but in the latter case I'd be a candidate for much more serious "doom".

Regarding swerving, it works sometimes and sometimes it doesn't (and sometimes it's not an option as you point out). Either way, I'd be much safer swerving at a lower speed than at 90MPH.

 

[Michael Varacin]

You people who think that 90 mph is ok are nuts. You must have been sleeping through highschool physics.

Ever consider that fact that you can not even survive an impact into a solid object from 60 mph?

Find a copy of the book, "Motorsports Medicine". It explains clearly what happens to the human body in rapid deceleration.

Then there is the fact that almost everyone thinks they are an above average driver. Funny. Everyone is above average.

I've been a professional race car driver for almost ten years. I am scared every time I get on the highway because of all the "above average drivers". I was sitting here, silently watching this thread. But I couldn't take it any more. If you think 90 mph is ok, even in your "super sports car", then do the rest of us a favor. Kill yourself now.

We don't need you, and the world would be better off if the stupid people stop breeding.

 

[Seth_L]

Why don't you tell us what you really think Michael?

If you're such an expert on racing you should know that people survive crashes from 200MPH. 60MPH isn't that hard to survive in a modern car. Consider that there are crumple zones, seat belts, airbags, etc and most people slow down before impact with their brakes.

If you don't want to go 90MPH, don't drive on the freeway. No one is forcing you to drive on it if you don't think it's safe.

Oddly enough the Autobahn and the freeways in Europe support high speeds just fine and without problems at speeds well above 90MPH. We, in the US, should make a driver license harder to get (requiring a level of competence), inspect people's cars at least yearly, and the same thing would work here too. The problem isn't the car (by in large), it's the drivers in the US who think driving is a right, not a priviledge.

 

[George_W_K]

Even though I'm not a fan of NASCAR, the number 3 comes to mind.

 

[Seth_L]

I never said everyone survives. I merely mean to point out that crashing at 60MPH and over isn't an automatic fatality which is the impression his post would seem to point to.

 

[Michael Varacin]

Seth,

No one will survive a direct impact at 200 MPH even in a modern race car. Notice on the big crashes you see the car still is moving foward, even after the impact. That makes a huge difference.

You would be suprised how many people have died in car racing accidents from speeds under 100 mph. Even in modern race cars.


All cars have crush zones. But it is still a limit of how fast you can decelerate. Suppose you have 5 feet of crush space in the front of your car before the engine is in your chest. You are still stopping from 60 - 0 in 5 feet. Yes, it's not linear. I need to calculate the g's there, but it's more then you can expect to live from. 60 MPH is not easy to survive a direct hit. Unless you are still moving after the impact.

 

[Chris]

Realize also, that the structural integrity of a NASCAR / CART type car is far greater then what you're driving on the road. And the raceways are banked in such a way to provide flush zones and a continued forward movement. The walls are designed where they "relax" backwards rather then providing a cement barracade, etc.

I'm just saying this so it can be noted.

 

[Yee-Ming]

OT: for some reason, this discussion of Germany's Autobahns reminds me of an Alistair McLean novel, where an assassin set up his alibi by appearing drunk in a society do (rinsed mouth with Scotch and poured it over himself), gets carted off to sleep it off, whereupon he sneaks out of wherever he was, gets into his Ferrari and drives 3 straight hours at 180mph (IIRC from Paris to Rome, not sure if this is accurate but you get the idea, across Europe through Germany), makes his hit, drives back, and "wakes up" from his drunken stupor the next morning.

 

[Mark Larson]

Hey i've read that novel too!

 

[Kevin Hewell]

I saw a documentary on the History Channel about the Auto Bahn. Basically, it said that, aside from better driver's education in Germany, the roads are just built better for speed than the Interstate Highway System is here.

 

[JamieD]

I've also noted before in this thread, that I've seen a few articles on different sites (BBC, CNN) about the proposals for Speed Limits on these roads, since the different "peaks" people are using can be completely different.

Plus, if your solution to having "us" on the road with you folks who want to go 90mph is for "us" to stay home/not that the highway with a lower speed limit than you're driving.. My solution is you move to Germany and go nuts.

 

[MarkHastings]

I guess the speed limit would also have to be limited to the particular area you're in. I can see where the mid west could support 90mph because there are large areas of flat land that stretch as far as the eye can see, but here in CT, even 55 seems a bit too much for some highways.

The Merrit Parkway has so many damn twisty/winding roads and so many damn blind curves that anything over 60mph is insane!

Also add in the fact that the Merrit has stop signs at every entrance ramp so most cars, entering the highway, are doing only about 20-30 mph. Imagine coming around a corner, doing 90, only to meet up with a car just pulling onto the highway... Most peoples reactions would be to pull into the left hand lane. I've seen SO many accidents this way when someone is already in that left hand lane. Not good!

 

[Seth_L]

Step 1 is to take the semi's and the slower drivers off the freeway system. If you can take out the differential speed element the freeway becomes very safe.

The police should actively ticket people who impede the flow of traffic instead of trying to catch people going with the flow of traffic. If the speed limit on a freeway is 70MPH and the flow of traffic is 80MPH (like most freeways around here in Michigan). The 45MPH minimum is way too low. The minimum should be at least 60MPH, and people going slow should be driving in the right hand lane, or even not on the freeway. The grandma going 55MPH in the middle (or left) lane is as much, if not more of a danger on the freeway than the guy going 100MPH.

People who are impeding the flow of traffic should be ticketed. Period.

 

[D. Scott MacDonald]

You do realize that life in the US (as we currently know it) would pretty much stop if we banned trucks from the high way? How do you think that all that stuff on the store shelves gets there? If I had to choose between a) driving with trucks on the highway or b) severely limited goods and services, I would definitely choose the trucks.

 

[Patrick Sun]

This is a macro-level problem, but many are trying to apply micro-level solutions to it. Got to see the big picture, and it's more complicated when so many factors are in play.

 

[Glenn Overholt]

But that was the big picture!

The speed limits are what they are because the people that live there decided on a safe maximum. If you go over what is posted, you are endangering yourself and others.

At first I thought the 'brick wall' example was really bad, but I see now. What if there was a turn on the freeway, and one car screwed up and a tanker truck ended up sideways across all of the lanes of a freeway? Oops! Crash time!

If you are going faster than you can see ahead of you, you're going to be toasted (assuming it was a flammable liquid in the tanks). Your brakes and air bags aren't going to help you much.

Glenn

 

[Seth_L]

Yes, I'm well aware of this. However, there are other ways to transport things, like trains...

I didn't say it was easy, but it is possible.