MBMB

That's handy information, Jack. Is that true everywhere in the U.S., or just in your neck of the woods?

DMG

Would you want a vehicle traveling 90 + mph to be legally approaching a car traveling the opposite direction (or in the same direction) which happens to be occupied by your wife and kids, and the justification of the driver for traveling that fast is that the car handles well ? I wouldn't.
I love to drive fast. I get a lot of enjoyment out of autocrosses and DEs

Jack '84 928s

Its true for everywhere in the US, I speed in texas as i live in new mexico so if i get a ticket there it doesnt get sent to nm if its paid on time heh. Randy there is no traffic school where i live, so you either pay the fine or pay a lawer.

SharkSkin

Chances are, I would rather be doing anything, anything at all, than be approaching somebody's wife coming the other direction on an undivided highway, while she yaks on the cellphone, yells at the kids, puts on makeup, or any of the other things she might be doing other than driving. Man, woman, kids or no, if they F up it doesn't matter what the speeds involved are, it's not going to be a pretty picture.

If your wife has half a brain behind the wheel, and the kids aren't getting in the way of her driving, then the speed I drive in my own lane is not only irrelevant to her, it's none of her damn business.

Telling me I should go slow because somebody else can't drive is offensive to me.

rob rossitto

good point dmg...actually, the LEADING cause of highway deaths is CHILDREN. drivers get distracted picking up jr's bottle/book/dvd/etc drift off the road and splat!

maybe we should make driving w/children illegal... gotta agree w/sharkskin to some extent - although speed itself is not the killer, it's lack of attention.. in fact, we had MORE highway deaths w/55mph limits than w/70+ limits, presumably due to lack of attention at lower speeds...

but on a public road, you can't control the other driver, hence at some point excessive speed can be a detriment to "bogie avoidance".... so while it's rather distasteful to be constrained due to other's incompetence/lack of skill/etc, speed rules do serve a purpose, at times...however, on a deserted open road, speed rules are a total nuisance, and enforcing zero tolerance policies only serves the state...

it's not just speeding tickets that are over prescribed though - if ANY alcholic beverage is consumed by the driver, passenger, or found in the car (even if it's 3 yrs old and empty), the accident gets listed as alcohol related...gotta get those stats up to justify the new .08% rules...more easy money, by scaring folks into accepting foolish/oppressive rules and penalties as "public safety" items....

gotta wonder if it's the ins co's that really benefit...good math, jack! funny part is, w/traffic school you can sit on your couch, drinking a beer and do the video/test w/a 6 pack and bowl of popcorn...

what could be better? illegal aliens routinely get driver's licenses under assumed names...they get a dui/etc, get another license and carry on....no fines, no fuss... you/we get a stupid infraction and if we attempt to ignore it, we go into a national database and get tossed into prison/jail if we don't pay up...

think it's obvious as to why getting an atty and fighting is so prevelent, regardless of guilt... like the looking for justice in the cathouse idea though...oh justice, is that you w/september in room 9?

Jim bailey - 928 International

Rob..."we had MORE highway deaths w/55mph limits than w/70+ limits, " ....... If you believe that many accidents are simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time then at 70 MPH you are only in the wrong place about 75 % as long ........ Plus a fast moving target is harder to hit .

Jack '84 928s

Ill give you an idea of what tickets do to your insurance.

My insurance is 375$ a month with 5 points. My advice pay a lawer or dont drive onver 55mph lol. This is for the porsche and my altima. They will go off in september all but 2 points. With only 2 points left my insurance should be 200$ or less each month.

Niels Jørgensen

DMG, I don't follow your point. Speed is not the issue!

At 0 mph, there is no chance of an accident, and no chance of injuries. That I think we can all agree to. Let's also agree that "no accident"="no injuries".

It's also obvious that increased speed increases the chance of an accident and higher speeds causes more injuries. What we do not agree on is the function by which these things relate. You seem to think that there's some kind of linear or exponential relation, and I think that is ignoring quite a few facts.

The speed-to-chance-of-accident relation takes a massive jump as soon as the vehicle begins to move, then the curve flattens (rises only very slowly) until you reach a speed at which the car can no longer be operated safely, or a speed at which the driver is no longer competent to control the vehicle. Are you suggesting that these limits are constant?

Just for kicks, take a 16-year old kid, Schumi, an F360 and a Yugo. Mix them and try to figure out which combination is more/less dangerous at 100 mph when exposed to a sudden change in conditions. In fact, let the Yugo/Kid combination do 60, and I bet it'll still be the combination most prone to accidents.

Now, the attention vs. chance of accident curve is a different matter entirely. At 10mph, what is more likely to cause an accident: Doubling the speed to 20mph or the driver playing with the stereo instead of watching the road?

As for speed vs. injury, yes, it's probably directly (or even exponentially) related to speed. But that does not make 60mph safe and 90mph reckless. Both can cause major injuries, but 90mph keeps me on my toes, 60mph lull me to sleep. No accident, no injuries.

My point is this: A Speed limit is a more or less arbitrary value at which it is deemed that the lowest common denominator of car/driver combination allowed on our streets will be able to go from A to B with less than X% chance of causing an accident.

It is NOT an absolute safety limit, and it does not apply equally to all combinations of cars and drivers. I can be just as easily responsible above the speed limit as I can be reckless below it. The speed is not the issue, but it is the only parameter that you can measure absolutely.

Hence, zero-tolerance is crap.

heinrich

Shane!! Told you Dude ...... Btw I'm still on vacation, and this is the second time in over a week I get to check mail. Back Monday.
Heinrich

Shane

Thanks again Heinrich!!!!!!!

Jeannie is the best!!

Ron_H

quote by Niels:
"As for speed vs. injury, yes, it's probably directly (or even exponentially) related to speed. But that does not make 60mph safe and 90mph reckless. Both can cause major injuries, but 90mph keeps me on my toes, 60mph lull me to sleep. No accident, no injuries."

Thank you. Now that makes you, and I, and all the traffic engineers that don't get to set speed limits as they are required by law to do in the U.S., in agreement. The higher the speed the lower the accident rate. As you perceive a situation to have more risk, you respond by raising your attention level. Duh!!
Police officers do this routinely. How can they regard driving their cruisers at 90 to 100 mph as they work traffic weaving in and out from lane to lane as safe when they do it and reckless and unsafe when someone else does it?? Either way speed and behavior are not absolutely dangerous; they are relative and it is an insult to say otherwise. If it was not the case, the highway would be littered with dead Smokeys. Hey, you think there could be a case of numbskull-itis here? Or ego? Or dwindling revenues??

By law, traffic engineers set the limits using many criteria, but one includes measuring speed according to the 85th percentile of "free flowing" traffic without the presence of signs, or police, or apparent hazards, or other limiting factors during several representative time periods. The speed at which the majority of drivers feel comfortable travelling over that particular road. Then they round UP to the next highst 5 mph, (absent unusual cirmstances). But traffic engineers are not always involved in setting speed limits as the law demands. If they were the situation would be drastically different. The accident rate would be lower; the citation rate and income generated rate would be lower; and the insurance profits would be lower. Can't have that can we. So the engineering studies are not always done prior to setting speed limits and they are set arbitrarily, just like during the 55 maximum era when the accident rate increased. Isn't life just wonderful and free in the USA?

autochicago

Without going into the "speed kills" debates and other issues pointless to the debate (yes we all know what objects colliding at speed can do) ... The 55 mph NMSL (National Max Speed Limit) was legislated into place during the energy crisis. It was supposed to be a temporary solution -- so I understand from historical study. There was (according to those that I've discussed such with ... I did not yet drive back then :-) no problem with drivers at the time and the rate of speed, typically 75 mph speed limit back then, even in the environment of poor-handling, wheels-fall-off-at-60,000 domestic big-three scrap iron that prevailed at the time.

Lore has it ;-) that governments got hooked on the revenue stream of speeding citations like crack junkies constantly on that next score.

Soon, you've got local governments, law enforcement joined-with-emissions, joined-with-safety-advocate lobby, supported by the NMSL, all trumpeting "SPEED KILLS" ... and locking America-the-beautiful, America-the-free into, ironically, a stupidity-driven, iron cage of left-lane-dwelling-no-turn-signal-me-me-me-no-consideration-I'm-going-to-drive-50-on-the-highway-if-I-want-to sort of idiotic driving culture that will take decades to counter. Fortunately, through the hard work and determination of grass roots citizens armed with facts, and gradually, those paid politicos somewhat faded into history, there is some hope of regaining some sanity on our clogged roadways.

How did we get back to 60, 65, 70? Proof, as others mentioned, from such sources as traffic experts regarding such concepts as 85th-percentile setting of speeds. Evidence showing that highway accident rates, as Ron mentioned, that actually went up during the NMSL period. NMSL was repealed and some states began experimenting with raising the speed limit back towards pre-NMSL levels. What happened? Under new higher limits enacted in many states, roadway statistics could either not offer any proof that higher speed limits were causing higher addident rates nor proof of more fatalities. Furthermore, just the opposite. Roadway statistics revealed that accidents and fatalities decreased for roadways under the new limits. Of course the speed-kills camp would counter this, but some of the states got a clue. There are still some states that remain to this day junkies to the crack pipe that is revenue from their absurd traffic enforcement policies.

Not to mention that the old structure and hooked-on-revenue mentality perpetuated the same addiction to revenue justified by "speed kills" that is now engrained in our insurance system. Warning: because enforcement has grown more lax because there is less revenue incentive in it, the insurance companies are dreaming up their own ways to regain that curtailed revenue stream. If they had their way, your car would be set up for monitored insurance. And, bing, you drive over the speed limit, your rates go up. Be wary of any attempts by your insurance provider to sell you on pay-as-you-drive insurance.

Anyway, enough. Always fight those tickets and be aware of the latest-and-greatest efforts in your governmental jurisdictions to collect hidden taxes. Please don't take that as an anti-tax stance, but yes it is a stance against hidden taxes collected into perpetuety by misrepresenting facts and perpetuating myth.

WER

Oh, wow, I hate to get started here, but gotta put in my 2 cents.... Just got back from a weekend at the beach, 250 miles round trip on mostly rural roads, during which not once did I (or the "red menace", my '84 928S) commit an irresponsible act. I felt in complete control of myself AND the car, so, why do I feel lucky when we return unscathed?

First, the other drivers.... I doubt that more than 5% of them have had any instruction above High School driver's ed., do they have any idea of what to do when the road gets wet, or they drop a wheel off the road, or another car is coming in their lane? They might possibly be safe at 35 mph, but no way at 55 or more. Do you think any of them are constantly thinking ahead about visible dangers? I doubt it.

Then, the other cars.... In those 250 miles across rural NC, I rarely encounter another Porsche, or any other driver's car, except the occasional BMW which always seems to have it's driver glued to a cell phone. On the other hand, I quit counting how many terribly unsafe cars I saw..... a ford ranger, jacked up about a foot, leaving a trail of sparks from the metal tire cord hitting the cement running 65 mph.... '84 corollas running 60 mph with a donut spare on the front.... a Mazda pickup which traveled at a 10 degree angle to the road because of frame damage.... an old conversion van full of kids that bounced for at least 50 yards after hitting any sort of bump..... log trucks, dump trucks and garbage trucks, all losing their loads.

When I lived in Germany my 356C flunked inspection because there was some mud dried on a rear brake line and the inspector made me take steel wool to it so he could be sure there was no rust, and then paint it, so it couldn't rust later... I've seen cars here with valid inspections that have had a brake line crimped shut so the wheel cylinder wouldn't leak..

So, my challenge to ya'll (AND me) is to do what we can to make the roads safe for us to drive the speeds which are safe for us and our cars... Real drivers instruction before licensing and real inspections....

Sorry about the rant, but, after 25 years in law enforcement, I have seen very few "accident" where no one was at fault, and a hell of a lot of crashes where someones's mind or equipment wasn't up to being operated on the highway...

heinrich

Ron and AutoChicago, APPLAUSE!! I wholeheartedly agree. I get places very quickly because I work around left-lane squatters, safely and in a very broad margin of safety. However it is considered aggressive and therefore ticketable driving. Speed does not kill, it is bad driving that kills. Agreed on racing Smokeys, I live in a 25mph neighbourhood, I get frustrated at kids zooming by at 45. But the greatest speeders are cops ... no sirens, no lights, just "WHOOSH"!!!! .... I wait for them to kill someone with their "Judicious Speed".....

Also agreed, a car designed for speed is also designed for stopping equally fast. Porsche is all that.

autochicago

I wholeheartedly also agree with WER - more aspects of the many that need fixing in today's driving culture in the U.S. There was hardly a day went by in my years of commuting on Chicago roadways where you wouldn't see a car ready to throw a balding tire, an axle of a '76 Chevy VanDura littered on the highway with it's former host on the shoulder, or worse, on it's side across a couple of lanes. '86 Grand Am dragging a muffler and spewing oil smoke for everyone for a mile behind to choke up.

Our bureaucrats can justify spending $20M to build a new toll plaza, yet can't come up with any solutions for catching grevious negligence in basic maintenance of the hydraulics that failed on the church van that slammed into that toll plaza, killing its occupants and those in cars around it. First, perhaps we shouldn't be stopping cars on a moving thoroughfare feeding a major metropolitan area to collect coins in a bucket. Now there's food for thought.



Thanks all for the insightful comments on this topic!