The suggestion I've seen is a system with sensors that then puts a limiter on the fuel pump. I drive a Prius though, so I'm entertained by the notion of someone trying to figure out how to do an aftermarket limiter refit on that car.
I seriously doubt such a thing would fly with the populace though: people get extremely defensive when it comes to things which might fuck with their cars and rightly so - they're major capital expenditures.
Because every minute extra spent going somewhere by bus or train is [strike]an economic loss and a minute you'll never get back?[/strike] a moment you can spend reading or watching a DVD or playing a video game or talking to the person next to you.
Honestly, if you have the time to take public transportation, I don't understand why you wouldn't.
Commuting by car is the shittiest thing.
Maybe for you, but there are some people who actually take pleasure from driving.
Which brings me to my question - what kind of car do you drive?
It's a rare, rare person who takes pleasure from the kind of driving that happens on your typical commute.
I love my car, but Adrien's got the right idea.
And to answer your question, Jetta 1.8L Turbo.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Ok. Practically there may be instances where a person would be justified in going faster than the posted speed limit so a hard ban via technology doesn't make sense.
But the real answer is much easier than that:
Money.
If people have the ability to drive faster than the speed limit, some will, and highway troopers can then issue tickets and the accompanied fines.
There is a necessity for highway troopers on the road, whether or not it is possible to speed, for a variety of safety issues. If people are violating speed limits, then troopers can at least generate some revenue while they are out there.
Personally, I don't think the problem with driving is a lack of education...it's a lack of common sense and a lack of basic human decency...how the hell do you teach that?
How do you teach the asshole that rides your bumper and swerves in and out of traffic recklessly not to do those things. You can't...there are some people who are able to do it skillfully and without incident, the rest of them will ultimately get in an accident but that "education" comes at the cost of thousands of dollars in damage at best, a lost life(s) at worst.
An artificial technological speed limiter isn't going to help anything. It's not going to teach them WHY they aught to go slower and that speeding up rarely saves any significant time...if you're late..you're already late and speeding up doesn't do shit
So unless you want to have a shit ton of accidents and fatalities just to teach people why they aught to be cautious, imo the only way this is going to be solved is autopilots and remove human idiocy from the equation altogether. Get it so that you literally just tell the car where you want to go and it takes you there...and since all other cars on the road are computer controlled, it would be safer to go a higher speeds and be more efficient.
In addition, as someone else mentioned earlier in the thread. Maybe there needs to be an easy way to self report unsafe drivers. 911 isn't good enough if you're driving alone and don't want to make a phone call while driving. I'd be for mounting cameras on cars and uploading your video to the police
How do you teach the asshole that rides your bumper and swerves in and out of traffic recklessly not to do those things. You can't...
You teach the driver who is in front of said reckless driver to get out of the passing lane and let the dangerous driver go on his merry way without having to dodge around others.
There's people who will actively slow down when being tailgated. They're as unsafe as the guy doing the tailgating, not because they're driving recklessly, but because they're escalating a situation and causing others to act even more recklessly.
How do you teach the asshole that rides your bumper and swerves in and out of traffic recklessly not to do those things. You can't...
You teach the driver who is in front of said reckless driver to get out of the passing lane and let the dangerous driver go on his merry way without having to dodge around others.
There's people who will actively slow down when being tailgated. They're as unsafe as the guy doing the tailgating, not because they're driving recklessly, but because they're escalating a situation and causing others to act even more recklessly.
They are not as unsafe because they have a condition on their behavior. The tailgater's condition is nearly always active since there is nearly always going to be people driving slower than him (at the legal limit, put nearly in there since absolutes are silly).
The easiest solution would be to increase police presence but that is just not possible in most places. People already complain about how many cops are assigned to traffic duty these days and how they are just digging for money.
I really like the idea of nationwide (or nearly so) RFID chips in speed limit signs, allowing newer cars to always "know" the speed limit and utilize it in various ways.
I really dislike the idea of a governor keeping me from breaking said speed limit. There are times when you simply need to drive faster...medical emergencies (that don't warrant an ambulance, or where one isn't readily available), passing (it's generally legal on a two-lane highway to break the speed limit to allow for safer passing), and probably a ton more if I thought about it. Some of which may require either quick reaction or long-term use, making any sort of "temporary override" insufficient.
I do like the idea of something beeping at me annoyingly when I get more than 3-4 mph over the speed limit. I'd prefer to be able to turn it off (largely in case the computer "reads" the RFID tag wrong or something, but also just because) but I'd probably rarely do so. "Hi, car! What's that you say? You want to help me not get tickets? Why, thank you! You're swell!"
You teach the driver who is in front of said reckless driver to get out of the passing lane and let the dangerous driver go on his merry way without having to dodge around others.
There's people who will actively slow down when being tailgated. They're as unsafe as the guy doing the tailgating, not because they're driving recklessly, but because they're escalating a situation and causing others to act even more recklessly.
There may not be a passing lane. The traffic in the non-passing lane may be going slow enough that the "slow" driver in the passing lane is passing. If I'm going 10mph over the limit and constantly passing cars on my right, I'm probably not going to jump out of your way just because you want to go 20mph over. Unless you have flashing lights and sirens of some kind, you can fucking wait.
Also, we've done about a hundred pages on this before (that I think resulted in many infractions and a jailing or few), but there's no fucking way you're going to convince me that I'm responsible for the reckless actions of the asshole tailgater behind me. Ever. You will not do it, period.
EDIT: By the same token, if there is a ten car space coming in the non-passing lane, and you're going significantly slower than the traffic behind you seems to want to go, get the fuck over and let them by. Common sense. I'm just sick of people that think I should constantly be jumping in and out of one- to two-car-length spaces to let them by when I'm passing the slowpokes on the right too, and I'm already speeding to the tune of a $150+ ticket if a cop decides I'm his catch of the day.
How do you teach the asshole that rides your bumper and swerves in and out of traffic recklessly not to do those things. You can't...
You teach the driver who is in front of said reckless driver to get out of the passing lane and let the dangerous driver go on his merry way without having to dodge around others.
There's people who will actively slow down when being tailgated. They're as unsafe as the guy doing the tailgating, not because they're driving recklessly, but because they're escalating a situation and causing others to act even more recklessly.
They are not as unsafe because they have a condition on their behavior. The tailgater's condition is nearly always active since there is nearly always going to be people driving slower than him (at the legal limit, put nearly in there since absolutes are silly).
The easiest solution would be to increase police presence but that is just not possible in most places. People already complain about how many cops are assigned to traffic duty these days and how they are just digging for money.
Fair enough. He's not "as" unsafe. Poor choice of words. Still, I think my point stands that if you can't educate the stupid out of some people, you can educate others to better deal with the stupid.
There may not be a passing lane. The traffic in the non-passing lane may be going slow enough that the "slow" driver in the passing lane is passing. If I'm going 10mph over the limit and constantly passing cars on my right, I'm probably not going to jump out of your way just because you want to go 20mph over. Unless you have flashing lights and sirens of some kind, you can fucking wait.
Also, we've done about a hundred pages on this before (that I think resulted in many infractions and a jailing or few), but there's no fucking way you're going to convince me that I'm responsible for the reckless actions of the asshole tailgater behind me. Ever. You will not do it, period.
That's entirely beside the point I was trying to make. If there's a crazy driver on the road and you're not actively trying to get out of his way before he causes some harm, you're as big a fool. He may cause the accident, but it's rarely impossible to maneuver your way away from dangerous drivers once you've spotted them. I'm definitely not saying you're responsible for his actions.
There may not be a passing lane. The traffic in the non-passing lane may be going slow enough that the "slow" driver in the passing lane is passing. If I'm going 10mph over the limit and constantly passing cars on my right, I'm probably not going to jump out of your way just because you want to go 20mph over. Unless you have flashing lights and sirens of some kind, you can fucking wait.
Also, we've done about a hundred pages on this before (that I think resulted in many infractions and a jailing or few), but there's no fucking way you're going to convince me that I'm responsible for the reckless actions of the asshole tailgater behind me. Ever. You will not do it, period.
That's entirely beside the point I was trying to make. If there's a crazy driver on the road and you're not actively trying to get out of his way before he causes some harm, you're as big a fool. He may cause the accident, but it's rarely impossible to maneuver your way away from dangerous drivers once you've spotted them. I'm definitely not saying you're responsible for his actions.
If he causes an accident behind me, the odds that it will somehow involve or affect me are lower than if he causes an accident in front of me.
There's always the possibility that he'll actually rear-end me, but that seems the least likely of the three.
Honestly, when I drive one of my general goals is to, whenever possible, put crazy and/or stupid drivers behind me.
Really, there's only so much you can do to stop people from driving like idiots. You're not going to be able to do it with a difficult driving test because they will do whatever the fuck they want when they get their license.
I never took any professional classes in driving; I was taught by my parents. I had to read a driving manual and take a written test on it, but I don't remember a damned thing from it. I have never been in an accident. The best way to learn driving is by driving, and how safely you drive is based almost entirely on your personality. If you're a spoiled little shit who doesn't work to pay for anything you own and think you can do anything you feel like, you will probably drive terribly.
Hard limits on driving speeds are unnecessary, circumventable and can actually cause problems for people who are driving safely. Sometimes you need to accelerate quickly to avoid an accident. Someone else gave an example of someone moving into your lane without looking-- this has happened to me. I had to accelerate to avoid a collision because there were people behind me and slamming on the brakes would probably have caused an accident itself.
If I'm not mistaken, the "beeping" idea would require some kind of RFID devices on all speed limit signs, which would be a huge waste of money. Speed limit signs already get vandalized frequently, I'm sure plenty of people would have no problem breaking RFIDs attached to them (especially if they like to speed in that particular area). Or they would simply find out how to stop the beeping.
Probably the only thing that is going to make a substantial impact on driving accidents is a large scale shift towards public transportation, something that will take many years and billions/trillions of dollars here in the US. That's not an argument against it per se, just a realistic assessment of the situation. A severe social stigma towards drunk driving couldn't hurt either.
I can't drive at all myself (too many things to pay attention to at once), so I don't fucking drive.
I don't think the solutions to driving accidents & fatalities can be found in licensing programs, either. People just cheat their way around it. I propose something very simple: make it illegal to manufacture any non-emergency vehicle capable of exceeding 60 mph.
Hahahahaha
hahah
hah
Oh you fascist goose. Really? How could you... well, whatever.
No sorry, that needs to be rebutted. :P
A. 60 mph is ridiculously slow.
B. Cars are made outside of America. Lots of them actually. If Americans need their own special really really slow cars, then by god I guarantee you'll be paying a premium for them. Also kills the export market.
C. For gods sake... you really think this is a good idea?
D. IT IS SO UNSAFE. I am telling you now - i have been in situations before where I was effectivly speed limited at 110km/h (Hyundai getz :P) and it is fucking terrifying to put your foot down and feel nothing underneath. Terrifying and unsafe. There are times when you NEED to drive fast (the situation I experienced personally involved a 2 lane highway, a crash occurring in my lane obstructing traffic, and a lorry behind me)
I really hate reading these threads, because it makes me feel like a damn libertarian compared to the views of most people (especially most Australian posters). Australian roads fucking suck to drive on now. In Melbourne we're getting to the point where there is a speed camera on almost every major intersection, and a fuckload of minor ones. These cameras will book you for going 3 km over the limit. For you international readers, that is not a fucking lot of miles an hour. It saps the fucking pleasure from driving when you're constantly eyeing the damn speedo to check that you're still going exactly 60 km an hour down the long, empty stretch of road you're currently driving on. And the penalties are fucking harsh too - serious cash, and in your first 5 years of driving you can afford more than a couple of tickets, or it's license gone.
In any case I find myself firmly of the view that the road rules in Melbourne are fucking ridiculous. Were I not on a public forum I would perhaps be inclined to suggest that I am a frequent speeder who has become very adept at avoiding enforcement. Of course that's completely untrue, as back when I first got my license I was caught twice for driving at 80 kilometers an hour in a 70 zone (both times dead sober, on an empty road, with quite literally not a car in sight), and were I to be caught with another infringement at any time during the next 2 years, even for 3 km/h over I would lose my license, and consequently my job and uni placement.
Irregardless, the large amount of effort one would theoretically have to put into watching their back constantly for cops and constantly scanning roadsides for mobile speed cameras (and don't forget slowing unnaturally for passing those cameras, eyes on the speedo instead of the road) is effort not concentrated on being a safe driver; but anyone with a fucking clue knows that's never what it's been about, it's just a big fat (gigantic, massive) cash cow for the government.
To put it like a bogun bumper sticker I saw the other day, welcome to the United Communist States of Australia. ;-)
blizzard224 on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
Options
WarcryI'm getting my shit pushed in here!AustraliaRegistered Userregular
edited June 2010
Well, I'm in Queensland and I just got my learners (about three years overdue) and I'm going pretty well I think. I do actively hate manual cars though, since I have ADD. Too much shit to remember and monitor. Steering, braking, cars, pedestrians and speedo are pretty much all I can concentrate on at once. Once I start gear changing I start forgetting things and slow to a snail's pace so I don't wreck anything (or anyone). Auto is the way to go for me. my Camry.
On the subject of limiting speed, I think it is circumstantial. Emergencies call for ridiculous speed at times, but I think limiting the speed in the city is probably a good idea. Limiting as in giving you a warning when you're getting close to the speed limit (~5km/h away). Physically restricting it could have very bad consequences in the wrong circumstances.
I'd like more accountability for cops breaking the law. Just because you're a cop doesn't mean you should be doing 75 on a highway where people aren't, or talking on your cell phone, that is clearly not your "radio." And I doubt your sergeant is telling that funny of jokes that you'd be laughing on the "radio."
I actually had a cop tail me for about a half hour yesterday for god knows what. Maybe he was trying to find a reason to pull me over, but it was pretty weird he'd follow every route I took from my house to my parents'.
I once followed a cable van for about twenty minutes off of the highway, through town, to the outskirts, up a huge hill, into a suburban neighborhood, through several turns, and finally onto a dead end.
Turns out he was going to the house right next to mine. You might have just been on his route.
I doubt his route would take him through all the unpopulated back roads I use to get to my parents. Through a county line.
bowen on
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
There may not be a passing lane. The traffic in the non-passing lane may be going slow enough that the "slow" driver in the passing lane is passing. If I'm going 10mph over the limit and constantly passing cars on my right, I'm probably not going to jump out of your way just because you want to go 20mph over. Unless you have flashing lights and sirens of some kind, you can fucking wait.
Also, we've done about a hundred pages on this before (that I think resulted in many infractions and a jailing or few), but there's no fucking way you're going to convince me that I'm responsible for the reckless actions of the asshole tailgater behind me. Ever. You will not do it, period.
That's entirely beside the point I was trying to make. If there's a crazy driver on the road and you're not actively trying to get out of his way before he causes some harm, you're as big a fool. He may cause the accident, but it's rarely impossible to maneuver your way away from dangerous drivers once you've spotted them. I'm definitely not saying you're responsible for his actions.
That depends. Crazy driver is going to be crazy regardless, and will weave in and out of lanes, so you trying to get out of his way will probably create an even more dangerous situation than keeping your pace and being aware of your surroundings and letting asshole behind you decide he wants to pass you on the shoulder doing 110 MPH.
bowen on
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
80 km/h is such a frankly offensive nanny-state speed limit I don't even know where to start addressing it. It's too slow for modern cars. It's too slow for modern roads. It would make long distance travel take 20-30% longer.
I agree that 80km/h is a bit low, but how would you feel about 90 or 100km/hr limits imposed mechanically on cars?
A 100 km/h limit? Well, I hope you've never overtaken a vehicle on a highway only to have them suddenly speed up, requiring you to floor it to get past them.
The problem isn't the speed, it's the low-speed focus of driver training and the total exclusion of high performance driving training. Thinking that slowing down cars slightly will reduce fatalities is the worst kind of intervention strategy... that's like thinking that reducing the size of bullets in everyone's guns will reduce shooting fatalities. There are two real solutions to the issue: training, or bans. We either ban cars, or we increase the training.
The extent of high speed driver training is maybe, maybe a few minutes on a course with some pylons to dodge. There's no focus on skid recovery, nor on exploring the limits of four wheels and a combustion engine in a controlled setting. Want to know why teenagers get into accidents so often? They're natural explorers and are highly adventurous, and they want to discover the limits of their vehicles. It just so happens that the only way they can do so is on a quiet road.
I had the privilege of training with an uncle who happened to be a world class rally racer in his glory days. I know that I could safely drive a car on an empty mountain highway at speeds exceeding 140 km/h, but I also understand precisely how far it would take me to stop, and how difficult sudden evasive turns are at those speeds. So I do not drive at the maximum speed I could do on an empty highway. But a teenager in their first car... they do not understand how at higher speeds you are riding a razor's edge of control, and the subtle warning signs that tell you that your wheels are about to lose their tenuous grip on the road. They may push themselves to 100 km/h, 120 km/h because they simply do not understand how quickly car performance changes, because they have never been taught this neither more importantly have they experienced the terror of an uncontrolled skid even in a controlled setting.
So no, I firmly reject the notion of limiters. In fact, I would go so far as to endorse the idea that people who support limiters should be stripped of their driving privileges, because they are unable to show the restraint required to control a vehicle under any setting. Sticking a 80 km/h cap on a car will not stop them from plowing through a crosswalk full of children in an urban setting... something I'd warrant that their poor driving skills would make more likely.
There may not be a passing lane. The traffic in the non-passing lane may be going slow enough that the "slow" driver in the passing lane is passing. If I'm going 10mph over the limit and constantly passing cars on my right, I'm probably not going to jump out of your way just because you want to go 20mph over. Unless you have flashing lights and sirens of some kind, you can fucking wait.
Also, we've done about a hundred pages on this before (that I think resulted in many infractions and a jailing or few), but there's no fucking way you're going to convince me that I'm responsible for the reckless actions of the asshole tailgater behind me. Ever. You will not do it, period.
That's entirely beside the point I was trying to make. If there's a crazy driver on the road and you're not actively trying to get out of his way before he causes some harm, you're as big a fool. He may cause the accident, but it's rarely impossible to maneuver your way away from dangerous drivers once you've spotted them. I'm definitely not saying you're responsible for his actions.
That depends. Crazy driver is going to be crazy regardless, and will weave in and out of lanes, so you trying to get out of his way will probably create an even more dangerous situation than keeping your pace and being aware of your surroundings and letting asshole behind you decide he wants to pass you on the shoulder doing 110 MPH.
Ok, so we're basically in complete agreement. The actual maneuver you need to do in order to be a safe driver is entirely context dependent.
But really? If there's a guy behind me wanting to drive 50k over the limit, and as he approaches I get out of the left lane to give him a straight passing lane, he's still going to be weaving in and out of lanes to avoid me?
Just for kicks, anyone have any stats on auto accidents on the Autobahn where you make your own speed limit?
saint2e on
0
Options
GnomeTankWhat the what?Portland, OregonRegistered Userregular
edited June 2010
I got to thinking. Now, my perspective on some of this is different than some people, because I drive to and from work daily in a major city, with huge traffic issues (Houston).
If we are going to start nit picking people going 5-10 over the speed limit, we need to start also nit picking people going 5-10 under. The most dangerous thing I see on a daily basis is not the flow of traffic moving at 65-70 in a 60, it's the people who refuse to go the speed limit. When the flow of traffic is going 70, and you are going 55, that creates a very dangerous situation. The drivers that close up on you at 15mph have to either break, or dodge you, lest they get run over by the traffic behind them. It creates backups and dangerous split second decision situations that are completely avoidable. If you, or your car, are incapable of doing the posted speed limit and staying within a few miles per hour of the flow of traffic, you shouldn't be on that road.
When you're dealing with the kind of traffic we deal with in Houston, someone going that much slower than the flow of traffic is easily more dangerous than the person going with the flow of traffic, even if that flow is over the speed limit.
Well, I'm in Queensland and I just got my learners (about three years overdue) and I'm going pretty well I think. I do actively hate manual cars though, since I have ADD. Too much shit to remember and monitor. Steering, braking, cars, pedestrians and speedo are pretty much all I can concentrate on at once. Once I start gear changing I start forgetting things and slow to a snail's pace so I don't wreck anything (or anyone). Auto is the way to go for me. my Camry.
On the subject of limiting speed, I think it is circumstantial. Emergencies call for ridiculous speed at times, but I think limiting the speed in the city is probably a good idea. Limiting as in giving you a warning when you're getting close to the speed limit (~5km/h away). Physically restricting it could have very bad consequences in the wrong circumstances.
You need to practice more than. I drive a manual every day, and shifting isn't something you should think about it, it should just happen. I don't even look at my tac, I shift the car purely be feel and sound, and it's a complete muscle reaction, no thought involved.
To be fair, I've been driving manuals (by choice) since I was 20, and I'm 30 now, so I have quite a bit of experience...but yah. It really only took a month or two for shifting to become a completely natural action.
I got to thinking. Now, my perspective on some of this is different than some people, because I drive to and from work daily in a major city, with huge traffic issues (Houston).
If we are going to start nit picking people going 5-10 over the speed limit, we need to start also nit picking people going 5-10 under. The most dangerous thing I see on a daily basis is not the flow of traffic moving at 65-70 in a 60, it's the people who refuse to go the speed limit. When the flow of traffic is going 70, and you are going 55, that creates a very dangerous situation. The drivers that close up on you at 15mph have to either break, or dodge you, lest they get run over by the traffic behind them. It creates backups and dangerous split second decision situations that are completely avoidable. If you, or your car, are incapable of doing the posted speed limit and staying within a few miles per hour of the flow of traffic, you shouldn't be on that road.
When you're dealing with the kind of traffic we deal with in Houston, someone going that much slower than the flow of traffic is easily more dangerous than the person going with the flow of traffic, even if that flow is over the speed limit.
I am not opposed to this. But, there needs to be concessions made for emergency cases too, there are times where vehicles become disabled but still need to use the highway (tire flat, on a donut).
bowen on
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
0
Options
GnomeTankWhat the what?Portland, OregonRegistered Userregular
I got to thinking. Now, my perspective on some of this is different than some people, because I drive to and from work daily in a major city, with huge traffic issues (Houston).
If we are going to start nit picking people going 5-10 over the speed limit, we need to start also nit picking people going 5-10 under. The most dangerous thing I see on a daily basis is not the flow of traffic moving at 65-70 in a 60, it's the people who refuse to go the speed limit. When the flow of traffic is going 70, and you are going 55, that creates a very dangerous situation. The drivers that close up on you at 15mph have to either break, or dodge you, lest they get run over by the traffic behind them. It creates backups and dangerous split second decision situations that are completely avoidable. If you, or your car, are incapable of doing the posted speed limit and staying within a few miles per hour of the flow of traffic, you shouldn't be on that road.
When you're dealing with the kind of traffic we deal with in Houston, someone going that much slower than the flow of traffic is easily more dangerous than the person going with the flow of traffic, even if that flow is over the speed limit.
I am not opposed to this. But, there needs to be concessions made for emergency cases too, there are times where vehicles become disabled but still need to use the highway (tire flat, on a donut).
Sure, there is a concession for this: Flashers. That's what they are for, and if I come up on someone going 50 in a 65 with flashers on, I get it, and I safely get out of the way. These are not the people I am talking about.
I like this. How about more sane speed limits and work zone limits within reason too?
When it's midnight and I'm traveling I hate hitting an "active workzone" that's, quite literally, 4 miles of cones with not a person around. Except the 8 cops along the path. Plus, get rid of this 55 nonsense on large, multi-lane highways. Look, NYS "unmarked" speedlimit is 55 on back roads. I think we can get beyond that with a 2-3 lane highway that's meant for long distance traveling.
bowen on
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
Well, I'm in Queensland and I just got my learners (about three years overdue) and I'm going pretty well I think. I do actively hate manual cars though, since I have ADD. Too much shit to remember and monitor. Steering, braking, cars, pedestrians and speedo are pretty much all I can concentrate on at once. Once I start gear changing I start forgetting things and slow to a snail's pace so I don't wreck anything (or anyone). Auto is the way to go for me. my Camry.
On the subject of limiting speed, I think it is circumstantial. Emergencies call for ridiculous speed at times, but I think limiting the speed in the city is probably a good idea. Limiting as in giving you a warning when you're getting close to the speed limit (~5km/h away). Physically restricting it could have very bad consequences in the wrong circumstances.
You need to practice more than. I drive a manual every day, and shifting isn't something you should think about it, it should just happen. I don't even look at my tac, I shift the car purely be feel and sound, and it's a complete muscle reaction, no thought involved.
To be fair, I've been driving manuals (by choice) since I was 20, and I'm 30 now, so I have quite a bit of experience...but yah. It really only took a month or two for shifting to become a completely natural action.
Optionally, though I'm not sure if this is available to Aussies, never ever drive a manual, period. I've been driving a decade now and have never been in a situation where an automatic wasn't available (knock on wood). Now, while DOS and manual transmissions are cool things to know how to operate, time is often better spent using modern technology.
If I'm not mistaken, the "beeping" idea would require some kind of RFID devices on all speed limit signs, which would be a huge waste of money. Speed limit signs already get vandalized frequently, I'm sure plenty of people would have no problem breaking RFIDs attached to them (especially if they like to speed in that particular area). Or they would simply find out how to stop the beeping.
Or you could just set it up to beep whenever someone goes over, say, 125kph. And most people wouldn't disable it because it's just not worth the damn effort.
You target the people going crazy high speeds.There's nothing you can really DO about low speed problems without a crazy expensive and unrealistic setup.
I like to decide what gear I'm in, thank you very much.
Drive for forward, Reverse for backwards, Park for not moving, Neutral for when the car breaks.
Anything else is just wankery.
I like my wankery, thank you very much.
In all seriousness, though. I prefer manual over automatic. It's probably part snobbery and part "me having to subconsciously pay attention while I'm driving, making my drive slightly less boring somehow".
Well, I'm in Queensland and I just got my learners (about three years overdue) and I'm going pretty well I think. I do actively hate manual cars though, since I have ADD. Too much shit to remember and monitor. Steering, braking, cars, pedestrians and speedo are pretty much all I can concentrate on at once. Once I start gear changing I start forgetting things and slow to a snail's pace so I don't wreck anything (or anyone). Auto is the way to go for me. my Camry.
On the subject of limiting speed, I think it is circumstantial. Emergencies call for ridiculous speed at times, but I think limiting the speed in the city is probably a good idea. Limiting as in giving you a warning when you're getting close to the speed limit (~5km/h away). Physically restricting it could have very bad consequences in the wrong circumstances.
That's why it's generally recommended that you learn how to drive auto before moving to gears. The goal is, of course, to minimize the number of things you have to think about besides your surroundings.
Edit: I don' think I'll ever like driving a manual. Okay, that's not true. I'll never like driving another manual. I'm very visceral with my driving, to the point that I feel uncomfortable if my seat is more than one notch off of my usual setting. Therefor, changing cars is enraging enough without having to worry about the differences causing me to stall out.
What you don't like people who roll backwards on an incline when they shift into gear?
Or skip gears and slow down in the middle of accelerating to get onto a highway?
My mom actually has a story about that. When she was starting out with manuals, there was one hill near her home that she always drove around. Well, one day, she was in a bit of a rush and decided to go over the hill. So she drives up the hill and stops at the light 90% of the way up. When the light turned to green, she put the car in gear... and stalled out. Not wanting to block traffic, she quickly restarted the car, put it in gear, and stalled out again. And again. And again. After several more rounds of this, she felt a bump, and realized she'd stalled so many times that she had backed into the car behind her. By this point, she was totally panicked, and was pretty much hyperventilating until she looked in the rear view mirror and saw the guy she'd backed into mouthing the words "calm down." After that, she was able to collect herself and make it to the other side of the hill.
I like to decide what gear I'm in, thank you very much.
Drive for forward, Reverse for backwards, Park for not moving, Neutral for when the car breaks.
Anything else is just wankery.
I like my wankery, thank you very much.
In all seriousness, though. I prefer manual over automatic. It's probably part snobbery and part "me having to subconsciously pay attention while I'm driving, making my drive slightly less boring somehow".
I know there's more to learn with a manual transmission, but I feel that I have more control with a manual. If I want to slow down, I can ease up on the accelerator rather than having to break. Some autos, especially in smaller engine cars, dont handle certain things very well, like shifting to accelerate at higher speeds, up hills etc.
Don't get me wrong, I sometimes like the whole go/stop simplicity of an auto - but I prefer the experience of driving in a manual. And being comfortable with it has meant in the past that I was better equipped when having to drive unfamiliar vehicles/vans etc.
Fallingman on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
Options
Casually HardcoreOnce an Asshole. Trying to be better.Registered Userregular
edited June 2010
After driving a manual car for 15 years and now having to drive an automatic, let it be known that automatic transmission is utter shit. You have ZERO control with an auto.
I like to decide what gear I'm in, thank you very much.
Drive for forward, Reverse for backwards, Park for not moving, Neutral for when the car breaks.
Anything else is just wankery.
I like my wankery, thank you very much.
In all seriousness, though. I prefer manual over automatic. It's probably part snobbery and part "me having to subconsciously pay attention while I'm driving, making my drive slightly less boring somehow".
I know there's more to learn with a manual transmission, but I feel that I have more control with a manual. If I want to slow down, I can ease up on the accelerator rather than having to break. Some autos, especially in smaller engine cars, dont handle certain things very well, like shifting to accelerate at higher speeds, up hills etc.
Don't get me wrong, I sometimes like the whole go/stop simplicity of an auto - but I prefer the experience of driving in a manual. And being comfortable with it has meant in the past that I was better equipped when having to drive unfamiliar vehicles/vans etc.
Man, I remember when I was deployed over to Iraq and somebody came in asking "who here knows how to drive a stick?"
I, of course, drove a stick back home so I raised my hand.
Apparently the "stick" in question was actually on some crazy Russian 5-ton trucks we were driving out to the Iraqi military to deliver. It was one of those 10-speed or whatever (with high/low for each) transmissions that, from what I understand, was all the rage on big rigs back in the 70's. Basically, it in no fucking way resembled my Honda Civic.
Still, once I got it rolling I managed. Sorta. Getting it moving in first without stalling or grinding was absolutely absurd, but once it was rolling all the subsequent gears were relatively easy.
If anybody's wondering, we were just driving them a hundred yards or so outside the FOB, after driving them across the FOB...the military generally wouldn't allow an untrained driver to take a vehicle long distance, particularly in a hostile fire zone.
Just for kicks, anyone have any stats on auto accidents on the Autobahn where you make your own speed limit?
You could also look at the years that Montana had no real speed limit, though I'm not sure either would apply to semi-urban freeways (does the Autobahn run through cities with no speed limit?). Still, good data to look at for cross-country highways.
After driving a manual car for 15 years and now having to drive an automatic, let it be known that automatic transmission is utter shit. You have ZERO control with an auto.
Yeah man, I pressed the accelerator and the car went from 0 to 100 without any dicking around. WTF?!?! Where's the control?!?!?
I am a significantly better driver with a manual. You actually need to pay attention to everything going around you, and you have much better maneuverability in traffic.
Posts
I seriously doubt such a thing would fly with the populace though: people get extremely defensive when it comes to things which might fuck with their cars and rightly so - they're major capital expenditures.
I love my car, but Adrien's got the right idea.
And to answer your question, Jetta 1.8L Turbo.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Good thing it's easy to circumvent. I tend to agree, though, I don't think the general populace would go for this. At least, I hope not.
But the real answer is much easier than that:
Money.
If people have the ability to drive faster than the speed limit, some will, and highway troopers can then issue tickets and the accompanied fines.
There is a necessity for highway troopers on the road, whether or not it is possible to speed, for a variety of safety issues. If people are violating speed limits, then troopers can at least generate some revenue while they are out there.
How do you teach the asshole that rides your bumper and swerves in and out of traffic recklessly not to do those things. You can't...there are some people who are able to do it skillfully and without incident, the rest of them will ultimately get in an accident but that "education" comes at the cost of thousands of dollars in damage at best, a lost life(s) at worst.
An artificial technological speed limiter isn't going to help anything. It's not going to teach them WHY they aught to go slower and that speeding up rarely saves any significant time...if you're late..you're already late and speeding up doesn't do shit
So unless you want to have a shit ton of accidents and fatalities just to teach people why they aught to be cautious, imo the only way this is going to be solved is autopilots and remove human idiocy from the equation altogether. Get it so that you literally just tell the car where you want to go and it takes you there...and since all other cars on the road are computer controlled, it would be safer to go a higher speeds and be more efficient.
In addition, as someone else mentioned earlier in the thread. Maybe there needs to be an easy way to self report unsafe drivers. 911 isn't good enough if you're driving alone and don't want to make a phone call while driving. I'd be for mounting cameras on cars and uploading your video to the police
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
You teach the driver who is in front of said reckless driver to get out of the passing lane and let the dangerous driver go on his merry way without having to dodge around others.
There's people who will actively slow down when being tailgated. They're as unsafe as the guy doing the tailgating, not because they're driving recklessly, but because they're escalating a situation and causing others to act even more recklessly.
They are not as unsafe because they have a condition on their behavior. The tailgater's condition is nearly always active since there is nearly always going to be people driving slower than him (at the legal limit, put nearly in there since absolutes are silly).
The easiest solution would be to increase police presence but that is just not possible in most places. People already complain about how many cops are assigned to traffic duty these days and how they are just digging for money.
I really dislike the idea of a governor keeping me from breaking said speed limit. There are times when you simply need to drive faster...medical emergencies (that don't warrant an ambulance, or where one isn't readily available), passing (it's generally legal on a two-lane highway to break the speed limit to allow for safer passing), and probably a ton more if I thought about it. Some of which may require either quick reaction or long-term use, making any sort of "temporary override" insufficient.
I do like the idea of something beeping at me annoyingly when I get more than 3-4 mph over the speed limit. I'd prefer to be able to turn it off (largely in case the computer "reads" the RFID tag wrong or something, but also just because) but I'd probably rarely do so. "Hi, car! What's that you say? You want to help me not get tickets? Why, thank you! You're swell!"
There may not be a passing lane. The traffic in the non-passing lane may be going slow enough that the "slow" driver in the passing lane is passing. If I'm going 10mph over the limit and constantly passing cars on my right, I'm probably not going to jump out of your way just because you want to go 20mph over. Unless you have flashing lights and sirens of some kind, you can fucking wait.
Also, we've done about a hundred pages on this before (that I think resulted in many infractions and a jailing or few), but there's no fucking way you're going to convince me that I'm responsible for the reckless actions of the asshole tailgater behind me. Ever. You will not do it, period.
EDIT: By the same token, if there is a ten car space coming in the non-passing lane, and you're going significantly slower than the traffic behind you seems to want to go, get the fuck over and let them by. Common sense. I'm just sick of people that think I should constantly be jumping in and out of one- to two-car-length spaces to let them by when I'm passing the slowpokes on the right too, and I'm already speeding to the tune of a $150+ ticket if a cop decides I'm his catch of the day.
Fair enough. He's not "as" unsafe. Poor choice of words. Still, I think my point stands that if you can't educate the stupid out of some people, you can educate others to better deal with the stupid.
That's entirely beside the point I was trying to make. If there's a crazy driver on the road and you're not actively trying to get out of his way before he causes some harm, you're as big a fool. He may cause the accident, but it's rarely impossible to maneuver your way away from dangerous drivers once you've spotted them. I'm definitely not saying you're responsible for his actions.
If he causes an accident behind me, the odds that it will somehow involve or affect me are lower than if he causes an accident in front of me.
There's always the possibility that he'll actually rear-end me, but that seems the least likely of the three.
Honestly, when I drive one of my general goals is to, whenever possible, put crazy and/or stupid drivers behind me.
I never took any professional classes in driving; I was taught by my parents. I had to read a driving manual and take a written test on it, but I don't remember a damned thing from it. I have never been in an accident. The best way to learn driving is by driving, and how safely you drive is based almost entirely on your personality. If you're a spoiled little shit who doesn't work to pay for anything you own and think you can do anything you feel like, you will probably drive terribly.
Hard limits on driving speeds are unnecessary, circumventable and can actually cause problems for people who are driving safely. Sometimes you need to accelerate quickly to avoid an accident. Someone else gave an example of someone moving into your lane without looking-- this has happened to me. I had to accelerate to avoid a collision because there were people behind me and slamming on the brakes would probably have caused an accident itself.
If I'm not mistaken, the "beeping" idea would require some kind of RFID devices on all speed limit signs, which would be a huge waste of money. Speed limit signs already get vandalized frequently, I'm sure plenty of people would have no problem breaking RFIDs attached to them (especially if they like to speed in that particular area). Or they would simply find out how to stop the beeping.
Probably the only thing that is going to make a substantial impact on driving accidents is a large scale shift towards public transportation, something that will take many years and billions/trillions of dollars here in the US. That's not an argument against it per se, just a realistic assessment of the situation. A severe social stigma towards drunk driving couldn't hurt either.
Hahahahaha
hahah
hah
Oh you fascist goose. Really? How could you... well, whatever.
No sorry, that needs to be rebutted. :P
A. 60 mph is ridiculously slow.
B. Cars are made outside of America. Lots of them actually. If Americans need their own special really really slow cars, then by god I guarantee you'll be paying a premium for them. Also kills the export market.
C. For gods sake... you really think this is a good idea?
D. IT IS SO UNSAFE. I am telling you now - i have been in situations before where I was effectivly speed limited at 110km/h (Hyundai getz :P) and it is fucking terrifying to put your foot down and feel nothing underneath. Terrifying and unsafe. There are times when you NEED to drive fast (the situation I experienced personally involved a 2 lane highway, a crash occurring in my lane obstructing traffic, and a lorry behind me)
I really hate reading these threads, because it makes me feel like a damn libertarian compared to the views of most people (especially most Australian posters). Australian roads fucking suck to drive on now. In Melbourne we're getting to the point where there is a speed camera on almost every major intersection, and a fuckload of minor ones. These cameras will book you for going 3 km over the limit. For you international readers, that is not a fucking lot of miles an hour. It saps the fucking pleasure from driving when you're constantly eyeing the damn speedo to check that you're still going exactly 60 km an hour down the long, empty stretch of road you're currently driving on. And the penalties are fucking harsh too - serious cash, and in your first 5 years of driving you can afford more than a couple of tickets, or it's license gone.
In any case I find myself firmly of the view that the road rules in Melbourne are fucking ridiculous. Were I not on a public forum I would perhaps be inclined to suggest that I am a frequent speeder who has become very adept at avoiding enforcement. Of course that's completely untrue, as back when I first got my license I was caught twice for driving at 80 kilometers an hour in a 70 zone (both times dead sober, on an empty road, with quite literally not a car in sight), and were I to be caught with another infringement at any time during the next 2 years, even for 3 km/h over I would lose my license, and consequently my job and uni placement.
Irregardless, the large amount of effort one would theoretically have to put into watching their back constantly for cops and constantly scanning roadsides for mobile speed cameras (and don't forget slowing unnaturally for passing those cameras, eyes on the speedo instead of the road) is effort not concentrated on being a safe driver; but anyone with a fucking clue knows that's never what it's been about, it's just a big fat (gigantic, massive) cash cow for the government.
To put it like a bogun bumper sticker I saw the other day, welcome to the United Communist States of Australia. ;-)
On the subject of limiting speed, I think it is circumstantial. Emergencies call for ridiculous speed at times, but I think limiting the speed in the city is probably a good idea. Limiting as in giving you a warning when you're getting close to the speed limit (~5km/h away). Physically restricting it could have very bad consequences in the wrong circumstances.
I doubt his route would take him through all the unpopulated back roads I use to get to my parents. Through a county line.
That depends. Crazy driver is going to be crazy regardless, and will weave in and out of lanes, so you trying to get out of his way will probably create an even more dangerous situation than keeping your pace and being aware of your surroundings and letting asshole behind you decide he wants to pass you on the shoulder doing 110 MPH.
A 100 km/h limit? Well, I hope you've never overtaken a vehicle on a highway only to have them suddenly speed up, requiring you to floor it to get past them.
The problem isn't the speed, it's the low-speed focus of driver training and the total exclusion of high performance driving training. Thinking that slowing down cars slightly will reduce fatalities is the worst kind of intervention strategy... that's like thinking that reducing the size of bullets in everyone's guns will reduce shooting fatalities. There are two real solutions to the issue: training, or bans. We either ban cars, or we increase the training.
The extent of high speed driver training is maybe, maybe a few minutes on a course with some pylons to dodge. There's no focus on skid recovery, nor on exploring the limits of four wheels and a combustion engine in a controlled setting. Want to know why teenagers get into accidents so often? They're natural explorers and are highly adventurous, and they want to discover the limits of their vehicles. It just so happens that the only way they can do so is on a quiet road.
I had the privilege of training with an uncle who happened to be a world class rally racer in his glory days. I know that I could safely drive a car on an empty mountain highway at speeds exceeding 140 km/h, but I also understand precisely how far it would take me to stop, and how difficult sudden evasive turns are at those speeds. So I do not drive at the maximum speed I could do on an empty highway. But a teenager in their first car... they do not understand how at higher speeds you are riding a razor's edge of control, and the subtle warning signs that tell you that your wheels are about to lose their tenuous grip on the road. They may push themselves to 100 km/h, 120 km/h because they simply do not understand how quickly car performance changes, because they have never been taught this neither more importantly have they experienced the terror of an uncontrolled skid even in a controlled setting.
So no, I firmly reject the notion of limiters. In fact, I would go so far as to endorse the idea that people who support limiters should be stripped of their driving privileges, because they are unable to show the restraint required to control a vehicle under any setting. Sticking a 80 km/h cap on a car will not stop them from plowing through a crosswalk full of children in an urban setting... something I'd warrant that their poor driving skills would make more likely.
Ok, so we're basically in complete agreement. The actual maneuver you need to do in order to be a safe driver is entirely context dependent.
But really? If there's a guy behind me wanting to drive 50k over the limit, and as he approaches I get out of the left lane to give him a straight passing lane, he's still going to be weaving in and out of lanes to avoid me?
If we are going to start nit picking people going 5-10 over the speed limit, we need to start also nit picking people going 5-10 under. The most dangerous thing I see on a daily basis is not the flow of traffic moving at 65-70 in a 60, it's the people who refuse to go the speed limit. When the flow of traffic is going 70, and you are going 55, that creates a very dangerous situation. The drivers that close up on you at 15mph have to either break, or dodge you, lest they get run over by the traffic behind them. It creates backups and dangerous split second decision situations that are completely avoidable. If you, or your car, are incapable of doing the posted speed limit and staying within a few miles per hour of the flow of traffic, you shouldn't be on that road.
When you're dealing with the kind of traffic we deal with in Houston, someone going that much slower than the flow of traffic is easily more dangerous than the person going with the flow of traffic, even if that flow is over the speed limit.
You need to practice more than. I drive a manual every day, and shifting isn't something you should think about it, it should just happen. I don't even look at my tac, I shift the car purely be feel and sound, and it's a complete muscle reaction, no thought involved.
To be fair, I've been driving manuals (by choice) since I was 20, and I'm 30 now, so I have quite a bit of experience...but yah. It really only took a month or two for shifting to become a completely natural action.
I am not opposed to this. But, there needs to be concessions made for emergency cases too, there are times where vehicles become disabled but still need to use the highway (tire flat, on a donut).
Sure, there is a concession for this: Flashers. That's what they are for, and if I come up on someone going 50 in a 65 with flashers on, I get it, and I safely get out of the way. These are not the people I am talking about.
When it's midnight and I'm traveling I hate hitting an "active workzone" that's, quite literally, 4 miles of cones with not a person around. Except the 8 cops along the path. Plus, get rid of this 55 nonsense on large, multi-lane highways. Look, NYS "unmarked" speedlimit is 55 on back roads. I think we can get beyond that with a 2-3 lane highway that's meant for long distance traveling.
Optionally, though I'm not sure if this is available to Aussies, never ever drive a manual, period. I've been driving a decade now and have never been in a situation where an automatic wasn't available (knock on wood). Now, while DOS and manual transmissions are cool things to know how to operate, time is often better spent using modern technology.
Or skip gears and slow down in the middle of accelerating to get onto a highway?
Drive for forward, Reverse for backwards, Park for not moving, Neutral for when the car breaks.
Anything else is just wankery.
Or you could just set it up to beep whenever someone goes over, say, 125kph. And most people wouldn't disable it because it's just not worth the damn effort.
You target the people going crazy high speeds.There's nothing you can really DO about low speed problems without a crazy expensive and unrealistic setup.
Except, you know, better training.
I like my wankery, thank you very much.
In all seriousness, though. I prefer manual over automatic. It's probably part snobbery and part "me having to subconsciously pay attention while I'm driving, making my drive slightly less boring somehow".
That's why it's generally recommended that you learn how to drive auto before moving to gears. The goal is, of course, to minimize the number of things you have to think about besides your surroundings.
Edit: I don' think I'll ever like driving a manual. Okay, that's not true. I'll never like driving another manual. I'm very visceral with my driving, to the point that I feel uncomfortable if my seat is more than one notch off of my usual setting. Therefor, changing cars is enraging enough without having to worry about the differences causing me to stall out.
My mom actually has a story about that. When she was starting out with manuals, there was one hill near her home that she always drove around. Well, one day, she was in a bit of a rush and decided to go over the hill. So she drives up the hill and stops at the light 90% of the way up. When the light turned to green, she put the car in gear... and stalled out. Not wanting to block traffic, she quickly restarted the car, put it in gear, and stalled out again. And again. And again. After several more rounds of this, she felt a bump, and realized she'd stalled so many times that she had backed into the car behind her. By this point, she was totally panicked, and was pretty much hyperventilating until she looked in the rear view mirror and saw the guy she'd backed into mouthing the words "calm down." After that, she was able to collect herself and make it to the other side of the hill.
I know there's more to learn with a manual transmission, but I feel that I have more control with a manual. If I want to slow down, I can ease up on the accelerator rather than having to break. Some autos, especially in smaller engine cars, dont handle certain things very well, like shifting to accelerate at higher speeds, up hills etc.
Don't get me wrong, I sometimes like the whole go/stop simplicity of an auto - but I prefer the experience of driving in a manual. And being comfortable with it has meant in the past that I was better equipped when having to drive unfamiliar vehicles/vans etc.
Man, I remember when I was deployed over to Iraq and somebody came in asking "who here knows how to drive a stick?"
I, of course, drove a stick back home so I raised my hand.
Apparently the "stick" in question was actually on some crazy Russian 5-ton trucks we were driving out to the Iraqi military to deliver. It was one of those 10-speed or whatever (with high/low for each) transmissions that, from what I understand, was all the rage on big rigs back in the 70's. Basically, it in no fucking way resembled my Honda Civic.
Still, once I got it rolling I managed. Sorta. Getting it moving in first without stalling or grinding was absolutely absurd, but once it was rolling all the subsequent gears were relatively easy.
You could also look at the years that Montana had no real speed limit, though I'm not sure either would apply to semi-urban freeways (does the Autobahn run through cities with no speed limit?). Still, good data to look at for cross-country highways.
Yeah man, I pressed the accelerator and the car went from 0 to 100 without any dicking around. WTF?!?! Where's the control?!?!?