Limiting cars top speed. Arguments for and against - Page 2 - Ford Forums

gabbs19 · 11-08-2004, 07:57

They should stop blaming speed for everything. Even if they did speed limit cars its not going to stop many people. Whats stopping them doing 110 in the suburbs. Id hate to go overtaking a truck at a maximum speed of 110 in the country as well. If anything id like them to really crack down on making a hell of a lot harder to get your licence. At the moment its basically drive around park here, do a hill start and thats it.

EB-maen · 11-08-2004, 08:00

yeah, personally i dont think that speed limiting is the answer to anything, as i said in another thread somewhere, 110kph is more than enough to kill someone if you hit them, so unless they are going to limit all cars to 40kph there is no point.

Black EX-R6 · 11-08-2004, 13:14

So most people towards the end of this thread are basically saying because you can kill at 40km/h why not let everyone have the potential to do 200km/h. Sounds sane to me.

I dont see how it would be hard to implement over variouscar styles. The limiter would only effect the vehicles top speed. Nothing else. So all cars and trucks could be limited by the same or similar computer to 130km/h. This would be fine in most instances for overtaking. I mean how often do you get over 130km/h overtaking, and if you do the car you are overtaking is going fast enough anyway.

Im hearing some pretty poor arguments in my opinion on the pro side. Things like quoting questionable statistics, stating driving is only fun when speeding (another thread), Making cars only turn right, Motorsport restrictions, or the fact the limiting cars is dangerous. Not arguments that bare any weight at all.

As for motorsport restrictions, why not allow people to disconnect their own cars computer anytime they want for track usage. Sure, some people will abuse this and disconnect it all the time, but the vast majority of drivers will not. The ones that do run the risk of being caught.

And as for limiting cars is dangerous. WTF? Most sensible people dont take there cars to 130km/h on street/highway driving, let alone 180-200km/h. So how is limiting cars dangerous. If there is an emergency then call the police or ambulance to give you a lift.

The older cars that are not run by ecu would obviously be exempt. The speed limiting operation would only be for new cars starting from a certain point. Therefore slowly phasing out non speed limited cars. Or, you could voluntarily have your current ecu car limited at the rta or something.

Black EX-R6 · 11-08-2004, 13:18

Ill make a few points as to why i think it is a good idea.

1) Anything we can do to sensibly lower deaths on our road should be considered. If we can save two percent of deaths on our road this way then that is a great achievement.

2) If your car is stolen it would be easier for the police to catch them if a chase ensues, therefore limiting damge to your car and increasing the chance the thieves would be caught.

3) If the voluntary limiting system was used, and a sticker made up stating this car is speed limited to 130km/h. Then your car will be less of an attraction for thieves if they know the next car can go so much faster.

4) Criminal activity. How much harder will it become for criminals to get away if their cars are limited to 130km/h?

Citric XR6 · 11-08-2004, 13:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black EX-R6

The speed limiting operation would only be for new cars starting from a certain point. Therefore slowly phasing out non speed limited cars. Or, you could voluntarily have your current ecu car limited at the rta or something.

I like this idea...I shall sit back and watch my investments grow as they become highly sought after weapons...

Black EX-R6 · 11-08-2004, 13:42

Yeah, but your highly sort after weapon would also be highly sort after by thieves

RaceCraft · 11-08-2004, 13:47

And unfortunaltey highly unregisterable and uninsurable... They tried the same arguement when they introduced ULP, and how many years ago was that now?

RaceCraft · 11-08-2004, 14:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black EX-R6

Ill make a few points as to why i think it is a good idea.

1) Anything we can do to sensibly lower deaths on our road should be considered. If we can save two percent of deaths on our road this way then that is a great achievement.

I would also like to add, fatalities are tradgic, but what about all the other damage accidents cause?
Emotional trauma, property damages, physical injury... I would like to think that as a society we care about the above as well, if we can reduce those the follow on effect would be a reduction in the road toll

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black EX-R6

2) If your car is stolen it would be easier for the police to catch them if a chase ensues, therefore limiting damge to your car and increasing the chance the thieves would be caught.

I dont think speed limiting is the ideal solution to that point.. With the vast developements of GPS navigation, police communications and their policy on aborting high speed pursuits, I think a better solution would lie somewhere within there. They can still damage your car, and other people, doing the posted speed limit let alone pushing the car to its' speed limit

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black EX-R6

3) If the voluntary limiting system was used, and a sticker made up stating this car is speed limited to 130km/h. Then your car will be less of an attraction for thieves if they know the next car can go so much faster.

True, but you seem to be baseing a HUGE personal expense (getting these limiters installed) on the fact that some people are criminals.. Playing hot potatoe with car thieves is like adding another bailing bucket on the Titanic, it is just a futile excersise.. I think you will find that the larger proprtion of theives target cars for convience not so much as the joy riders the media covers

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black EX-R6

4) Criminal activity. How much harder will it become for criminals to get away if their cars are limited to 130km/h?

No matter how fast the car goes, the police radio is always faster. The criminals get away due to the policy the police have when instegating the pursuit.. Again I dont think the financial installation expense of limiting your car is going to help catch theives, I can bet that these criminals are also never going to install such restrictions on their own cars

I know what you are saying though, but speed limiting some cars, some drivers is such a grey area, the only way to do it effectively is utilse GPS and maybe SSAP in older cars

Casper · 11-08-2004, 14:42

ok, at what point did the government and its cronies take over my own thought and decision making processes?
This is not a debate about speed limiting, this is a debate to determine just how much an individual can be legislated against.
I for one never gave anyone the right to control every aspect of my life from womb to tomb. I still have a brain in my head and that brain tells me that inappropriate speeding is plain stupid...I dont need it legistated that my car shouldnt be able to do it. If that was the case I may as well buy a 120Y right now.

JG33PY · 11-08-2004, 14:44

[quote=gabbs19] Even if they Id hate to go overtaking a truck at a maximum speed of 110 in the country as well. QUOTE]

you'd never get past doing 110, cause he's late and doing 120. remember the fat cats speed limited heavy vehicles a few years back. obviously that didn't work.
speed limits are for revenue raising, nothing else.