NationStates Jolt Archive

Lets see what NSG thinks of speed limits on highways of course.

Personally I think they're completely useless on big open streches of road, in good conditions of course.

Iv driven at 140 miles an hour in my SI and been in complete control, and any car thats not a useless hybrid is more than capable of holding 100 miles an hour for an extended period of time. On big wide open roads such as turnpikes and highways.

Imo, there should be at least 4 lanes on every highway ( there almost already is ), A slow lane ( 60 and under ) A lane that allows up to 100, and a lane that allows unlimited speed.

Lets see what NSG thinks of speed limits on highways of course.

Personally I think they're completely useless on big open streches of road, in good conditions of course.

Iv driven at 140 miles an hour in my SI and been in complete control, and any car thats not a useless hybrid is more than capable of holding 100 miles an hour for an extended period of time. On big wide open roads such as turnpikes and highways.

Imo, there should be at least 4 lanes on every highway ( there almost already is ), A slow lane ( 60 and under ) A lane that allows up to 100, and a lane that allows unlimited speed.

140 miles an hour and in complete control? What if an animal ran in front of your car?

140 miles an hour and in complete control? What if an animal ran in front of your car?

*mushroom cloud*

Fast food! Yea!

Lets see what NSG thinks of speed limits on highways of course.

Personally I think they're completely useless on big open streches of road, in good conditions of course.

Iv driven at 140 miles an hour in my SI and been in complete control, and any car thats not a useless hybrid is more than capable of holding 100 miles an hour for an extended period of time. On big wide open roads such as turnpikes and highways.

Imo, there should be at least 4 lanes on every highway ( there almost already is ), A slow lane ( 60 and under ) A lane that allows up to 100, and a lane that allows unlimited speed.

ROTTEN POLL.

Speed limits in places like eastern Montana, and hell, the vast majority of North Dakota do seem ridiculous in daylight hours with unlimited visibility with dry, above-freezing weather conditions. Seeing as how that's a lot to judge, the law leaves it up to the officers on the road to determine conditions and appropriate speeds for them.

I own a Civic Si, and I love it, but I've never felt the need to go as fast as 140. I have seen 100, though, and I can honestly say that there'd be no way in hell I'd avoid a darting pheasant, rabbit, deer, elk, or any other unpredictable freeway hazard that might leap up and hit me. That being the case, I'd much rather try to avoid it or if I must, hit it at 75 than at 140.

Problem is, the Interstates are the majority of controlled-access freeway in the US. Most of the highways around here are two-lanes in opposition right next to one another. No way in hell do I want unlimited speeds on those roads at any time, let alone at night.

And as for four lanes everywhere, why? As for four lanes with variable speed limits on each one, are you nuts? Think of how inattentive the AVERAGE driver is with the way things are now. Multiply that by four lanes of differing limits and you've got a recipe for accidents that would clog the freeways night and day.

I respect your need for speed and to waste fuel, and that's fine, as far as it goes. But you must share the road, and I'd rather you do 140 at the race track. If there isn't one, go find one or start a consortium to get one built.

http://www.projo.com/news/content/highway_crash_11-02-07_RK7NAOB_v86.3228764.html

http://www.10news.com/news/14525752/detail.html

http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20070627/triple_fatal_crash_070627?hub=TorontoHome

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4176/is_20061213/ai_n16908503

http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/264421


You've driven 140 and THOUGHT you were in complete control -- just as these folks thought THEY were in complete control.

I won't link it here, but there are some ferocious pictures of what happened when a motorcyclist met the trailer of an 18 wheeler at 160 mph out there, and it ain't pretty. (Can be seen on Snopes.com if you MUST see them.)

Useful, because (in theory) they prevent folks like the OP from having their way.

I may be slightly bitter and/or paranoid (new driver), but apart from under very specific conditions (qv Intangelon) the speed limits are just fine as they are. Sure, we could raise 55 to 65 in places. On a day with good visibility and little traffic, you could stretch that to 75 or 80. But 100 mph? Or variable speed limits for each lane? I'm sorry, but I barely trust the average drivers on highways with speed limits as they are. Yeah, I might get over it in two or three years, but that's beside the point.

i think there should be a recommended speed limit only on motorways. motorways are about the safest roads there are and they're also the roads on which most people will speed if they are going to at all.

tbh, the speed limit on most stretches of motorway in britain is rarely enforced, far less than on other roads in any case.

ironically, some of the heaviest and most worrying motorway traffic i've encountered (at normal speed) has been caused by many people driving up behind a police car sticking around 70 and realising they're going to overtake at over the speed limit so slamming on the brakes. consequently the traffic that was progressing safely at 10mph or so over the limit is then dangerously close together and fixated on keeping to the speed limit instead of concentrating on driving safely.

Speed limits in places like eastern Montana, and hell, the vast majority of North Dakota do seem ridiculous in daylight hours with unlimited visibility with dry, above-freezing weather conditions.

I live in North Dakota. Yes, in daylight hours with unlimited visibility with dry, above-freezing weather conditions, the speed limits are just fine. However, let's say it's dark, there's a nice layer of ice on the roads, it's snowing and blowing a little, and a deer runs in front of your car. I'd like to think you weren't driving 140 mph under those circumstances. The speed limits adapt naturally to changing weather conditions. Frankly, given all that, I'd probably be at home. However, if I were on the road, I would be driving about 30 mph and making a lot of bargains with God along the lines of "I swear if I live through this, I will never leave my home again in weather like this."

Roads are not engineered for speeds above their speed limits. As you go above the speed limit, the risk of loss of control and a major accident increase considerably. They're just not built for that kind of speed, and few drivers are even capable of knowing how to handle another vehicle moving at that speed, let alone actually driving one like that.

So, unless you want to pay for a multi-trillion dollar reengineering of the country's roads to support higher speed limits, it's not really an option to change them significantly. Of course, perhaps that would be a good idea. Reengineer the roads for higher speeds, and in exchange for such an upgrade program, build a good mass transit system so that people like me don't get to experience the bliss of sitting in traffic every single day at 5 miles per hour (3 miles per hour if construction is going on, but I digress...).

140 miles an hour and in complete control? What if an animal ran in front of your car?That is why man invented the fence. They are useful for blocking the progress of more than just Mexicans.


As to the OP, listen to Vetalia. He is often correct, and this case is no exception.


Oh, and it is possible to have speed limits per lane and have everything work. One suburb out here has such roads. The difference between lanes is only 20km/h.

That is why man invented the fence. They are useful for blocking the progress of more than just Mexicans.

I can't recall a time when a fence successfully stopped an animal from somehow finding a way around it. Of course, I only counted 14 dead deer on a 240-mile stretch, but still...that's one dead driver if they were to plow in to something like that.

I can't recall a time when a fence successfully stopped an animal from somehow finding a way around it. Of course, I only counted 14 dead deer on a 240-mile stretch, but still...that's one dead driver if they were to plow in to something like that.The only animals I have seen get past our fences where birds.

What kind of fences do you use?

Speed limits are there to keep people safe, cars aren't made to cruise and handle well at 140mph they just aren't.

They are also there to save the roads from unnecessary wear and tear, and because driving really really fast wastes gas and that's bad. mkay?

i think there should be a recommended speed limit only on motorways. motorways are about the safest roads there are and they're also the roads on which most people will speed if they are going to at all.

tbh, the speed limit on most stretches of motorway in britain is rarely enforced, far less than on other roads in any case.

ironically, some of the heaviest and most worrying motorway traffic i've encountered (at normal speed) has been caused by many people driving up behind a police car sticking around 70 and realising they're going to overtake at over the speed limit so slamming on the brakes. consequently the traffic that was progressing safely at 10mph or so over the limit is then dangerously close together and fixated on keeping to the speed limit instead of concentrating on driving safely.

Agreed, the multi lane idea is stupid, idiots in hybrids would just kill people.

I think highways ( as we call them in the US ) dont need speed limits, if people are driving decent cars they wont have a problem holding 100 miles an hour.

Also, you'd be surprised how fast a SI can stop. Of course if we simply built fences on the side of the highways ( hey they do that in germany! ) you wouldnt have to worry about that kinda stuff such as animals.

Worked in germany, it can work in the US of A as well. Im sick of assholes doing 70.

The only animals I have seen get past our fences where birds.

What kind of fences do you use?

I've seen bulls run across cattle guards unscathed, what kind of lazy stupid animals do you have where you are?

Speed limits are there to keep people safe, cars aren't made to cruise and handle well at 140mph they just aren't.

They are also there to save the roads from unnecessary wear and tear, and because driving really really fast wastes gas and that's bad. mkay?

Maybe if your driving a hybrid or a beater, my tires are rated to go at 160 miles an hour for up to 4 hours, ( Toyo HSR950s ). My engine is doing 8200 at 140. And if I wanted to cruise I'd keep it at 130ish, where it does about 6800, well below the engines 9000rpm redline.

So decent cars ARE Made to cruise at those speed.

So, unless you want to pay for a multi-trillion dollar reengineering of the country's roads to support higher speed limits, it's not really an option to change them significantly. Of course, perhaps that would be a good idea. Reengineer the roads for higher speeds, and in exchange for such an upgrade program, build a good mass transit system so that people like me don't get to experience the bliss of sitting in traffic every single day at 5 miles per hour (3 miles per hour if construction is going on, but I digress...).

... and while you're at it, elevate the roads so that drivers won't have to deal with animals crossing.... then put the inter-city train tracks below the roads.... and within cities build a monorail network above the roads.... and maybe design a flying airport.

Anyway, I never understood the obsession with Going Really Fast. Explain plz?

... and while you're at it, elevate the roads so that drivers won't have to deal with animals crossing.... then put the inter-city train tracks below the roads.... and within cities build a monorail network above the roads.... and maybe design a flying airport.

That actually wouldn't be a half bad idea...

Anyway, I never understood the obsession with Going Really Fast. Explain plz?

It doesn't interest me, but like most things I don't mind it as long as you don't pose a risk to others and you cover any costs that it inflicts on the community as a whole (for example, environmental laws, gas taxes, and money for road maintenance). Beyond that, you're free to do what you want.

I've seen bulls run across cattle guards unscathed, what kind of lazy stupid animals do you have where you are?

The urbanized type.
Gone soft in their city ways.

I've seen bulls run across cattle guards unscathed, what kind of lazy stupid animals do you have where you are?Moose, deer, cattle, foxes, cougars, wolves, bears, etc.

And sure, a bull can easily get past a cattle guard, but what about a 3 meter tall slab of concrete. How many bulls have you see cross those unscathed? That is what I mean by fence.

Maybe if your driving a hybrid or a beater, my tires are rated to go at 160 miles an hour for up to 4 hours, ( Toyo HSR950s ). My engine is doing 8200 at 140. And if I wanted to cruise I'd keep it at 130ish, where it does about 6800, well below the engines 9000rpm redline.

So decent cars ARE Made to cruise at those speed.

I drive neither a hybrid or a "beater" but my car isn't made to go really really really fast for any amount of time, it's made to get me safely from point A to point B.

You really have no reason to drive so fast, unless you are either trying to macho up to compensate for something or you are just so dumb as to be unbelievably reckless.

I have an inordinately busy life and I can get anywhere I need to go on time at 65 mph.

On some roads maybe there shouldn't be a speed limit, but I'm not really sure I trust drivers that much. Rare is the day upon which I don't see horrible (and dangerous) driving.

Additionally, some roads really do need speed limits. For example, Highway 17 (in California).

Maybe if your driving a hybrid or a beater, my tires are rated to go at 160 miles an hour for up to 4 hours, ( Toyo HSR950s ). My engine is doing 8200 at 140. And if I wanted to cruise I'd keep it at 130ish, where it does about 6800, well below the engines 9000rpm redline.

So decent cars ARE Made to cruise at those speed.Your tires may be rated for 160 mph, but they where engineered to perform best a 60 contrary to what you may believe. It is not until your car costs close to $100,000 that the case is otherwise. Such cars where designed for the majority in mind, and the majority of people don't do much more than 5-15mph faster than the speed limit. To think otherwise would simply be foolish.

Oh, and your engine was designed to cruise between 3000 and 4000rpm. Otherwise the cockpit becomes too load for most people's tastes.

Moose, deer, cattle, foxes, cougars, wolves, bears, etc.

And sure, a bull can easily get past a cattle guard, but what about a 3 meter tall slab of concrete. How many bulls have you see cross those unscathed? That is what I mean by fence.

That's called a wall, not a fence. And it's ugly.

Moose, deer, cattle, foxes, cougars, wolves, bears, etc.

And sure, a bull can easily get past a cattle guard, but what about a 3 meter tall slab of concrete. How many bulls have you see cross those unscathed? That is what I mean by fence.

A cement barrier is not a fence.

http://pictures.exploitz.com/Falling-fence-photo--_smgpx10001x14520x1c00fef3a.jpg

http://www.jakehowlett.com/gallery/photos/fence2.jpg

those are fences.

That actually wouldn't be a half bad idea...
The implied question is where the money will come from.... splitting up the DoD and Iraq War's budgets won't last forever.

I drive neither a hybrid or a "beater" but my car isn't made to go really really really fast for any amount of time, it's made to get me safely from point A to point B.

You really have no reason to drive so fast, unless you are either trying to macho up to compensate for something or you are just so dumb as to be unbelievably reckless.

I have an inordinately busy life and I can get anywhere I need to go on time at 65 mph.

*applauds* I see the NSG-DoCS has been practicing?

A cement barrier is not a fence.

http://pictures.exploitz.com/Falling-fence-photo--_smgpx10001x14520x1c00fef3a.jpg

http://www.jakehowlett.com/gallery/photos/fence2.jpg

those are fences.Fine, then build cement barriers along your highways.

Fine, then build cement barriers along your highways.

we barely have money for the bridges and overpasses, where in the hell are we going to get money for that?

don't you think we should make the roads safe before you know, letting idiots drive around faster than all get out, just cuz "that's what menz do"?

:rolleyes:

*is slightly freaked out that her Okie accent is coming out in her posting tonight*

*applauds* I see the NSG-DoCS has been practicing?
DoCS?

Maybe the OP really CAN go safely at several hundred MPH, but the OP isn't the only car on the road. Look at the dumbest driver on the road. Imagine s/he is eating a hamburger, drinking hot coffee, talking on a cellphone, and putting on makeup. Do you REALLY want him/her/it barrelling down the road at nearly the speed of sound, heading in your general direction? :eek: :eek: :eek:

we barely have money for the bridges and overpasses, where in the hell are we going to get money for that?

don't you think we should make the roads safe before you know, letting idiots drive around faster than all get out, just cuz "that's what menz do"?

:rolleyes:

*is slightly freaked out that her Okie accent is coming out in her posting tonight*Taxes.

I'm not suggesting we have people zipping around as fast as their cars can take them. However, animals walking onto your highways is a serious safety issue, how do you folks just ignore it?

DoCS?

NationStates General Department of Common Sense, Dilbert-inspired. My personal moniker for a number of NSG posters who have continually displayed ... well, common sense. Basically, posters who avoid spam, don't feed trolls, whose arguments are logical and well rounded, whose beliefs are relatively tolerant et cetera. (I also founded a real-life counterpart, the Sane People's Coalition, of which I am currently the only member.)

The only animals I have seen get past our fences where birds.

What kind of fences do you use?

The kind that keep cattle from escaping. Cattle aren't known to be terrific jumpers. Deer, however....

Agreed, the multi lane idea is stupid, idiots in hybrids would just kill people.

I think highways ( as we call them in the US ) dont need speed limits, if people are driving decent cars they wont have a problem holding 100 miles an hour.

Also, you'd be surprised how fast a SI can stop. Of course if we simply built fences on the side of the highways ( hey they do that in germany! ) you wouldnt have to worry about that kinda stuff such as animals.

Worked in germany, it can work in the US of A as well. Im sick of assholes doing 70.

I'm sick of assholes doing 140. There, is that a sound argument? It won't work in the US because we have many more miles of freeway than Germany, and a fence tall and strong enough to work would be insanely expensive. I know -- let's tax people who drive too damned fast.

See? I can be abrasive, too. See how childish it sounds?

Maybe if your driving a hybrid or a beater, my tires are rated to go at 160 miles an hour for up to 4 hours, ( Toyo HSR950s ). My engine is doing 8200 at 140. And if I wanted to cruise I'd keep it at 130ish, where it does about 6800, well below the engines 9000rpm redline.

So decent cars ARE Made to cruise at those speed.

No, you've purchased a specialized vehicle and outfitted it with specialized tires. Hundreds of thousands of people cruising at 130 = disaster. You may be a competent driver -- I must conclude that given that you've obviously survived an amount of time in control of a high-end machine -- but the vast majority of drivers aren't.

Moose, deer, cattle, foxes, cougars, wolves, bears, etc.

And sure, a bull can easily get past a cattle guard, but what about a 3 meter tall slab of concrete. How many bulls have you see cross those unscathed? That is what I mean by fence.

Are you paying for 46,837 miles (75,376 km) of concrete walls on both sides of the Interstates? I'm not.

I think in the USA, we should either turn our Interstates into the Autoban, or build our own Autoban that runs from major cities to major cities, however it stays on the outskirt of the city, and you take another road into the city.

Taxes.
I pay enough of those already.

I'm not suggesting we have people zipping around as fast as their cars can take them. However, animals walking onto your highways is a serious safety issue, how do you folks just ignore it?
you shouldn't ignore it, you could really get hurt. There are signs... reminding you that animals live here, you pay attention in those areas, be aware of your surroundings (hopefully you do that all the time when you are driving)

NationStates General Department of Common Sense, Dilbert-inspired. My personal moniker for a number of NSG posters who have continually displayed ... well, common sense. Basically, posters who avoid spam, don't feed trolls, whose arguments are logical and well rounded, whose beliefs are relatively tolerant et cetera. (I also founded a real-life counterpart, the Sane People's Coalition, of which I am currently the only member.)
ah.

I think in the USA, we should either turn our Interstates into the Autoban, or build our own Autoban that runs from major cities to major cities, however it stays on the outskirt of the city, and you take another road into the city.


Thats actually the best idea Ive heard this whole thread, that way you end up with being able to get from city to city very quickly ( which is were I mainly speed ).

I can see the logic of having speed limits in alot of places, I just dont see the logic of having them on big wide open roads.

if you ever drive on I-95, you'll realize that time has no meaning. It takes me 3 hours to go 40 miles.
:sniper:

*gives slice of cheese cake* :)

if you ever drive on I-95, you'll realize that time has no meaning. It takes me 3 hours to go 40 miles.
:sniper:

Thats actually the best idea Ive heard this whole thread, that way you end up with being able to get from city to city very quickly ( which is were I mainly speed ).

I can see the logic of having speed limits in alot of places, I just dont see the logic of having them on big wide open roads.

uh.......so, how fast can an 18-wheeler safely go? They book about 80mph through here and nearly run my ass over daily. I don't know how they would fare on a road with no speed limit.....or would they be banned?

Are you paying for 46,837 miles (75,376 km) of concrete walls on both sides of the Interstates? I'm not.Will the entire 75,000 km of Interstate need fence? No.

But sure, I'll pay for it. I hope you take checks.

Agreed, the multi lane idea is stupid, idiots in hybrids would just kill people.

I think highways ( as we call them in the US ) dont need speed limits, if people are driving decent cars they wont have a problem holding 100 miles an hour.

Also, you'd be surprised how fast a SI can stop. Of course if we simply built fences on the side of the highways ( hey they do that in germany! ) you wouldnt have to worry about that kinda stuff such as animals.

Worked in germany, it can work in the US of A as well. Im sick of assholes doing 70.

Maybe if your driving a hybrid or a beater, my tires are rated to go at 160 miles an hour for up to 4 hours, ( Toyo HSR950s ). My engine is doing 8200 at 140. And if I wanted to cruise I'd keep it at 130ish, where it does about 6800, well below the engines 9000rpm redline.

So decent cars ARE Made to cruise at those speed.
Yeah, dude. I don't drive a hybrid. I drive a van. It's useful for carrying things from one place to another that are larger than your Civic. It does not do 100 mph. Even if it did, I wouldn't do that on a dare.

When I'm not using that for work a minivan is often rented for me to move other human beings, none of which are willing to test my 'skills' while I manuver said vehicle at 100 mph.

In addition, you might have noticed these lumbering, large vehicles with 18 wheels on the road. Unlike your hyped up grocery getter, their tires are rated at 55 mph and would barely flinch when you balled up your tiny little car in the back of them.

Further, your front wheel drive car is ill-equipped to handle those speeds no matter what the overly enthusiastic people at your Honda club have told you. Front wheel drive is great in less than perfect conditions like snow or lower speeds in urban settings. Once you get up to those higher speeds it is working in spite of itself.

Look man, I first got behind the wheel of a race car at the age of five and raced until I was in my twenties. Honestly, there is very little I can't do in a car. I wouldn't be stupid enough to believe that at well over 100 mph I was 'fully in control,' and I've had honest to god sports cars, not front wheel drive economy cars playing dress up.

Going fast is fun. That's why there's track days and club racing. The road ways are for people who have shit to do and do not have the luxury of tricking out their cars so they can pretend they actually have a performance car. They have people and things to carry from place to place and their lives shouldn't be endangered by dipshits who think that playing Need for Speed is like going to driving school.

I pay enough of those already.No you don't. You enjoy paying taxes and wish you got to pay more. *Jedi wave thing*


you shouldn't ignore it, you could really get hurt. There are signs... reminding you that animals live here, you pay attention in those areas, be aware of your surroundings (hopefully you do that all the time when you are driving)I do pay attention, but reducing the load on drivers is always going to help.

Yeah, dude. I don't drive a hybrid. I drive a van. It's useful for carrying things from one place to another that are larger than your Civic. It does not do 100 mph. Even if it did, I wouldn't do that on a dare.

When I'm not using that for work a minivan is often rented for me to move other human beings, none of which are willing to test my 'skills' while I manuver said vehicle at 100 mph.

In addition, you might have noticed these lumbering, large vehicles with 18 wheels on the road. Unlike your hyped up grocery getter, their tires are rated at 55 mph and would barely flinch when you balled up your tiny little car in the back of them.

Further, your front wheel drive car is ill-equipped to handle those speeds no matter what the overly enthusiastic people at your Honda club have told you. Front wheel drive is great in less than perfect conditions like snow or lower speeds in urban settings. Once you get up to those higher speeds it is working in spite of itself.

Look man, I first got behind the wheel of a race car at the age of five and raced until I was in my twenties. Honestly, there is very little I can't do in a car. I wouldn't be stupid enough to believe that at well over 100 mph I was 'fully in control,' and I've had honest to god sports cars, not front wheel drive economy cars playing dress up.

Going fast is fun. That's why there's track days and club racing. The road ways are for people who have shit to do and do not have the luxury of tricking out their cars so they can pretend they actually have a performance car. They have people and things to carry from place to place and their lives shouldn't be endangered by dipshits who think that playing Need for Speed is like going to driving school.

QFT.

I really think 70mph is a very reasonable speed limit. I travel highways daily (I-75) and get to my destination just fine. Of course the de jure speed is 70mph, but I'd say the de facto speed is 75-80... maybe 85 if there's no cops around and the traffic is light. =P Police don't usually bother with anything less than 10 over anyway. This is assuming there is a lane that those horrible 18-wheelers are not allowed to use. I wouldn't want those things going too fast; they scare the hell out of me. One was practically on my bumper and I nearly had a heart attack. The thing could have rolled right over my car without difficulty.

55-65mph is completely insane for a highway though (unless it's the 18-wheelers).

if you ever drive on I-95, you'll realize that time has no meaning. It takes me 3 hours to go 40 miles.
:sniper:

Bah. It once took me about that long to cross the Tappan Zee Bridge. Well, that and the six exits before it, but still. [/oneupmanship]

I really think 70mph is a very reasonable speed limit. I travel highways daily (I-75) and get to my destination just fine. Of course the de jure speed is 70mph, but I'd say the de facto speed is 75-80... maybe 85 if there's no cops around and the traffic is light. =P Police don't usually bother with anything less than 10 over anyway.
That's mainly because it seems everyone slows to at most 10 over whenever a police car comes into sight.... Then again, if they really wanted to crack down on speeders, I guess they'd use unmarked cars.

Yeah, dude. I don't drive a hybrid. I drive a van. It's useful for carrying things from one place to another that are larger than your Civic. It does not do 100 mph. Even if it did, I wouldn't do that on a dare.

When I'm not using that for work a minivan is often rented for me to move other human beings, none of which are willing to test my 'skills' while I manuver said vehicle at 100 mph.

In addition, you might have noticed these lumbering, large vehicles with 18 wheels on the road. Unlike your hyped up grocery getter, their tires are rated at 55 mph and would barely flinch when you balled up your tiny little car in the back of them.

Further, your front wheel drive car is ill-equipped to handle those speeds no matter what the overly enthusiastic people at your Honda club have told you. Front wheel drive is great in less than perfect conditions like snow or lower speeds in urban settings. Once you get up to those higher speeds it is working in spite of itself.

Look man, I first got behind the wheel of a race car at the age of five and raced until I was in my twenties. Honestly, there is very little I can't do in a car. I wouldn't be stupid enough to believe that at well over 100 mph I was 'fully in control,' and I've had honest to god sports cars, not front wheel drive economy cars playing dress up.

Going fast is fun. That's why there's track days and club racing. The road ways are for people who have shit to do and do not have the luxury of tricking out their cars so they can pretend they actually have a performance car. They have people and things to carry from place to place and their lives shouldn't be endangered by dipshits who think that playing Need for Speed is like going to driving school.

Im not saying everyone has to drive that fast, im just saying that there should be an option to go much faster than 65 for people that can do it.

And I do agree that FWD isnt exactly a good setup at all ( if I realy want to push it I'll take out the E-type, not mine of course, or the S2000, also not mine ). However I only go that fast in a straight line, Ive never had a problem with tire wear, engine tempture or iffy handleing, it just happens to use fuel much faster. Ive maintied over 130 for an hour and a half down south ( where they really dont give a shit ) and I had no problems.

I can see the logic of having speed limits in alot of places, I just dont see the logic of having them on big wide open roads.

Because you're not the only person using that road. Jeez, selfish, or just don't give a damn?

That's mainly because it seems everyone slows to at most 10 over whenever a police car comes into sight.... Then again, if they really wanted to crack down on speeders, I guess they'd use unmarked cars.
Oh, they've started doing that. Suddenly there's a long stretch of highway that no one really wants to speed on anymore. =P Tricky bastards! I guess they figured out that when people see a Crown Victoria, they slow down.

Hmm, switched names. Sorry. =P

Im not saying everyone has to drive that fast, im just saying that there should be an option to go much faster than 65 for people that can do it.
The amount of bullshit that goes into that determination is unworkable and unrealistic. For fuck sake, just enforcing 3 or more people for the carpool lane is a giant pain in the ass (as I endured first hand today waiting a fucking hour to go the 2 1/2 miles from the toll plaza to my home). What would it be? Special stickers? A whole other agency that certifies cars for triple digit speeds? The giant public works program to add lanes to the freeways to separate the speed monkeys from the people who just need to get shit done? It's a fun fantasy, I've had it. But it's just that, a fantasy.

Yes, there is the Autobahn. The Germans approach driving in a much different manner, and if you ask a German the fantasy of open road bliss is also a fantasy because as soon as you get a nice clip going, you run into traffic. (for safety sake they are not allowed to pass on the right)

Plus, we have a lot more territory to cover. I do think that some speed limits need to be adjusted, but frankly I'm more interested in everyone going around the same speed and that speed has to be realistic to the majority of the cars on it.

And I do agree that FWD isnt exactly a good setup at all ( if I realy want to push it I'll take out the E-type, not mine of course, or the S2000, also not mine ). However I only go that fast in a straight line, Ive never had a problem with tire wear, engine tempture or iffy handleing, it just happens to use fuel much faster. Ive maintied over 130 for an hour and a half down south ( where they really dont give a shit ) and I had no problems.
I've done a lot of stupid things and didn't have any problems.

We call that 'luck.'

Oh, they've started doing that. Suddenly there's a long stretch of highway that no one really wants to speed on anymore. =P Tricky bastards! I guess they figured out that when people see a Crown Victoria, they slow down.

Hmm, switched names. Sorry. =P

Well, THIS. IS. AMERICAAAAAA! and I don't think that's exactly caught on here yet. <.<

I've done a lot of stupid things and didn't have any problems.

We call that 'luck.'
But Lady Luck is fickle, and God plays not games of chance with the universe. I call it Fate. For who can tell what manner of deeds the morrow will bring? That is not the decree of some arbitrary game of dice, no; the events of the universe are not random but purposeful, each serving to help a greater purpose. It is thus the province of the One Above, or at least a really, really powerful supercomputer.

Anyway. Carry on.

Im not saying everyone has to drive that fast, im just saying that there should be an option to go much faster than 65 for people that can do it.

Because having a bunch of idiots driving at completely different speeds is such a wonderful idea. What could possibly go wrong? :rolleyes:

The stretches of Autobahn which are unrestricted do not have higher accident rates than those that are. They are the same roads, the same drivers, the same conditions.

Case closed.

Anyone who thinks that no spped limits is a good idea should take a trip to east africa (probably the same in many other parts of africa and many other developing countries). I think they may "have" speed limits, but not many people follow them. Get out of that alive and you may want to change your mind...

Anyone who thinks that no speed limits is a good idea should take a trip to east africa (probably the same in many other parts of africa and many other developing countries). I think they may "have" speed limits, but not many people follow them. Get out of that alive and you may want to change your mind...

you got it, leonstein. the problem is that americans don't know how to drive. they should first learn, then talk about speed limits.
the (right) example about east africa says that a speed limit does not mean anything in itself. it must be adequate and then enforced.
and it should have sense. long midwest highways at 65 mph is ridiculous. narrow mountain roads at 200 kmh is idiot.

Okay, let's look at the benefits: You save some time going faster than you would if you followed the speed limits. The time is hardly great, especially on highways where the speed's already high.

And the disadvantages: You use more gas, it's bad for the environment and it costs more for you. The risk of being involved in a car crash is higher.

No, removing the speed limits wouldn't be a good idea. It didn't take me to long to come to that conclusion.

The stretches of Autobahn which are unrestricted do not have higher accident rates than those that are. They are the same roads, the same drivers, the same conditions.

Case closed.

The Autobahn is also engineered to accommodate those kinds of speeds. It has additional engineering features that American roads don't, enabling them to safely accommodate a wide range of speeds with little accident risk. If you tried to speed like that on an American highway, say one of the interchanges a couple of miles from my dorm, you'd be on the fast track to human and steel pate.

A lot of this, of course, probably has to do with the fact that the US interstate system was ostensibly designed for national defense first and public transportation second, so they weren't planning on high-speed traffic in the first place but rather the lumbering trucks, tanks (although I wonder what that would do to the asphalt) and transports of the military.

The stretches of Autobahn which are unrestricted do not have higher accident rates than those that are. They are the same roads, the same drivers, the same conditions.

Case closed.The Autobahn is very different that the American Interstate system.

The Autobahn has been engineered to allow for safety at high speeds AND it has a additional safe driving regulations than the Interstates (or any road, really).

There is a reason that the unrestricted sections do not have higher accident rates than the restricted sections; several teams of people built the road from the ground up to behave that way.

Speed limits are a good thing to have in place. I trust myself at speeds in excess of 100mph, sure, but I don't, never have and never will trust any other driver on the road to take my safety and well-being into consideration at any point and assume pretty much every driver I see is about to do something completely stupid. Lower speeds may mean it takes me a few minutes longer to reach my destination (hours on longer trips), but if I have twice as much time to react to some retard dozing off and drifting into the oncoming lane, I'm just as happy.

I have driven a lot and I do drive a lot, as far as 3500 miles from A to B, and I see people doing incredibly stupid things all the time. Until this country grows up, stops being stupid and starts being responsible, as a whole, I would never entrust it with high speeds. I believe people should be free to endanger their own lives as they see fit, but endangering an unwilling person's life is unquestionably wrong. Granted, it's already dangerous enough, but is that really justification for making it even more dangerous? No.

People in this country are bad enough drivers as it is, and the stupidest of stupid things people do on the road (aside from intoxication, fatigue, etc.) are all fueled by impatience. Rewarding people with higher speed limits to break excessively only positively conditions them to that impatience and breeds more of it. Until I feel like I can trust other people on the road, I wouldn't support raising speed limits in most conditions.

is it stupid or useful to keep people who care more about trying to impress each other then the kind of world we all have to live in from killing each other?

this is another one of those things like second hand smoke, where if the only ones they were endangering were themselves and others of their bent, i would say go ahead and have at it.

but bussess have to drive on those same highways, and people are hurded in to riding in cars by a darth of adiquite alternatives, a shortage that exists for no other reason then to keep people indentured while imagining themselves to be free. for of course the 'profit' of the intrest on their indenture.

the 55 limit is 10mph lower then the optimum cruzing speed most passinger automobiles seem to be designed. (optimum motor rpm in intercity driving gear).

personally i'm less concerned with this. i think idiots who want to try and impress each other with how suckered they are into worshiping this status quo are just that. my concern is with the kind of world we all have to live in. and with how the same motivations for coercing people into indenturing themselves to the automobile are screwing up everything that is worth a dam, and ultimately threatining the very web of life on this planet.

so i really don't give a rat if idiots want to go out and kill themselves, but i am very much concerned with their arrogant and conciousless refusal to keep doing so to themselves.

=^^=
.../\...

Personally, I like the German Autobahnen: no general speed limits, people drive exactly in their lanes, and cars in the faster lane will brake to allow you to overtake a slow truck. Driving on German motorways is almost relaxing.

However, since I live in Italy, I shudder to think what would happen here if there was no limit on motorways: even to-day, many peope drive on them at 50 km/h over the allowed general limit (that's 130 km/h). This, coupled with idiotic status-symbol-frenzy (quite common in italian drivers), and general disregard of rules and safety, make me think that what is good for generally more disciplined nations (like Germany) isn't that good for less disciplined ones.

Lets see what NSG thinks of speed limits on highways of course.

Personally I think they're completely useless on big open streches of road, in good conditions of course.

Iv driven at 140 miles an hour in my SI and been in complete control, and any car thats not a useless hybrid is more than capable of holding 100 miles an hour for an extended period of time. On big wide open roads such as turnpikes and highways.

Imo, there should be at least 4 lanes on every highway ( there almost already is ), A slow lane ( 60 and under ) A lane that allows up to 100, and a lane that allows unlimited speed.

In perfect conditions perhaps. Try doing 140 in the rain or even better, in the snow. If it's legal, people will do it.

What happens when someone loses control in the unlimited lane doing say 200? They're probably going to take people out in the slower lanes as well. People's rights to be safe on the road come ahead of any right to drive fast.

I personally would like to thank the OP and all others who ignore speed limits and other rules of the road for taking it upon themselves to risk my safety and the safety of every other person in every other car they drive near.

Nothing gives me greater joy than when people are reckless with my life and the lives of my children without regard for my opinion on the matter.

http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/grinser/grinning-smiley-036.gif

To echo LG - thank you to all those people who consider it worth risking my life by driving recklessly - I realise how important it is for them to get home from work two minutes earlier, what are a few deaths compared to that?

Also, you'd be surprised how fast a SI can stop. Of course if we simply built fences on the side of the highways ( hey they do that in germany! ) you wouldnt have to worry about that kinda stuff such as animals.
Option 1: Pay millions upons millions of dollars and spend years fitting all your highways with fences that can keep animals off the highway.
Option 2: Set the speed limit so that if(when) an animal gets onto the highway it can be avoided safely(whether by driving around it or simply stopping until it gets scared off) or, if it can't be avoided, you won't have a huge crash when you do hit it.
Yeah, dude. I don't drive a hybrid. I drive a van. It's useful for carrying things from one place to another that are larger than your Civic. It does not do 100 mph. Even if it did, I wouldn't do that on a dare.

When I'm not using that for work a minivan is often rented for me to move other human beings, none of which are willing to test my 'skills' while I manuver said vehicle at 100 mph.

In addition, you might have noticed these lumbering, large vehicles with 18 wheels on the road. Unlike your hyped up grocery getter, their tires are rated at 55 mph and would barely flinch when you balled up your tiny little car in the back of them.

Further, your front wheel drive car is ill-equipped to handle those speeds no matter what the overly enthusiastic people at your Honda club have told you. Front wheel drive is great in less than perfect conditions like snow or lower speeds in urban settings. Once you get up to those higher speeds it is working in spite of itself.

Look man, I first got behind the wheel of a race car at the age of five and raced until I was in my twenties. Honestly, there is very little I can't do in a car. I wouldn't be stupid enough to believe that at well over 100 mph I was 'fully in control,' and I've had honest to god sports cars, not front wheel drive economy cars playing dress up.

Going fast is fun. That's why there's track days and club racing. The road ways are for people who have shit to do and do not have the luxury of tricking out their cars so they can pretend they actually have a performance car. They have people and things to carry from place to place and their lives shouldn't be endangered by dipshits who think that playing Need for Speed is like going to driving school.
QFT. Roads are for getting cars and other vehicles from A to B safely. If you want to drive your car as fast as possible, then find a race track. That's what they're for.
Im not saying everyone has to drive that fast, im just saying that there should be an option to go much faster than 65 for people that can do it.
Feature exists: Aeroplanes.
I personally would like to thank the OP and all others who ignore speed limits and other rules of the road for taking it upon themselves to risk my safety and the safety of every other person in every other car they drive near.

Nothing gives me greater joy than when people are reckless with my life and the lives of my children without regard for my opinion on the matter.

http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/grinser/grinning-smiley-036.gif

We've got an overload in the sarcasm detector! Oh god, everyone get out, it's gonna blow!
http://ircamera.as.arizona.edu/NatSci102/NatSci102/images/kt3.jpg

Worked in germany, it can work in the US of A as well. Im sick of assholes doing 70.

Doesn't work in Germany.
Germany has been restricting speed limits on Autobahn streches for years now, mostly because a blanket speed limit would be impossible to push through politically.
I'll have to check facts, but there are only very few Autobahn kilometers left that don't yet have speed limits over 120km/h.

In some cases speedlimits are usefull (near scools, and some other parts in cities). but in a lot of cases they're just there to irritate you, so you're forced to drive in some absurd way; looking more to the side of the road than to the road itself to see if there are any camera's, idiots with laserguns or any other weird stuff they use to steal you're well earned money. Or you're looking more to your speedometer than paying attention to other traffic.

I think speed limits are making the roads more and more unsafe! And it takes all fun away from driving when you're forced to look at the same car the whole d#mn way.

But well in Holland (where I'm from) speed limits on highways are completely useless, the traffic is stuck almost 24/7.

In some cases speedlimits are usefull (near scools, and some other parts in cities). but in a lot of cases they're just there to irritate you, so you're forced to drive in some absurd way;
The term for driving in this absurd way or driving is 'driving safely'.
looking more to the side of the road than to the road itself to see if there are any camera's, idiots with laserguns or any other weird stuff they use to steal you're well earned money. Or you're looking more to your speedometer than paying attention to other traffic.
You're meant to pay attention to your speedometer. That's what it's there for. They don't put them in cars for shits and giggles you know.

I think speed limits are making the roads more and more unsafe! And it takes all fun away from driving when you're forced to look at the same car the whole d#mn way.

If you want to drive for fun then get off public roads, you're just getting in everyone else's way and(possibly) endangering their lives and the lives of their passengers.
But well in Holland (where I'm from) speed limits on highways are completely useless, the traffic is stuck almost 24/7.
If you put hundreds of cars on a limited stretch of road then it won't matter how fast they're allowed go, there'll still be traffic jams.

Doesn't work in Germany.
Germany has been restricting speed limits on Autobahn streches for years now, mostly because a blanket speed limit would be impossible to push through politically.
I'll have to check facts, but there are only very few Autobahn kilometers left that don't yet have speed limits over 120km/h.

Really? Last summer I drove through Western Germany from Karlsruhe to Basel and I found a 120 km/h limit on the motorway only near the Karlsruhe junction, and near Freiburg i.B - anyway, quite short stretches - the rest was no-speed-limit.

Personally, I like the German Autobahnen: no general speed limits, people drive exactly in their lanes, and cars in the faster lane will brake to allow you to overtake a slow truck. Driving on German motorways is almost relaxing.

However, since I live in Italy, I shudder to think what would happen here if there was no limit on motorways: even to-day, many peope drive on them at 50 km/h over the allowed general limit (that's 130 km/h). This, coupled with idiotic status-symbol-frenzy (quite common in italian drivers), and general disregard of rules and safety, make me think that what is good for generally more disciplined nations (like Germany) isn't that good for less disciplined ones.

German social harmony...it's a beautiful thing.

Over here in the UK, there are new toll roads popping up here and there. They generally run parallel to the normal motorway (sometimes bypassing smaller towns/cities).

I think that these roads should be de-restricted. You're paying extra for the privilege of being there. People worried about us speeders killing you can go and sit on the M6 proper in the traffic (which is caused by some old lady at the front driving at 30.)

Am I alone in believing the OP got a speeding ticket and is mad about it?

We've got an overload in the sarcasm detector! Oh god, everyone get out, it's gonna blow!
http://ircamera.as.arizona.edu/NatSci102/NatSci102/images/kt3.jpg

Aww. Damn. Sorry. :p

Am I alone in believing the OP got a speeding ticket and is mad about it?
Not at all.
Aww. Damn. Sorry. :p

Well, next time we'll know not to have a nuclear powered sarcasm detector.

The only animals I have seen get past our fences where birds.

What kind of fences do you use?

Deer have an uncanny ability to get under/over/around just about any man made structure. You haven't the slightest idea until you have seen a full grown, male deer crawl underneath a fence with less than a foot of clearance. Brillian bastards, they are, and can be quite the hazard on almost any road(In states where they live, anyway), whether or not you consider it safe(They even tend to flock to cities every once and a while-Lots and lots of free and easy food).

The Autobahn is also engineered to accommodate those kinds of speeds. It has additional engineering features that American roads don't, enabling them to safely accommodate a wide range of speeds with little accident risk.
Like what? The only real difference I can think of is the rule that you don't overtake on the wrong side. If that's what it takes, then introduce it.

Speed limits have ceased to be about safety a long, long time ago. That was a time when cars would literally break if they went above a certain speed and where it would take ages to come to a standstill. Cars today are perfect capable of maintaining speeds in excess of 100mph and stop in very short times. Their safety levels are much higher too.

If the only reason you need speed limits is the skill of drivers, then the problem lies with the licensing system, not the roads.

Unfortunately, there are a lot more variables in driving than just one driver's opinion of how well he can control his car in excessive speeds. Until you have actually tested your breaking and avoidance abilities in emergency and surprise situations, I wouldn't recomend boasting your control. As well, you don't control the habits of other drivers. New drivers uncomfortable or inexperienced with highway driving are prone to making mistakes and everyone knows how many plain old bad drivers there are. Hagving to swerve or break suddenly at those speeds are incredibly dangerous to not only you, but other drivers as well. Your car may be able to break cleanly at 140, but what about the car behind you? What about the cars around you?

Speed limits are intended for safety. You might as well say you don't need a seat belt or air bags either because you feel so in control of your car.

The stretches of Autobahn which are unrestricted do not have higher accident rates than those that are. They are the same roads, the same drivers, the same conditions.

Case closed.

Case closed in Germany, perhaps. Try again.

Like what? The only real difference I can think of is the rule that you don't overtake on the wrong side. If that's what it takes, then introduce it.

Speed limits have ceased to be about safety a long, long time ago. That was a time when cars would literally break if they went above a certain speed and where it would take ages to come to a standstill. Cars today are perfect capable of maintaining speeds in excess of 100mph and stop in very short times. Their safety levels are much higher too.

If the only reason you need speed limits is the skill of drivers, then the problem lies with the licensing system, not the roads.

Nope. cars may be capable of maintaining 100mph, but they're not designed to cruise there if you're at all interested in not stopping for gas a lot sooner than normal. And are you serious? The V8 engines of old could hack 100 easy. You might be referring to the Toyotas and Datsuns of the mid-70s, and you'd be bringing them up largely because of the oil shortages caused by embargoes back then. Hmmm...seems like the cars then were made for their times, weren't they? So now you'd have us believe that oil is cheap and plentiful and we needn't worry about reducing our use of it...as it climbs to $100 a barrel just this week?

Look, I hate to break it to you, but driving is something that, while romanticized and certainly stocked with its share of individuality, is NOT A RIGHT. The fact that whole shitloads of people have to use the same roads you do means you MUST act like you give a shit about the overall safety and efficiency of the system, from driver to gas tank to asphalt surface. That means speed limits. Hell no, I don't like sticking to 75 when I'm trying to get through western North Dakota and eastern Montana. But you know what? Any speed greater than that reduces my fuel efficiency from 350 miles to a tank down to 300 or less. As a result, I don't get where I'm going any faster, and sure as hell not any cheaper.

Face it, you're wrong on this one.

And are you serious? The V8 engines of old could hack 100 easy.
Yeah, and it was a safety risk because they had brakes the likes of which you wouldn't find on a Smart car these days. And because they had wobbly suspension. And because they'd get blown off the road if it got windy.

The real question is: the cars have gotten more sturdy, better designed, faster, safer and more fuel efficient. Why are we still on the same limits we had in 1960?

So now you'd have us believe that oil is cheap and plentiful and we needn't worry about reducing our use of it...as it climbs to $100 a barrel just this week?
I'm looking to reduce my fuel consumption any way I can. In fact, I use up a lot of fuel in stop & go traffic getting to and from uni. I should just not stop. Or better yet, get out and push the whole way.

Speed limits for reasons of fuel consumption are a silly idea. If the use of oil was your big criterion, there are way more important actions to take.

And finally, if fuel gets to expensive for you, I cordially invite you to stop going quickly or indeed stop driving altogether. I'll do it as long as I consider it worthwhile for me for the price.

Look, I hate to break it to you, but driving is something that, while romanticized and certainly stocked with its share of individuality, is NOT A RIGHT.
And I'm constantly bowing to the grand mistress called Society thanking Her.

Seriously though, whether or not it is a right is of no consequence. I may not have the right to go to Subway for dinner, but unless you give me one hell of a good reason, I don't think you have the right to stop me. So I'm not the one who should have to defend driving around, or indeed driving around as fast as I want - it is you who has to tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to. There are some places where you'll be right: neighbourhoods with lots of kids and so on. In most places you won't be.

The fact that whole shitloads of people have to use the same roads you do means you MUST act like you give a shit about the overall safety and efficiency of the system, from driver to gas tank to asphalt surface. That means speed limits.
Not always and not everywhere. Not the numbers arbitrarily chosen by someone sitting in an office wishing they'd gone to uni so they could've gotten a real job. In fact, if there are these clear criteria for why and when speed limits are justified, I'd like you (or Queensland Transport, for that matter) to go through all the roads I drive on and tell me precisely why place X has a 60km/h and not a 78.653km/h limit. Should be fairly easy to calculate once you've got all the facts available.

And if you don't think that's practical, I really have to wonder what's more important: speed limits, or the reasons for them. That's why I keep saying that the idea of speed limits and the stigma of breaking them has ceased to be about anything in particular a long time ago. These days the crappiest local politician can score points by lowering speed limits or denouncing "hoons" without reasons, justifications or explanations.

Face it, you're wrong on this one.
Let's just say I'm not convinced just yet.

I generally agree that speed limits on highways are stupid.

It requires, however, that the highways are built to accommodate this fact.

That means:
The road itself must be of high enough quality to grip the tires adequately and must be renewed periodically.
Safety regulations must be met - no animal must be able to run onto the highway.
There should be special regulations for times of snow, ice, rain, fog and other weather conditions that severely hamper the ability of drivers, cars and the road.
Finally, any stretch of the road that does not meet the above requirements must have a reasonable speed limit imposed on them.

It requires, however, that the highways are built to accommodate this fact.
I think rather more important is some authority (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%9CV) which makes sure vehicles are up to standard. I was amazed when I first learned that in Australia normal vehicles can be registered per mail without any sort of inspection whatsoever.

Today I'm not surprised. There are Holdens from the 60s driving around here which look like they have never been to servicing. Last week I saw an old Volvo that was actually dragging its rusty old exhaust along the ground for a good 2 km before the person pulled off to the side.

Not always and not everywhere. Not the numbers arbitrarily chosen by someone sitting in an office wishing they'd gone to uni so they could've gotten a real job. In fact, if there are these clear criteria for why and when speed limits are justified, I'd like you (or Queensland Transport, for that matter) to go through all the roads I drive on and tell me precisely why place X has a 60km/h and not a 78.653km/h limit. Should be fairly easy to calculate once you've got all the facts available.

Oh, come on now, you know better than that and I expect better from you. Any speeder worth his salt knows that one of the best ways out of a ticket is to ask when the last time the roads were surveyed. To prevent clever speeders from weazeling out of tickets in this manner roads are often surveyed and their speed limits set by a formula of traffic volume, visibility, road conditions, etc. It is far from 'arbitrary' and more than a few college degrees are applied.

It is far from 'arbitrary' and more than a few college degrees are applied.
Two links and two pictures for you:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20694971-5006790,00.html

http://www.qlimits.com.au/ - don't think, click!

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f94/Leonstein/FloTrip12small.jpg - limit is 70km/h, I can take that S-Curve with 90km/h flat without lifting and without a sound from the tires.

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f94/Leonstein/FloTrip6small.jpg - limit is 60km/h, same here, maybe more.

I wish I had a picture of a 2km long straight with no trees or houses either side, but fields. The limit there is 80km/h.

Whatever their rules are (I note they're not available for the public), they're not very good. And I somehow doubt academia has anything to do with it, considering (http://econ.ucsb.edu/~deacon/LaveAERSpeeding.pdf) the research (http://sense.bc.ca/research.htm).

Two links and two pictures for you:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20694971-5006790,00.html

The roads were more dangerous than the unrestricted ones. This isn't helping your case.

http://www.qlimits.com.au/ - don't think, click!
Doesn't this more or less outline some of the things I said?

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f94/Leonstein/FloTrip12small.jpg - limit is 70km/h, I can take that S-Curve with 90km/h flat without lifting and without a sound from the tires.

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f94/Leonstein/FloTrip6small.jpg - limit is 60km/h, same here, maybe more.

I wish I had a picture of a 2km long straight with no trees or houses either side, but fields. The limit there is 80km/h.
Again, you know better than this. You can't seriously believe that the limits or even daily driving be done at the edge of your cars performance. That's just stupid and I think too much of you to believe that you think that.

Further, what your car can do and what my van can do are pretty damn far apart. I need a van to carry shit and I'm sorry, that takes precedent over the want to have fun on the roadways. The roadways are not a fun zone, they are a tool for people to carry things and other people. You know where the fun zones are, you know how to get on them. You also know how much precaution goes into allowing you to use those fun zones.

Because driving at the limit has risks. Risks I'm not willing for you to be taking while I'm trying to get a load of stands, reflectors and HMI lights to a location, or someone carrying food to market, or the kids home from soccer practice.


Whatever their rules are (I note they're not available for the public), they're not very good. And I somehow doubt academia has anything to do with it, considering (http://econ.ucsb.edu/~deacon/LaveAERSpeeding.pdf) the research (http://sense.bc.ca/research.htm).
The research always forgoes the lethality of the accidents and instead focuses on frequency. The charting doesn't really focus as much on speed limits per se but rather in priorities in enforcement.

Really? Last summer I drove through Western Germany from Karlsruhe to Basel and I found a 120 km/h limit on the motorway only near the Karlsruhe junction, and near Freiburg i.B - anyway, quite short stretches - the rest was no-speed-limit.

I can't really say about that area. You know yourself how extensive the German Autobahn-network is. :)
I know that you don't have any Autobahnen around Frankfurt a. M. without speed limit any more, and the A9 between Munich and Berlin is mostly regulated by now as well.
It's a very slow progress, as it would be utterly impossible to force through any form of blanket regulation like the one in Austria. But every German driver will tell you that the streches of Autobahn without speed limit are in decline, and have been since the late 1980s.