Fuel Economy and Oil Dependency

1606163656679

Comments

  • boaz47boaz47 Member Posts: 2,747
    "Even at $10 a gallon in Europe, this is still not the case. At least 50 mpg cars are easy to find there."

    The people and the governments of Europe have a different mind set than we do. We have to believe we need to change and our government needs to believe we want to change. Right now that isn't happening. I think most people believe that this is a temporary problem. No one wants to invest in alternatives they want their cars with one person in each one and they expect their government to pull a rabbit out of their hat so nothing has to change. The reasoning is understandable if you look at how things worked out in the 70s.

    We were "told" there was a fuel shortage. Here in California we bought crappy little cars that were lucky to go 50k miles but they got pretty good mileage. The government jumped in with CARB and CAFE and promised to help work out a solution. Well 30 years later the Fleet fuel mileage was just about flat. As soon as fuel prices went up there was oil everywhere. CARB was supposed to hold tuff and make the manufacturers produce some zero emmisions vehicles by 2002 or so. They huffed and they puffed and then they decided hybrids would be close enough and everyone dropped zero emission vehicles like a bad habit. All bark and no bite.

    If we are going to accept some design changes this is the time to get it started. Invest in mass transit now so that even if this period levels off we will at least be working on some solutions.

    Think about it, 50 MPG with one person in the car is no better than 25 MPG in a vehicle with two. Cars like the Smart don't even give you that advantage or utility. Put 4 people in a 12.5 MPG SUV and you have moved people just as well as you would have in a 50 MPG sub compact or even a 27K 50MPG hybrid.

    With mass transit even a small bus that got 8 MPG with 20 people would move people as well as a 80 MPG car.

    One thing the rest of the world does that we could do is drive less. Yes I know that word less is a 4 letter word but that would be a great step forward. Can it be done? With a bit of planning it can and a change in mindset about our cars. They need to be thought of a tools not friends or pets or entertainment. At least that is how I see it. A tool only has to work as designed rather than becoming an extension of the drivers ego.

    But to be honest I don't think much will happen in the next few years. We as a nation are tied to the ICE and as long as there is a chance of finding petroleum somewhere, anywhere we will huff and puff but we will look to gas powered vehicles to solve the problem. For once I hope I am wrong.
  • vchiuvchiu Member Posts: 564
    >We as a nation are tied to the ICE

    I pretty much agree with your view.

    imho, cheap gas dealt a huge damage to the US because any investment in alternative was simply not interesting. Higher gas price did not really act as a true wake up call and most people just don't seriously reconsider the way they travel.

    I would put a lot of blame on the govt, present and past, for failing to develop any vision for a sustainable / long term society.
    They weren't many second thoughts when it came to spend trillions in some peace-keeping operations, whereas investing 50 billions for the California HS Train appears to be some kind of unsurmontable challenge.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    Amazing. Based on some of the imaginations around here on the effect of driving faster, we'd expect these people to be in horrible accidents and never make it to the next toll.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Right, you never hear of a multiple car pile up on the Autobahn. :P

    Multiple car pile-up near Ulm

    60 Cars Crash in Massive Pileup on Autobahn

    The vaunted German drivers don't seem to be as safe as the Brits:

    IRTAD
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,507
    England is an Orwellian surveillance grid police state with cameras everywhere and a lot less freedom than they think....people are scared into being on their best behavior :P

    Of course, there are massive pileups in slow and "safe" NA too, especially seems to happen in the Ottawa Valley, central California, and the southeast.

    Germany has a lot less than the US, according to that link. Heck, even Italy does, and if you have ever driven in Italy, that should be really shocking and scary.
  • ljgbjgljgbjg Member Posts: 374
    Yup - rented a car in Chicago and got nailed in WI - NJ driver so I never paid the ticket - however they have reciprocity and when ai went to renew my license in NJ I could not until I paid the WI fine.
  • ljgbjgljgbjg Member Posts: 374
    Generally speaking the competence and safety built into the majority of today's cars make 80+ MPH absolutely comfortable and safe - provided there is no idiot behind the wheel. My father had a '59 Chevy Impala 4 door hardtop V8 and he floored it for top end once - at 95 the hood was shaking and looked ready to fly off. - let's see - bias ply tires, drum brakes(bad ones at that), speed rated tires? :P , padded dash(uh, no), seat belts - a negative, collapsible steering column (no again), any airbags (no), ABS (no), traction control (no), rollover crashworthiness (no), front impact zone(no) --need I go on? Today my Accord V6 has all those things and more, and 80 is effortless - as is 100. I could cruise all day at 100 in total safety - provided everyone else was too (Autobahn) and not talking on their cellphones, texting, changing CDs, looking at maps, GPS, etc. - everything but paying attention to driving, and STILL get better mileage than my Dad's old V8 Chevy! Someone speeding and paying 100% attention to their driving is FAR less dangerous, IMHO, than someone distracted and not paying attention at all - even at 45.
  • andres3andres3 Member Posts: 13,956
    Someone speeding and paying 100% attention to their driving is FAR less dangerous, IMHO, than someone distracted and not paying attention at all - even at 45.

    AMEN!

    Someone paying 100% attention to driving and having some skill and experience in driving well, is 1 MILLION times safer than an old geezer who'd driving around on the freeway going 45 MPH who is distracted by something. It is ALWAYS inattention, negligence, and recklessness that cause accidents, it is NEVER too much speed (unless the car is incapable of going fast, in which case it is driver negligence, incompetence, and/or ignorance because you should know a Camry on 70 Series tires isn't going to take a corner as fast as a BMW on 45 Series tires).
    '18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    I wonder how much of the German figure is influenced by the reunification of Germany. East German roads weren't nearly as good as the Autobahn, and East German drivers were used to much lower speed limits. Now all of those roads and drivers are counted under Germany's total figures.

    I remember reading that, prior to reunification, the West German Autobahn was one of the safest roads in the world.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    Right, you never hear of a multiple car pile up on the Autobahn

    Isn't that almost 10-years old? And the article says heavy fog. I think I could find several of those each year here in the U.S.
  • mattandimattandi Member Posts: 588
    The government is a tempting target (so is big business like the auto manufacturers). Despite popular perception, our government (and big business) by and large responds to what we want and demand. I am under no delusion that it is perfect, but that is how our representative system of government (and our capitalistic economy) is intended to function. We could have highly fuel efficient cars, mass transit systems that meet our needs, more bike friendly communities, more compact/tighter cities, an energy policy targeted to long term sustainability, and on and on, but there just has never been enough public will or desire for those things.

    So I place the blame squarely on our society. We got what we wanted.

    It's interesting, this thread began as a discussion of design trade offs we may be willing to accept, and as often happens with these types of discussions, it quickly shifted to a discussion of lifestyle compromises and choices. IMHO, it is lifestyle changes that we are much less willing to accept, and we have developed a very strong relationship between our cars and our lifestyles.

    As to design, I think the trade off most likely to have some staying power this time around is small. For years we have trended towards larger vehicles. Even already popular small buggies weren't immune to the bloat. This trend may reverse. Smaller cars and small to mid SUV's and CUV's will increase in popularity. Minivans may actually become mini again. Manufacturers will make small more palatable by squeezing in as much comfort, luxury, performance, utility, convenience, and gadgetry as they can in small packages. Small will become less associated with the econobox. It is a pretty safe prediction and less sexy than other alternatives I know. Small requires less adjustment in lifestyle. Large will never completely go away, but small will garner a bigger piece of the pie.
  • boaz47boaz47 Member Posts: 2,747
    "As to design, I think the trade off most likely to have some staying power this time around is small. For years we have trended towards larger vehicles. Even already popular small buggies weren't immune to the bloat. This trend may reverse. Smaller cars and small to mid SUV's and CUV's will increase in popularity. Minivans may actually become mini again. Manufacturers will make small more palatable by squeezing in as much comfort, luxury, performance, utility, convenience, and gadgetry as they can in small packages. Small will become less associated with the econobox. It is a pretty safe prediction and less sexy than other alternatives I know. Small requires less adjustment in lifestyle. Large will never completely go away, but small will garner a bigger piece of the pie. "

    I tend to agree with your point. And I am not fully blaming the government because I agree that we as a society have proven over the years we prefer bigger, more powerful, faster than our neighbor. What I was targeting was the wasted breath and paper the government expels when they form such things as CARB and CAFE. They sound important but can do nothing against the buying habits of the consumer.

    But what I yearn for is a change by the consumer themselves. As a nation we decided to put a lot of effort into the rail system in the late 1800s and early 1900s. The government was committed to it as the consumer approved. Then we decided we needed a national highway system and once again we spent the necessary money to provide one of the best highways systems in the world. At least it is the most extensive highway systems in the world.

    If we could at least get started moving towards EVs again and increased mass transit then we could accept cars about the size of the Smart, only with much better mileage. If we weren't looking for a vehicle to do all things all the time we wouldn't need a 260HP Accord for a daily driver.

    But I believe you are correct in saying we will take the path that simply adds to what we already have. You might be right that we will see more small vehicles but if there is no other alternative like mass transit of EV or even increased bicycle lanes we are doomed to fall back into the same trap. People get used to paying 5 bucks a gallon and in a very few years cars start getting bigger and the HP goes up and we forget fuel problems. History.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,691
    >Someone paying 100% attention to driving and having some skill and experience in driving well, is 1 MILLION times safer than an old geezer who'd driving around on the freeway going 45 MPH who is distracted by something. It is ALWAYS inattention, negligence, and recklessness that cause accidents, it is NEVER too much speed

    Look at the picture gallery of the elderly driver causing this accident. 45 mph zone with severe lane changes due to major reconstruction. Two cars racing. Three lanes. One pickup truck hit in rear. Other car disappeared. Yup, gotta watch those elderly accidents waiting to happen--can't trust anyone over 39.

    image
    photos of speeding

    Story

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • mattandimattandi Member Posts: 588
    habits

    Legislation rarely does much to change them. ;)

    Someone earlier said something about false alarms. I remember when gas prices were stated in cents per gallon. Every time the price broke another dollar barrier, we whined and moaned about it for a while. We griped about the cars the manufacturers were offering. Then we went on our way. I think the alarms are real. We just keep choosing to hit the snooze button. The time from $2 to $4 was pretty quick. Maybe our snooze periods are growing shorter. The boss is on the phone calling to tell us we
    are late for work. (cue - A Day in the Life)
  • vchiuvchiu Member Posts: 564
    I agree that the government is not to be blamed for everything. It is the expression of the general will of the people after all.

    I would however expect the govt to undertake some actions that would be out of reach of the common citizen or corporation.

    When the Interstate higways were built, I suspect there were much fewer environmental or return on investment impact. There were maybe no serious public consultation, but the work was done even though it was sometimes forcefully made.
    There is today no discussion that such a highway network was instrumental in US growth.
    OTOH, even a compelling project such as the California High speed stumble against a lack of funding. It has been doing so since 1998. Hurdles are being set against the project that would have been discarded if it was another road project.
    Where can we find the strong will previous administrations displayed before?

    I don't think the HST need any societal change. There is no need for any law forcing people into trains. I rather believe, as a new technology, that people will see the advantage and naturally increase its use to a point that they will require further extensions. It will simply improve motorists and non-motorists' quality of life. This is what technogical improvements are for. The trade off are the investment needed, expecially because we are starting from nada.

    We can focus on electric cars and I trust this way looks very promising, but current road infrastructures can not be extended without limit, and personal transportation will always meet issues with congestion and parking spaces. This is the reason I see train technology as a long term support for quality motoring.

    Allright then, let us focus on other designs trade-off for MPG.

    what do you think of compressed air powered cars ?
    http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4217016.html

    Seems to be a fair technology, a nice alternative to electrics. I like it
  • rearwheeldriverearwheeldrive Member Posts: 140
    You get alot of replies to this one.

    That is one way to force savings on everyone. Its seems the easiest way but give me a break. It smells like some kind of social behavior order, not a gas saving issue.

    Maybe everyone should fill out forms to how much gas is allowed for their distance driving. Then figure out how much the car should have used. Then fine those folks.

    Just kidding. Its the same thing.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,691
    >Look at the picture gallery of the elderly driver

    BTW the elderly driver some like to stereotype and blame for traffic problems was 43. Yup, gotta watch those elderly accident causing drivers. He he. :blush:

    To extend the logic of a one or couple on forum, the two drivers apparently decided the speed limit was set inappropriately for them!!! and their car's ability!!!. They decided that 45 was not the right limit for a 3/2/3 lane interstate even in a construction area. The public knows that the speed limit was set wrong by the bureaucrats. It's normally 50/55.

    We apologize to the travelers on I75 because of the regular accidents almost daily that shut down the interstate. We hope those who got off enjoyed the tour of side streets and a few nice areas and few seedy areas depending on the route your Garmin led you on during the hours the interstate was shut down.

    Remember the speed limits are only suggestions along with driving carefully and courteously.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    The person already in that lane, has the right of way - courteously speaking.

    Yep and if I am in the middle of doing some passing the I am in the lane with the right of way. You should just stay calm and wait the few seconds for me to complete my pass.

    If you pull in front of them causing them to brake

    I am not talking about cutting off people, but if I am in the lane you should wait.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    The money could support an "elite tactical team" and bolster everything from crash investigations to cold-case murder probes, Trent said.

    Blago has said that the money raised will go to additional state troopers to help in high crime and gang infested areas.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Bad advice.

    Nope good advice and from personal experience it works.

    The best thing to do is maintain your current speed, pull over if the opportunity presents itself, or if you are in the fast lane.... move over.

    What happens if none of those options are available, unsafe or not reasonable? If I speed up that makes their tailgating worse.

    If I am myself following someone I cannot speed up, but if I slow down it gives more space between me and the car in front of me. If the person thats in front of me suddenly stops I can stop at a slower rate which would give the tailgater opportunity to slow down and an accident is avoided.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Our definitions of "congestion" are obviously different. I'd wager my definition is closer to Webster's than yours.

    Your definition of congestion is soley based on the number of cars on the road, mine is based on the number of cars on the road as opposed to the number the road can safely handle at one time.

    Using your definition a two lane city street going freely at or even above SL is more congested than a two lane expressway with enough traffic on it that it slows to below SL. Using my definition it would be the other way around which I think is a lot more accurate.

    Think of a hose where the hose is the road available,

    Actually if you slow the speed of the water the pressure decreases. Also remember that you have to introduce water into the hose at a reduced rate.

    Remember that a road with a slower speed limit can hold more cars, the ability to hold more cars means reduced congestion (or more accurately more cars are needed to cause congestion).

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    They can say whatever they want to gain public approval but things sometimes change after everything is in place. I wouldn't be surprised if they change it to 5 mph over the limit after it is all set up.

    They wont, the state police have unofficially been told that unless someone is driving recklessly not to bother with anyone doing under 10 over.

    I've heard that some toll roads use a timed speed check between the booths.

    I have heard that Ohio used to do that but did so in the 70' and haven't done so since. I know no US toll road that does that.

    In ILL there is no way that that can be done unless someone is using a transponder and maybe not even then. However the ILL tollway has repeatedly stated that they would not use that to issue speeding tickets. So far no one has gotten one.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Someone who has a track record of many and frequent (not at fault) accidents is still most likely a bad driver as I don't believe in bad luck.

    You may not believe in bad luck but there are many times when circumstances beyond our control affect us negatively.

    As an example: there is this busy intersection near me, in a 4 month period I was rear ended 3 times at this intersection. Each time I was stopped at a red light, each time the car that hit me was stopped behind me at that stop light. Each time for whatever reason they moved forward and hit me. Now according to you I am a bad driver, I would like to know why?

    And if you have 3 not at faults in one year, I'm sure most companies would ding you.

    Most companies ding you based on a function of amount paid out and number of payouts in a three year period. One $5,000 payout is not as bad as five $1,000 payouts. I know, I used to run experience modification factors for a large insurance company many years ago.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Generally speaking the competence and safety built into the majority of today's cars make 80+ MPH absolutely comfortable and safe - provided there is no idiot behind the wheel.

    Provided that you don't find yourself coming on a road buckle, or provided that no deer run infront of you, provided that you don't get a blow out, provided that.......

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • jipsterjipster Member Posts: 6,299
    Nope good advice and from personal experience it works.

    Drivers ed. classes don't always offer good real world advice. Maybe, 90% of the time your drivers ed. method works, but you end up being tailgated by a psychopath and you'll regret slowing down as you've suggested.

    A lot of younger male (some female) drivers will see slowing down, as you suggested, as confrontational... a challenge. They don't want to be "disrespected". So, they may want a little pay back.

    I've tried your drivers ed. method before, you know what happened? They did speed up to pass me, then pulled in front of me and slammed on their brakes. Luckily, I was expecting a foolish move like that and was able to avoid rear ending the idiot. :sick:

    What happens if none of those options are available, unsafe or not reasonable? If I speed up that makes their tailgating worse.

    I never wrote to speed up. I wouldn't do that unless I was not paying attention and going 10mph under the speed limit or something similar. And maintaining proper speed, if you yourself are not tailgating, should not be unsafe.
    2021 Honda Passport EX-L, 2020 Honda Accord EX-L, 2011 Hyundai Veracruz, 2010 Mercury Milan Premiere.
  • golfman4golfman4 Member Posts: 18
    I am surprised that the insurance industry doesn't lobby Congress for lower speed limits. From a physics standpoint, an accident on the interstate that hits a deer or road debris at night causes more severe injuries if the car is going 80 vs 60.
    And if/when the insurance runs out who pays for the care/financial support of that individual who drive considerably faster than the posted limit?
    We the people!
    So you want the "freedom' to drive 80-90 becasue you got the ride or the skills?
    Great if you got an extra 5 mil laying around!
  • snakeweaselsnakeweasel Member Posts: 19,592
    Drivers ed. classes don't always offer good real world advice.

    Who said anything about drivers ed? I am talking about professional driving courses.

    A lot of younger male (some female) drivers will see slowing down, as you suggested, as confrontational... a challenge. They don't want to be "disrespected". So, they may want a little pay back.

    Other than a sounding of a horn it never has happened.

    2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D

  • andantenegroandantenegro Member Posts: 1
    As a commercial driver, I can see the need to run slower in city limits or congested areas. But as for wide open areas like the deserts out west, 55 m.p.h. is ridiculous. Besides, what many states have been doing for years is erecting those fashionable "highway cones &/ or trees", that we all know seem to go on forever. In this way, the need for legislation really is not necessary since the posted warnings all along the way are enough for most of us to heed. Double fines & higher vehicle insurances...not to mention not being able to re-register your vehicle if the aforementioned penalties are not addressed. :cry:
    In short, I believe the Feds do not need to be involved. Let the people decide what is best for wherever they would reside. :shades:
  • KCRamKCRam Member Posts: 3,516
  • boaz47boaz47 Member Posts: 2,747
    I have read about the air concept before and I would have no problems with a ultra light weight vehicle even if it were glued together. I like the concept of any renewable or reusable resource to power our vehicles. I was very hopeful back in the 70s and early 80s when it looked like we would be getting alternative vehicles. I even had a neighbor that looked into producing methane from lawn clippings and other green waste to power his small compact car. I don't know what became of it.

    Now I would be willing to drive a small lightweight vehicle made of Plastic even if it were ugly. So to me it doesn't matter if it is powered by Air, water, electricity or methane gas as long as we have an option.

    I do have a concern as I stated in the beginning about the transition time while we wait for a switch over to light weight vehicles. If you have a whole fleet of 1600 pound vehicles on the same freeways and streets as you do 6000 pound trucks, Vans and SUVs piloted by parents doing five things at once.

    So in the end what I might be willing to accept as a design trade off or even a life style change will have little effect if indeed we are like the example given of the boss calling us to say we are late to work, and life goes on.

    To give an example of the thought that the easiest change, slightly smaller vehicles and slightly better fuel mileage, is the most likely change we will see I will relate a conversation overheard while sitting in a booth with my bicycle club.

    “Look across the street John, does that gas station sign say $3.95 a gallon? That is getting better, for a while there I was thinking of selling my X-5 and getting a small sedan. Looks like I can still enjoy my trips to Tahoe.”

    Maybe now the same person can simply down size to a X-3 and all will be right in the world, till the next time.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,691
    >So, they may want a little pay back.

    People need to realize there are many members of NRA who don't put a sticker on their rear window or bumper. Some day they'll get a surprise for their aggression when they tailgate someone acting like they're going to hit them in the rear, e.g., just to show off for the lady in the car with them or because they had a bad day already.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,507
    Of course, the NRA member might meet the weapon of another NRA member, or more likely someone who doesn't legally own the weapon at all...
  • euphoniumeuphonium Member Posts: 3,425
    He admits he doesn't have the wits to finesse himself out of the situation. :P
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,507
    That's pretty much the truth. The sane driver either goes around the slowpoke, or doesn't provoke the tailgater. Introducing firearms into traffic situations is the definition of overcompensation, no logic or accountability there.
  • gogogodzillagogogodzilla Member Posts: 707
    That would be true in a normal case. IE - passing with a sufficient rate of speed to do so quickly and safely.

    And I would agree with you on that.

    In the case where someone is trying to pass at speeds less than... let's say 5 mph of the car they are trying to pass, then they need to either speed up to finish the pass or get back behind that car.

    Much as the old saying goes, "S&%t, or get off the pot."
  • gogogodzillagogogodzilla Member Posts: 707
    And 0 mph is the safest speed of all!

    We need a 0 mph national speed limit!!!
  • 1stpik1stpik Member Posts: 495
    "We need a 0 mph national speed limit!!!"

    We could have that real soon. Right now, $4 gasoline represents a mild "speed limit" to the majority of folks. $5 or $6 gasoline would likely be the most effective 55 mph speed limit ever devised.

    And $10 gas would be a "0 mph national speed limit" for most folks.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    an accident on the interstate that hits a deer ...

    That's a reason people give for having more mass in their vehicle - so the larger crush zones and material absorb the energy.
    From a physics standpoint if you want safety, then rollcages or helmets would be required to drive on the interstate. And all cars would be retrofitted with stability control systems.
  • lemmerlemmer Member Posts: 2,689
    Went on a road trip over the weekend and saw a lot of full sized SUVs flying by me when I was doing around 78 mph. A saw a Hummer H2 that must have been doing over 90. In a five hour round trip on the interstate, I can count the number of passenger vehicles going under 70 mph on one hand. It must be different in your neck of the woods.
  • 1stpik1stpik Member Posts: 495
    We'll see how fast they drive when gas goes to $5 or $6.
  • lemkolemko Member Posts: 15,261
    ...if they're wealthy enough to afford a Hummer H2 and $4 a gallon gas, they could care less whether it was $5 or $6 either. To paraphrase Leona Helmsley, "Only the little people obey speed limits!"
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Member Posts: 3,062
    Gov Blagovich of Illinois proposed speeding traffic cameras on Illinois interstates.

    Think this idea would be acceptable if administration and fines were based on vehicle size. An owner of a vehicle the size of a Suburban would pay 3 times the fine that a Civic would pay for same speed. This could be scaled up so that a semi would pay perhaps 10 times the fine of the Civic. The fines should be based on the probable damage and consequences of a crash caused by the speeding vehicle.

    Now, that is equitable.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,507
    It's always like that in the northwest...the fastest vehicles on the road are usually SUVs and big trucks, or kids in messed up little cars.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,507
    Wouldn't the Suburban do three times the damage of a Civic?
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,691
    >semi would pay perhaps 10 times the fine of the Civic.

    But the Civic drivers cause more accidents with higher speed, cutting in and out, changing lanes because the drivers aren't going fast enough, and cutting across lanes to exits at the last minute. ;)

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    snakeweasel: Provided that you don't find yourself coming on a road buckle, or provided that no deer run infront of you, provided that you don't get a blow out, provided that.......

    Judging by the continually improving fatality stastistics on our roads, even with higher speeds, these scenarios obviously don't happen enough to be a concern.

    Of course, we could also be worried about space aliens landing in the road to abduct drivers, or Big Foot stepping out of the woods to cross the highway, or starlets descending on every state in the union to flash drivers and distract them, or...
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    golfman4: am surprised that the insurance industry doesn't lobby Congress for lower speed limits. From a physics standpoint, an accident on the interstate that hits a deer or road debris at night causes more severe injuries if the car is going 80 vs 60.

    You apparently have been in a coma for the last 30 years, or were hiding in a cave in Afghanistan during that time.

    The insurance industry lobbied heavily for retention of the national 65 mph speed limit when Congress was considering its repeal in late 1995. They lost.

    There has also never been any conclusive proof that higher speeds on limited access highways lead to more accidents, or more severe ones.

    golfman4: So you want the "freedom' to drive 80-90 becasue you got the ride or the skills?
    Great if you got an extra 5 mil laying around!


    Considering that people who drive the slowest on limited access highways are some of the most accident prone, you are targeting the wrong group of drivers.
  • kernickkernick Member Posts: 4,072
    The fines should be based on the probable damage and consequences of a crash caused by the speeding vehicle.

    You do realize that the lightest vehicles on the road are the ones that are the fastest? and the ones that may be driven extremely fast? Motorcycles. So the message to extreme drivers will be get a 1200cc sport motorcycle?
  • lemmerlemmer Member Posts: 2,689
    When is the last time a guy on his Ninja killed a family of four by rear ending their Suburban at 150 mph?
  • grbeckgrbeck Member Posts: 2,358
    I recall reading about a fatal accident between a car and a "ninja" motorcycle - and, yes, the occupants of the car were killed.
This discussion has been closed.

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.