Interesting that instead of addressing real problem - incompetence in driving, is solved by making world slower instead of forcing to learn to drive. In Germany it normal to drive way faster and noone has any problems
If we doing this we should rather do automated reaction speed/sobriety tests. Had a friend almost die bc he drove the day after being drunk bc he fell asleep from being sleep deprived even if he was "sober" by then
https://aaafoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2011Ped...
The real world has buildings and vehicles that offer protection against impacts. The faster you go, the higher the likelihood of multiple fatalities.
We codify limits. What's the advantage of allowing higher performance hardware on our roads?
I completely agree, that we don't need hyper cars or racing cars on the road. But the 100 mph limit wouldn't help at all in cities. There are better ways like obstacles that force a driver to slow down or routing with curves instead of straight lines.
In my experience not many drivers cruise at speeds of 100 mph (160 kmph). The richtgeschwindigkeit is much more common.
That's why I suggest to not limit the car's acceleration curve so the driver notices that the engine is on its limit. Rather I would implement an audible signal at 160 km/h and a repeating signal for over 190 km/h. Because to be honest: It's rarely possible to drive that fast for just a minute. I would also suggest to get these street legal racing machines like Audi RS-models off the road. There's absolutely no sane use for such overpowered cars on public roads. And finally: Company cars should be limited or regulated in some way. Most aggressive and fast drivers seem to be representatives. They don't pay the high prices for fuel and don't care about wear of the car (especially brakes).
Doing over 100 on the motorway/highway/autobahn is a totally different proposition.
There is car manufacturers and petrol heads lobby to not touch the unrestricted speed limits on the autobahn but there are also people who lobby for sensible speed limits as most people drive at about the speed a speed limit would be at anyway (120-130km/h) and the added energy used at speed along with dangerous situations coming from very high speed deltas are not good. A truck is always going to be 90-100 km/h and when a thrill seeker whizzes past them at 250 then the reaction time available and potential energy is killer.
Autobahns are designed for faster traffic with various features and rules to avoid common collisions. It may be possible to upgrade all the highways designed for 60-70mph to the same specs, but that does seem unrealistic. Just maintaining the surface condition is a common problem in the UK and US.
In one “hilarious” case some Norwegian rich guy went to Germany to buy a Lamborghini (or maybe it was some other super car, but I think it was a Lamborghini) and then proceeded to drive through Denmark at 100 km/h above the highest speed limit we have. Then got caught and lost his brand new car before he reached the ferry to Norway.
Of course a maximum speed limit in your car also wouldn’t solve the most dangerous of these cases. Since they occur when people drive more than 100 km/h through cities, and since our speed limit on the highways goes up to 130 km/h a car limit would probably need to be around 140-150 km/h. I’m Which wouldn’t solve the dangerous driving in cities at all. So unless you can regulate the top speed by location, it won’t save that many lives.
It would be sort of cool if you could regulate car top speed by location, but I’m not sure that’s really feasible. I think it’s far more likely that we’ll do it through mass surveillance. We’re already doing that with the diesel cars that are now illegal in certain city zones, where you’ll automatically get a ticket when your plate is registered by the city surveillance cameras. Once they can monitor speed, and the legalisation moves forward we’ll absolutely start doing this with speeding drivers. I’m not really a fan of the increased surveillance, but it’s not really like it’s going to stop.
They do that in Japan on the GTR, where the top speed limiter is removed when you're flying down the track.
https://www.autoblog.com/2007/12/22/nissan-gt-r-recognizes-t....
Volvo already limits top speed to 112mph in all their models since 2021 https://www.goodwood.com/grr/road/news/2020/5/does-volvos-ne....
Then there’s the time-honored tradition of car mods and the legacy / grandfathering problem. Plenty of cars out there today can hit 160mph or more easily, even pretty modest vehicles like a V6 Honda Accord. Is a 6000# Tesla limited to 100mph much safer than an Accord that weighs a little more than half as much going 160?
It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try, but the problem is much bigger than what limiting vmax on new vehicles will solve. 100mph is still many tons of force depending on vehicle weight, very much enough to do a lot of damage. Politicians love fixing the easy problem instead of addressing the cultural issues at play here in our society. Listen for how many cat-less exhausts you hear in California as evidence of how effective CARB and inspections have been. Again, it’s not that it’s a bad idea, just that there are too many ways around it and too much will to avoid the law. The best laws are the ones people want to follow. How do we steer society to a place where reckless driving isn’t so appealing?