Subject: Unfair speed limits

From: [email-masked] (Angelo_B.V.)
Date: Sat, 8 Apr 1995 11:02:06

Do people agree that it is unfair to have the same speed limit for different 
kind of autos ?

For example, driving a BMW 750 at 140 km/h you can still be looking at the
newspaper on the seat next to you.  At the same speed in a Fiat Panda, your 
are playing with your life.

So, why if you are so lucky to drive a nice car like a BMW,  you have to 
behave like you are driving a Panda?

It seems to me that the law discriminate people having good, safe cars.

Any opinions?

                                    Angelo

---

From: Derek B Shaffer <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 8 Apr 1995 13:41:17 -0400

Excerpts from netnews.rec.autos.driving: 8-Apr-95 Unfair speed limits by
[email-masked] 
> behave like you are driving a Panda?

I do think that the speed limits on most roads are artificially low, but
what if some cars were allowed to go twice as fast as others?  It seems
to me that that would create just as much of a saftey hazard as allowing
everyone to do 140km/h+ (or 88mph+).  It would especially jeopardize the
safety of those in Pandas or similar, and then they would be the ones
who feel discriminated against.

> It seems to me that the law discriminate people having good, safe cars.

It would only make sense - most good, safe cars burn more gas than
econoboxes, thus making a country less economically independent.  And
you know that a cop is more likely to pull over a Mercedes going the
same speed as a Chevy.
    But where it hurts more is in paying for the insurance.  I'm buying
a car this summer, and despite what my insurance agent said, it *will*
be a Saab.  What my insurance did say, though, is that Saabs are one of
the most expensive cars to insure.  "The turbo models?" I asked?  "All
of them, though the turbos are about 20-20% more", she said.  It seems
to me that if anyone should be promoting safe cars, it is the insurance
companies!

-DS

"Once you start down the         "Aaarrgggghh! Aaarrrggghhh!"
  dark path, forever will      /\          -Chewbacca
   it dominate your destiny." /~^\/\^/\
                  -Yoda      / /`/^~\`~\     "65 2 slow." - DS
===============================================================
Derek Shaffer [email-masked] (Carnegie Mellon) A3k/Emplant

---

From: [email-masked] (Steph Greenberg)
Date: 8 Apr 1995 18:29:46 GMT

Derek B Shaffer ([email-masked]) wrote:
: Excerpts from netnews.rec.autos.driving: 8-Apr-95 Unfair speed limits by
: [email-masked] 
:     But where it hurts more is in paying for the insurance.  I'm buying
: a car this summer, and despite what my insurance agent said, it *will*
: be a Saab.  What my insurance did say, though, is that Saabs are one of
: the most expensive cars to insure.  "The turbo models?" I asked?  "All
: of them, though the turbos are about 20-20% more", she said.  It seems
: to me that if anyone should be promoting safe cars, it is the insurance
: companies!

If you have a quote in writing, you will see that it's probably falling 
in the comprehensive and collision catagory. If this isn't true, check 
with 20th Century insurance, which has some of the lowest rates (at least 
in california).

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steph Greenberg                       
[email-masked]           "Every Friday is a prelude to Monday." 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: [email-masked] (Mark Brindle)
Date: 9 Apr 1995 13:58:27 GMT

Eric Bin ([email-masked]) wrote:

: A large number of experts believe that the biggest cause of accidents
: on the highways is speed differential.  For example, a Trabant leaps
: into the left lane to pass but he's passing at 70mph while you in your
: shiny new NSX are closing in a 140mph.  Your risk of an accident is
: very high in this case.

I agree that speed differential is a concern;  but, the *MAIN*
cause of accidents is driver inattention and/or incompetence.
Speed differentials on the German autobahns are *ENORMOUS* --
closing speeds of well over 100 mph are commonplace;  yet, the
accident rates are lower than on US interstates.  No, I'm *not*
suggesting that speed limits should be abolished in the US --
at least not any time soon.  US driver-training (and attitude!)
would need to be vastly improved before that would be practical.

: Everyone should travel at the same sppeed for maximum safety.

For *MAXIMUM* safety, automobiles should be totally abolished;
that's *almost* as practical as insisting that everyone drive
at the same speed.  There are lots of *excellent* drivers who
wisely choose to go slower than "the flow" of traffic -- maybe  
because of advancing age...  or an older car...  or a 3000 lb
sailboat back there on the trailer.

...why outlaw common sense?

Mark

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 1995 15:05:10 MST

In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (Mark Brindle) writes:
>From: [email-masked] (Mark Brindle)
>Subject: Re: Unfair speed limits
>Date: 9 Apr 1995 13:58:27 GMT

>accident rates are lower than on US interstates.

Are you sure about that?  I've heard that is a myth, that the accident rates 
(or maybe it was fatality rate) on the autobahn are much higher then on US 
interstates.

---

From: [email-masked] (Eric Bin)
Date: 8 Apr 95 21:16:28 GMT

[email-masked] (Angelo_B.V.) writes:

A large number of experts believe that the biggest cause of accidents
on the highways is speed differential.  For example, a Trabant leaps
into the left lane to pass but he's passing at 70mph while you in your
shiny new NSX are closing in a 140mph.  Your risk of an accident is
very high in this case.

Everyone should travel at the same sppeed for maximum safety.

Eric Bin
[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked] (John W. Kale)
Date: 9 Apr 1995 22:35:58 GMT

>closing speeds of well over 100 mph are commonplace;  yet, the
                                                       ^^^^^^^^
>accident rates are lower than on US interstates.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	This isn't a flame, but could you give a source or a citation
or something to back this up? I was actually arguing one side or another
of this subject with someone once, and I was unable to find any stats for
autobahn accident rates. I'm honestly interested.

John
-- 
Looking down the barrel of a loaded gun  |       John Kale          ''''
Just to see where the bullets come from  |   [email-masked]       -o-o
        -Screaming Blue Messiahs         |                   ---UUU---U--UUU--
             MY IDEAS ARE MINE ALONE -- Living Colour, "Middle Man"

---

From: [email-masked] (Steph Greenberg)
Date: 8 Apr 1995 17:28:59 GMT

Angelo_B.V. ([email-masked]) wrote:
: Do people agree that it is unfair to have the same speed limit for different 
: kind of autos ?

: For example, driving a BMW 750 at 140 km/h you can still be looking at the
: newspaper on the seat next to you.  At the same speed in a Fiat Panda, your 
: are playing with your life.

The main cause of accidents, besides inattentive or impaired drivers that 
is, is the difference in speed between cars. If everyone goes fast, and 
makes certain that there are no other cars next to them when they change 
lanes, and leaves enough room between them and other cars so if anything 
happens in front of them they have enough time to react, then you can 
raise the speed limit. 

The problem is, sometimes it's safer to drive 80 than others. When it's 
daylight and there's very few cars on the road, it's as safe as going 50. 
But I've been on interstate 5 going north numerous times at around 100, 
and I can tell you it's nerve wracking. You're cruising, and some truck 
in the right lane going up a slight grade is slowing down traffic in the 
lane next to you. 

What happens? Some moron, who doesn't look at the lane next to him/her, 
pulls right in front of you at around 40. Your engine doesn't end up in 
their back seat only because you had the smarts to slow down.

In order to raise the speed limit you have to educate stupid drivers more 
thoroughly or deny them licenses. I don't think you'll see either in your 
lifetime.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: 10 Apr 1995 12:34:37 GMT

RE: Saabs more to insure

The reason for this is not with regard to the safety (ie: reduced medical claims],
but to the cost of repair to the vehicle.

Safety features like "crumple zones" are great, but they trash the car.  This
translates to more cars being "totaled" or needing costly extensive repairs,
which translates to the insurance company paying out more in claims.

Its simple economics and has little to do with whether the cars are, or are not,
safe; The insurance company doesn't care about that.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Al Legerlotz          <[email-masked]>
Digital Equipment Corporation

All statements are my own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
of Digital Equipment Corporation.

---

From: [email-masked] (Steph Greenberg)
Date: 10 Apr 1995 06:17:57 GMT

John W. Kale ([email-masked]) wrote:

: In a previous article, [email-masked] (Mark Brindle) says:

: >I agree that speed differential is a concern;  but, the *MAIN*
: >cause of accidents is driver inattention and/or incompetence.
: >Speed differentials on the German autobahns are *ENORMOUS* --
: >closing speeds of well over 100 mph are commonplace;  yet, the
:                                                        ^^^^^^^^
: >accident rates are lower than on US interstates.
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

: 	This isn't a flame, but could you give a source or a citation
: or something to back this up? I was actually arguing one side or another
: of this subject with someone once, and I was unable to find any stats for
: autobahn accident rates. I'm honestly interested.

I don't have any stats, but from what I saw when I was in Germany, the 
fatality rates for accidents on the Autobahn were appaling. The debris 
from a single accident could stretch for 3/4 of a kilometer. If you saw a 
relatively fresh accident, what was left couldn't be identified as an 
automobile.

Germany requires private driver training which includes physics and other 
essentials that indoctrinate good driving habits. Driving tests are more 
frequent. Imagine unlimited speed limits in a country where drivers don't 
even turn their heads to see if there's another car right next to them. 

Let alone one coming at them at 100+mph faster than they're going. 

Not that I wouldn't mind unlimited speeds if I was the only one on the 
road. Or everyone on the road was SCCA certified.

---

From: [email-masked] (Mark Brindle)
Date: 10 Apr 1995 12:05:00 GMT

Steph Greenberg ([email-masked]) wrote:
: John W. Kale ([email-masked]) wrote:
: : [email-masked] (Mark Brindle) says:

: : >I agree that speed differential is a concern;  but, the *MAIN*
: : >cause of accidents is driver inattention and/or incompetence.
: : >Speed differentials on the German autobahns are *ENORMOUS* --
: : >closing speeds of well over 100 mph are commonplace;  yet, the
: :                                                        ^^^^^^^^
: : >accident rates are lower than on US interstates.
: : ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

: : 	This isn't a flame, but could you give a source or a citation
: : or something to back this up? I was actually arguing one side or another
: : of this subject with someone once, and I was unable to find any stats for
: : autobahn accident rates. I'm honestly interested.

: I don't have any stats, but from what I saw when I was in Germany, the 
: fatality rates for accidents on the Autobahn were appaling. The debris 
: from a single accident could stretch for 3/4 of a kilometer. If you saw a 
: relatively fresh accident, what was left couldn't be identified as an 
: automobile.

Sorry, it's been a long time since I saw the accident-rate stats
and I don't remember the source;  but, on a basis of *accidents*
per highway-mile, German autobahns were safer than US interstates.

As far as *fatality* rates are concerned, I don't recall ever
seeing the data;  but, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the
autobahn figures are higher.  Obviously, there aren't gonna
be many survivors of 120+ mph screw-ups.  Also, I'd guess the
occupancy-rate is higher in Germany -- if so, there would be 
more passengers involved in the average mishap.

regards,

Mark

---

From: [email-masked] (Gumby)
Date: 10 Apr 1995 19:31 CDT

[email-masked] (Steph Greenberg) writes...

>In a previous article, [email-masked] (Mark Brindle) says:

[about the Autobahn]
>: the accident rates are lower than on US interstates.

>the fatality rates for accidents on the Autobahn were appaling.

Yes and yes.  There are less accidents on the Autobahn, but the few there
are, are crashes worthy of Hollywood.  I think it would work well here.
The intelligent people who don't have to travel will hide for the first
months while the stupid drivers kill each other, leaving it safe for us to
come back to roads with no limit and all the stupid drivers dead.

Marc

---

From: [email-masked] (Jon Simon)
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 1995 04:37:44 GMT

>Yes and yes.  There are less accidents on the Autobahn, but the few
>there are, are crashes worthy of Hollywood.  I think it would work well
>here. The intelligent people who don't have to travel will hide for the
>first months while the stupid drivers kill each other, leaving it safe
>for us to come back to roads with no limit and all the stupid drivers
>dead.

Amen to that...  Course, the stupid 55 in the left lane driver's will be
indignant most likely and still do it...so they'll get mopped up too!

---

From: [email-masked] (Oskar Dymitr Kudla)
Date: 19 Apr 1995 16:21:41 GMT

Mark Brindle ([email-masked]) wrote:

: Sorry, it's been a long time since I saw the accident-rate stats
: and I don't remember the source;  but, on a basis of *accidents*
: per highway-mile, German autobahns were safer than US interstates.

: As far as *fatality* rates are concerned, I don't recall ever
: seeing the data;  but, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the
: autobahn figures are higher.  Obviously, there aren't gonna
: be many survivors of 120+ mph screw-ups.  Also, I'd guess the
: occupancy-rate is higher in Germany -- if so, there would be 
: more passengers involved in the average mishap.

: regards,

: Mark

This has nothing to do with Mark's  reply to FATAL accidents.

I just want to note something about having no speed limit on the higways. This
past summer when I went to Germany and drove on the authobahn, I noticed that
not too many cars on the highway go more than 90 m.p.h. So I guess people can
choose a reasonable speed to drive at without having any limitation placed on
them.

Of course there are those who go 120+, but at least they can concentrate on the
road not on looking out for cops somewhere in the bushes :)

On the other hand , maybe we need speed limit - after all our highways aren't
autobahns. I myself would be scared to drive on I-45 120 m.p.h. - those of you
from TX know what i'm talking about(pot holes and other surface irregularities)

Oskar         :

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 1995 22:57:55 GMT

Let me say that I am in favor of increasing the speed limits, perhaps 
dramatically, IF we improve driver education and testing and eliminate 
this silly notion that driving is a right.

Having said that, if I had my say, the speed limits in Pennsylvania would 
be decreased to about 20 m.p.h. or so until the state gets off its ass 
and fixes the highway system.  I drove through part of the state this 
past weekend and was appalled at the condition of the roadway relative to 
the roads I encountered in the neighboring states of Ohio, W. Virginia, 
and Maryland.  I truly think that at 55 mph I was driving as fast as I 
would ever drive under such miserable road conditions.  Besides the 
beating the car takes, as a driver I felt mentally tired after the 
constant pounding encountered on I-79 and I-70.  It was such a relief to 
finally cross into W. Virginia and onto better roads, which, while 
certainly not perfect, were so much better than those in Pennsylvania as 
to seem glassy smooth.  I will do anything in my power to avoid driving 
through any part of PA again!

k

-- 
*****************************************************************************
   Do not pride yourself on the few great men who, over the centuries, have
   been born on earth through no merit of yours.  Reflect, rather, on how 
   you treated them at the time, and how you have followed their teachings.

                                               -Albert Einstein
******************************************************************************
[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked] (Matthew David Kase)
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 15:03:53 GMT

> indignant most likely and still do it...so they'll get mopped up too!

No. You just switch the smokey's traffic duty from stopping
those running at previously illegal speeds, to stopping
and ticketing these sons of bitches. I tell you what though,
getting a ticket for going to slow would really send your
insurance company into a loop! What would they do? They surely
can't raise you rates. They'd HAVE to lower 'em. After all,
according to their logic, the slower you go the more safe you
are.

Matt Kase
88 T-Bird TurboCoupe
UVa

---

From: [email-masked] (ABaker5363)
Date: 5 May 1995 16:39:27 -0400

I would like to forward the idea of organizing a ballot initiative in
California to mandate the State government to set maximum speed limits at
reasonable rates, which would be about 85% of the road survey, and reduce
the CHP budget by half, directing the money to crime control instead of de
facto government sponsored insurance racketeering. Is anyone interested in
working on such an inititaitve? This 55/CHP insurance racketeering
operation is a national disgrace, and has gone far enough. The State of
California can'
t seem to find the money to fund a computer to track violent felons, but
they recently found enough moneyt to hire 350 MORE CHP. We need crime
control, and fair practices from our state government and police
operations.