top speed limiting, stupid!

[charger69]

ok, this is about what i hear from the big car producers, limiting speed means more safety? i think this is the top stupid thing ever you can hear, because when you pay a big amount of money for a car you want it to go fast, not slow. like instead of buying a bmw m3 with limited top speed for 80 000 euros, you'd better buy a golf GTI for the half of those money and same performance, maybe better. if those big car producers care about safety, they'd better put some more strong materials on the sides of the car body, and not just fiber glass, or aluminium.

 

[wezzel98765]

But then the cars will still have a limited top speed, because they will be heavier

 

[HDi fun]

THe limits are exactly set low. I think that it's generally 155mph. There is no impact on acceleration or torque below that speed, regardless of which gear you're in. Clearly if you're going on a track then removing the limit makes sense.

 

[kai_mitsurugi]

The reason they do it is because if they let the car do 155mph+ then due to "safety reasons" they would have to put better brakes, better suspension components and improve other bits so that it would be "safe" at the faster speeds. This would mean the car would cost more to produce and more cost passed on to the consumer.

 

[prevtec]

i always thought the goverment governed the top speed on cars

 

[turbonutter69]

The reason they do it is because if they let the car do 155mph+ then due to "safety reasons" they would have to put better brakes, better suspension components and improve other bits so that it would be "safe" at the faster speeds. This would mean the car would cost more to produce and more cost passed on to the consumer.

Thats exactly what I was gonna say. I'm sure they mentioned something like that on top gear a while ago... But it is true. Just look at the bugatti veyron how much did that cost just to make it go those sort of speeds....

 

[prevtec]

imagine they governed every car to a top speed of 70 mph motorway speed
who would buy an expensive car then???

this will never happen, so dont worry
the reason is car companies would go out of buissnes, and mess up the goverments
pay packets

if you think about it
what would be the point of paying 100,000 pounds on a car when it couldnt overtake a
fiesta

example
did anyone ever see a truck trying to overtake another truck on a motorway??
it takes hours

 

[HDi fun]

Let's start seeing the trees, please. It's not as if the Veyron is exactly lacking in the braking department. 155mph limiting is there to mitigate against the risk of super high speed racing on the roads. If we all know that our supercars are restricted to 155mph then that risk is removed.

It's not as if the power and torque is limited. You can have as much as you like, in any gear until you hit 155mph whereupon the speed limiter intervenes.

Besides, how many of us drive cars regularly than can effortlessly top 155mph?

 

[turbonutter69]

Besides, how many of us drive cars regularly than can effortlessly top 155mph?

LoL I wish :bigsmile:

 

[prevtec]

even at 155 mph
thats a scary speed, ive done it once in a 200sx 2.0 turbo
you be suprised how fast you come up to a drver doing 60 mph

 

[HDi fun]

i agree with you, Prevtec, other drivers are sometimes unaware of how quickly a high performance car can gain speed.

 

[prevtec]

i agree with you, Prevtec, other drivers are sometimes unaware of how quickly a high performance car can gain speed.

i know how to add but
i feel that when travilling at 120 mph,your not doing 60 mph then another 60 mph on top of it

its whats called the illusion of speed i suppose ( if i can call it that)
am i right in what im saying???

 

[obi_waynne]

I just wondering if the car makers are worried about getting sued for high speed accidents. The road safety lobby would have us all driving limited power cars so as a concession the cars have all the power but a limited top speed

Crazy Town.

 

[Wcnwzrd]

ive never had this issue. i just pull the limiter. alot harder on the newer cars since you gotta swap the brains but still worth it for those time you happen to find an open event while out about town or traveling

 

[charger69]

I just wondering if the car makers are worried about getting sued for high speed accidents. The road safety lobby would have us all driving limited power cars so as a concession the cars have all the power but a limited top speed

Crazy Town.

i mean, when the top speed is limited, i cant find a sense, why do then people buy those expensive cars, when they can buy another way more cheaper car with the half of the price. because when you pay so much for a car, you want it to have some nice performance. and i really wonder, like for example, the old mustang, the first series, were costing only 3000$ then, and they are way better and still can handle than the new mustang which costs like 10 of those. and by the way, if they want safety, they should put some more care of the car body, not limiting speed.

 

[pgarner]

Ok its a gentlemans agreement between the bosses ( come on how many real car makers are there now ) that the speed is limited to 155.

charger your going on about them using better materials for high speed accidents but to be honest a head on crash at 60mph, which it 120mph total if both were traveling at 60mph, kills most people then what do you think will happen at 155 head on crash.
also look at your own driving.

At 155 mph thats 250 kph or 250000 meters per hour, 3600 seconds in an hour that works out at nearly 70 meters every second. now im not going to say anything about an animal as youve already said youll not aviod it f you cant, but lets say a kid runs out in front of you - i think the highway code suggests a 2 second thinking time, 140mtrs then the accutal stopping ime the car takes. now thats at this 155 limit.
lets put that up to the 200mph that alot of tuners try to achieve - 2 second is 180mtrs thinking time alone along with an increase in braking distance.
now the veyron 252mph - 113 mtrs every second or 226 in thinking time.

basically if theres a crash up front at 70, 31 mtrs every second, theres a chance youll stop before hand however at 155 youve got the same distance in which you notice it but really half the distance to stop a car thats going more than twice as fast

limiters should be kept on cars unless your doing track or equivalent racing NOT street racing or mucking around in cars.

Now thats just my 2 pence

 

[obi_waynne]

The GTR idea of a limiter linked to a GPS is an interesting idea. On the road you are limited but on a recognised track the limiter is switched off.

 

[obi_waynne]

Just got to take over the GPS satellites as per a typical Bond film now....




.... Oh and buy a GTR ....

 

[charger69]

Ok its a gentlemans agreement between the bosses ( come on how many real car makers are there now ) that the speed is limited to 155.

charger your going on about them using better materials for high speed accidents but to be honest a head on crash at 60mph, which it 120mph total if both were traveling at 60mph, kills most people then what do you think will happen at 155 head on crash.
also look at your own driving.

At 155 mph thats 250 kph or 250000 meters per hour, 3600 seconds in an hour that works out at nearly 70 meters every second. now im not going to say anything about an animal as youve already said youll not aviod it f you cant, but lets say a kid runs out in front of you - i think the highway code suggests a 2 second thinking time, 140mtrs then the accutal stopping ime the car takes. now thats at this 155 limit.
lets put that up to the 200mph that alot of tuners try to achieve - 2 second is 180mtrs thinking time alone along with an increase in braking distance.
now the veyron 252mph - 113 mtrs every second or 226 in thinking time.

basically if theres a crash up front at 70, 31 mtrs every second, theres a chance youll stop before hand however at 155 youve got the same distance in which you notice it but really half the distance to stop a car thats going more than twice as fast

limiters should be kept on cars unless your doing track or equivalent racing NOT street racing or mucking around in cars.

Now thats just my 2 pence

hey man, i agree, but that's more a thing dedicated to drivers, it all depends on them, if they think, they wouldn't drive fast on places where they shouldn't, but i mean, the speed limiting, it looks to me pointless, it should be added as an optional choice for the car, not neccessery, because it all depends on the driver, and his responsibilitys. by the way, i like street racing, but not wild ones, always should be taking care of things, if you know what i mean.

 

[charger69]

The GTR idea of a limiter linked to a GPS is an interesting idea. On the road you are limited but on a recognised track the limiter is switched off.

that's a way better idea, than limiting speed.