did his insurence pay out on the car?

 

Very true. Another problem with modern Ferraris, and some other high speed road cars, is that they don't have external wings. They rely on ground effects and under-body aero, such as venturi tunnels. The downforce created by under-body stuff is highly variable due to suspension movement. A race car that relies on under-body aero has a very stiff suspension to keep the clearances as constant as possible.

 

where's Nick?

 

Jeff,
Point accepted. AS

 

Wow just saw this tread. These Enzo guys really need to learn how to drive, but I have to give them credit they do a perfect job at totally destroying their cars.

 

Sorry, but I still find 'safest way to go fast on (public) roads' to be a contradiction.
Recalling some of the more famous 'backflips' in racing (LeMans, Road Atlanta), I can't imagine a public road to be safe on a car with questionable aero balance.
And from a personal perspective, 100mph into a turn is a lot more interesting than 200 in a straight line, IMHO.

 

It sounds to me like you have no idea of what you are writing about, go experience an event and you will understand.

 

This story made the cover of WSJ today ... quite an event

 

Thanks, but I think I'll just stick to track driving.

 

I am enjoying both, different kind of fun.

 

Would be cool to get some GTs going to their next event (including mine!).

 

The open road racing events are done on roads NORMALLY open to the public but they are closed to the public during the event and one car at a time is operating. That is a bit different than driving flat out on a crowded highway, though I have always found it "interesting" that some Porsche drivers are adverse to driving their machines, which have been designed and tested to be driven at high speeds on public roads, at high speeds on public roads. It is old knowledge that drivers who operate their machines at the highest speed levels are the safest and at least risk for accident or death. ( a challenge to that statement will be ignored, because it is established fact and a search of the archives will reveal my foundation for same). The drivers who operate at or below the speed limits are at the highest risk. Live with it, or change it. We are blessed with the right and opportunity in America to change such threatening consequences. isn't that nice?? What is unfortunate is that so few actually want to do so, and continue to accept the risks that they do every day.

 

Ron,
Richard probably should be asked his current opinion on that. I'm sure he agreed with you, since his statement in the R/T article said something to the effect of "This is America, where you can do anything you want, as long as you are willing to pay the consequences"
The problem is that the consequences are not always anticipated. I suspect Richard could have driven another 30,000 miles in the Enzo at lesser speeds. I doubt that factory test drivers try to hit 190mph+ on roads they haven't previously driven at lesser speeds. Personally, I'd rather find the rough spots at 100 than 200 mph. Didn't Car and Driver give up top speed runs after a tes driver death? I'm certain they said that regarding tuner cars.
I've it 165 mph many times. I've seen enough bad stuff happen at higher rates that I have no desire to exceed that speed.
Doesn't your study cite highway speeds, not highest speed potentially attainable by an automobile?AS AS

 

First, let me say I am not advocating adoption of an attitude that everyone seek to travel at their vehicle's top speed because it will better insure their safety. safety.

Here are the summaries from the Montana Experiment:

"Summary of the effects of no daytime speed limits:
1. Fatal accident rates on these highways reached an all time low in modern times.

2. On 2 lane highways with no posted limits the frequency of multiple vehicle accidents dropped 5 percent.

3. Seat belt usage is up to 91% percent, with only a secondary enforcement law.

4. Posted limits and their enforcement, had either no or a negative effect on traffic safety.

5. As predicted by the engineering models, traffic speeds did not significantly change and remained consistent with other western states with like conditions.

6. The people of Montana and its visitors continued to drive at speeds they were comfortable with, which were often speeds lower than their counter parts on high density urban freeways* with low posted limits.

7. The theory behind posting speed limits on these classifications of highway is to reduce conflicts in traffic flow (caused by speed differential), thereby reducing accidents. On the two lane highways flow conflict accidents (multiple vehicle) decreased when the limits were removed. When added to the Autobahn results and the no change found on Montana’s Interstates, this thesis needs to be rethought because the field data on highways without posted limits doesn’t support it. With the expectation of higher speed differentials, multiple vehicle accident rates declined even when the actual speeds did not change significantly. This suggests the changes are the result of positive motorists behavior (courtesy and due caution).

8. In traffic engineering findings the vehicles traveling faster than average have the lowest accident rates, yet they are the primary targets of speed enforcement. To this we can now add, with speed limits there was no positive correlation between speed enforcement and accident rates on rural free flowing highways, if anything, the highways became less safe.
MONTANA PARADOX: Is that the desired safety effect from posting speed limits was achieved by removing them.
Followup Footnote: At the end of 2001, a year after Montana implemented its new NHTSA backed and sponsored enforcement program, fatalities increased significantly. Now another year of data is in (2002), Montana just recorded a 20 year high in fatal accidents."

Obviously, reinstating limits drastically increased accidents and fatalities.

Traffic engineering studies consistently state that "people are not insane" and will drive at speeds at which they feel most comfortable, (absent perceived presence of enforcement and/or hazards). Typically, this is 10 to 20 mph higher than posted limits, (generalization of course), and remains the same whether signs limiting speed are present or not. Those are the drivers in the 85th percentile. Flow management should be the goal, rather than speed enforcement, to lessen conflicts and ease congestion (translation: keep right except to pass, among other principles).

 

Ron,
An interesting study, however I do see a (potential) flaw in the study and model as put forth.

It does not address the ability (or more specifically INABILITY) of a driver to maintain control of a high HP vehicle at speeds GREATLY exceeding the 'standard' speed limit.

Yes, I know, everyone who gets behind the wheel of a 'supercar' instantly believes they become a better driver.
Also, the lack of proper safety equipment (seats, harnesses, rollbar, H&N restraints, kill switches, etc) are also a major concern.

Then again, I've never done anything like 'openroadracing' and it's already been stated that I don't know what I'm talking about.....so it is merely my own concerned opinion.