From 2022 every new car sold in the EU will be fitted with an automatic speed limiter, assisted braking and lane keeping assistance technology

[straight_stewie]

Just now, GoldenLag said:

You forgot the word "Try"

 

Though im sure you are just writing something sarcastically.  

Not as much as you might think. It's pointless to do something that is known to be legitimately impossible.

I would much prefer to see investments in "traditional" safety techniques rather than in automation. That being said, I treat driving a car the same way I treat firearms: As a rather dangerous thing that you can do safely if you are careful, well trained, and pay attention.

I rather like driving, and much prefer cars that don't annoy me with their nonsense. I get to decide where the car goes and what it does, and I don't need it to complain to me about it.

[GoldenLag]

18 minutes ago, Liltrekkie said:

I wonder what their definition of a "speed limiter" will be, any car that has fuel injection has a speed limiter, they call it a governor, typically its either 120 MPH or 155 MPH, (192kmh / 250kmh), some sports/hyper cars dont have a governor or speed limiter. Although typically the speed limiter can be modified in the cars tune, which most people wont do unless they are a car enthusiast anyway. 

Last time i checked the Governor doesnt limit speed, but limits engine torque and RPM. Its to protect the engine.

 

Cars do often have a upper speed limiter to stop them from going faster than what they are designed to handle

[IntMD]

Would love to know how this is going to be applied where I live as if it is going to apply to the UK, then it's going to get applied on those sold where I live. We do however have areas with no speed limit (like some parts of the autobahn), but on what most of you would call country roads...

[Taf the Ghost]

My first thought is that in most of the rest of the world, the politicians proposing this would be subject to a lifetime of engine revving everywhere they go. In the states, they'd setup muscle car demonstrations in front of their house every month.

 

My second thought is that they're hiding behind the "save the children!" line, so they clearly have an ulterior motive. Got some guesses, but nothing certain what it is.

[Sauron]

I think it's a bad idea, at least as far as the speed limit goes. You can crash and die at 130km/h just as much as if you were going 150. Besides, 130km/h is legal on the highway but not in a city - how does the car know at what speed it should limit itself?

 

By contrast, I think speed limits are severely outdated in much of Europe and way too low for modern cars. We aren't in the '70s anymore, I can expect my car to brake from 70km/h in time for me to avoid hitting a pedestrian on a crossing or the car in front of me.

[GoldenLag]

4 minutes ago, straight_stewie said:

Not as much as you might think. It's pointless to do something that is known to be legitimately impossible

Norwegian collision and accudent statistics and mindset says otherwise. 

 

Their goal is 0. And the mindset of saying "no that is impossible" is counterintuative to the goal. 

 

7 minutes ago, straight_stewie said:

I treat driving a car the same way I treat firearms: As a rather dangerous thing that you can do safely if you are careful, well trained, and pay attention

Then i presume you are a good driver, but this isnt meant to help you. Its improve overall safety. By as many means possible.

9 minutes ago, straight_stewie said:

I rather like driving, and much prefer cars that don't annoy me with their nonsense. I get to decide where the car goes and what it does, and I don't need it to complain to me about it.

That would be great in a perfect world, but sadly it isnt. 

[Liltrekkie]

1 minute ago, GoldenLag said:

Last time i checked the Governor doesnt limit speed, but limits engine torque and RPM. Its to protect the engine.

 

Cars do often have a upper speed limiter to stop them from going faster than what they are designed to handle

It depends on the type of governor, the ones on cars are there to limit speed, not RPM, torque or anything else. Though, most newer cars have "torque management" which does limit a cars torque to prevent transmission damage, and a governor on say a utility engine (think a snow blower or lawnmower) does limit RPM, none of which are similar to a cars governor however. You could make an argument that a rev limiter is a a governor of sorts, however, in most cases, i'd estimate close to 9/10, when a cars governor is being referenced, they are talking about the speed limiter. 

[Cheezdoodlez]

16 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Probably plays an annoying sound like when you dont wear a seatbelt. This is enough to keep people from breaking the speedlimit to go faster 

Doubt it. People who wanna go fast will find away around it. Just like people plugging in A loose seat belt clicker to get rid of the noise. 

[GoldenLag]

1 minute ago, Liltrekkie said:

It depends on the type of governor, the ones on cars are there to limit speed, not RPM, torque or anything else. Though, most newer cars have "torque management" which does limit a cars torque to prevent transmission damage, and a governor on say a utility engine (think a snow blower or lawnmower) does limit RPM, none of which are similar to a cars governor however. You could make an argument that a rev limiter is a a governor of sorts, however, in most cases, i'd estimate close to 9/10, when a cars governor is being referenced, they are talking about the speed limiter. 

Im mostly familiar with governor on heavy machinery. Which limit the horsepower throughput to avoid the engine overreving and tearing itself appart by generating too much horsepower

[GoldenLag]

1 minute ago, Cheezdoodlez said:

Doubt it. People who wanna go fast will find away around it. Just like people plugging in A loose seat belt clicker to get rid of the noise. 

Same people wouldnt buy one of these cars. 

 

Illegal modification is something entirely different. 

 

While removing the seatbelt clicker sound isnt. I can see removing the speedlimiter is illegal. 

 

Annoying sounds would stop the average driver to go faster. And they could also just autodrop the speed after a certaik ammount of time. 

[Liltrekkie]

Just now, GoldenLag said:

Im mostly familiar with governor on heavy machinery. Which limit the horsepower throughput to avoid the engine overreving and tearing itself appart by generating too much horsepower

Ah, yeah, that's just a governor of a different type, a cars governor simply just limits maximum speed. 112,115,118,120 and 155 MPH are the most common speeds in which cars are limited to. There are some exceptions, of course.

[GoldenLag]

13 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

My second thought is that they're hiding behind the "save the children!" line, so they clearly have an ulterior motive. Got some guesses, but nothing certain what it is.

Car makers will probably receive insentive to do stuff. 

 

Also car makers want to sell more cars. 

 

Those are the ultirior motives i can see.

[leadeater]

39 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Problem these days is everyone is using big ass SUV's where this doesn't work.

[Taf the Ghost]

2 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Car makers will probably receive insentive to do stuff. 

 

Also car makers want to sell more cars. 

 

Those are the ultirior motives i can see.

Modern cars have expected lives over 15 years with the most basic of maintenance. So this isn't an enforced replacement move. 

 

The reality is that they're going to want constant positioning information to be broadcast from the cars. I.e. full Tracking. They've tried to sneak that into a few States via Road Taxes, so it's one of those ideas that clearly has a lot of pull with certain factions. (It's also about Power & Control with these people, so figure out which it is. )

[straight_stewie]

19 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

That would be great in a perfect world, but sadly it isnt. 

I'm the human. The car is the car. I get to make the decisions in that relationship, whether the world is perfect or not.

 

21 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Their goal is 0. And the mindset of saying "no that is impossible" is counterintuative to the goal. 

The statement "the goal is impossible" is only trivially counterintuitive to the goal if the goal is legitimately not possible.

There are plenty of studies that show that certain types of automation, which happen to be the types we are discussing here (partial automation of crisis response), actually reduce safety by lulling operators into a false sense of security.

Performance Consequences of Automation Induced Complacency

[leadeater]

25 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Last time i checked the Governor doesnt limit speed, but limits engine torque and RPM. Its to protect the engine.

 

Cars do often have a upper speed limiter to stop them from going faster than what they are designed to handle

Many many cars are limited to 155mph, most cars sold in Europe. Japan is even stricter at 112/118mph, actual laws enforce these rules. The reason why exotic cars can get around those limits is that there is exemptions for limited availability special category vehicles, money really does exempt you from the law in this case heh.

 

My car is a Jap import so it's still limited to 118mph, it's not actually hard to remove the limit though but I don't actually need to go over 190km/h. What happens when you hit the limiter is the car adjusts the fuel mixture so the car just can't gain any more speed, drop below the limit and it reverts back. This means below the speed limit set there is no effect on engine output and performance.

http://www.roadsafetynz.org/modern-speed-limiters.html

[leadeater]

27 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Annoying sounds would stop the average driver to go faster. And they could also just autodrop the speed after a certaik ammount of time. 

Most cars produced after 2005 ish actually have speed warning chimes in them, you can adjust what speed it's set to or turn it off, mines off. Nag systems don't really work if they can be disabled or stop nagging.

[GoldenLag]

5 minutes ago, leadeater said:

My car is a Jap import so it's still limited to 118mph, it's not actually hard to remove the limit though but I don't actually need to go over 190km/h.

Ive got import car aswell. Would be nice to check, but i believe a lot of cars go more than 180km/h before not going faster. 

 

 

There is also no stretch of road in my country that would allow me to go that fast

[GoldenLag]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

Most cars produced after 2005 ish actually have speed warning chimes in them, you can adjust what speed it's set to or turn it off, mines off. Nag systems don't really work if they can be disabled or stop nagging.

There are a lot of approaches to this speed limiting. I see some system that will allow for short term speed violation being favored. Being able fore a min to go above the speed limit is useful. But more than a minute makes little to no sense. 

[leadeater]

1 minute ago, GoldenLag said:

Ive got import car aswell. Would be nice to check, but i believe a lot of cars go more than 180km/h before not going faster. 

 

 

There is also no stretch of road in my country that would allow me to go that fast

Not that I know... but my car is very noticeable when it hits that 190km/h mark. Odd that I know this without ever having taken it to that speed 

[Ryujin2003]

3 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

If everyone is limited to the same speed it will make things more unsafe imo. Also no mention of bikes.

Compare the accident rate between NASCAR and Formula 1.

 

[strajk-]

3 hours ago, cj09beira said:

golden were the days that my family made 300+km drives with me loose on the rear of the car on a matress sleeping like a kitten (pun intended), or the times i would travel on the back of a pickup,

 

I did 4000km in two trips in a two week span every year.

Fuck going from Germany to Portugal during the summer, having to sit for over 24 hours in a car was gruesome...at least I got my Gameboy to entertain me while using streetlamps or incoming cars during the night to light my screen up since there was no backlit screen during that time...

[GoldenLag]

11 minutes ago, straight_stewie said:

There are plenty of studies that show that certain types of automation, which happen to be the types we are discussing here (partial automation of crisis response), actually reduce safety by lulling operators into a false sense of security.

The systems the EU wants to implement are warning, restrictive and emergency systems. Not pure automation like automation driving. And automation driving has shown very good promise, even though its not perfect.

 

I find it hard to see how these systems will have the same effect as automatic driving in cars have. 

 

13 minutes ago, straight_stewie said:

I'm the human. The car is the car. I get to make the decisions in that relationship, whether the world is perfect or not.

And if there is a situation you dont notice and the car executes emergency manouvers. 

 

These systems want to increase safety while the driver is still the one in ultimate control of the situation. 

 

Traction control is a system that takes control if it noticed slipping of the car. And as someone whonlives in a countey where this saves countless lives, i strucgle to see how more such systems would make driving less enjoyable and less safe. 

[leadeater]

5 minutes ago, Ryujin2003 said:

Compare the accident rate between NASCAR and Formula 1.

 

NASCAR without crashes would suck though.

[Drak3]

53 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

Last time i checked the Governor doesnt limit speed, but limits engine torque and RPM. Its to protect the engine.

Limiting RPM in a vehicle limits speed.