The idea of self-driving cars is appealing to many of my friends as they dislike driving. It’s not relaxing for them. It’s not exciting. It’s a necessity that is often expensive and sometimes dangerous. But even for those people, the idea of a mandatory speed limiter isn’t necessarily appealing.
Today’s Morning Dump is all about the interaction between government, industry, and consumers. In Europe (and Northern Ireland), speed limiters are mandated on all new cars as of this weekend. If you can’t drive 88.5 and live on the continent this is your new reality, though there are a couple of ways around it.
Stateside, the existence of restrictions on foreign materials in batteries is leading many companies to scramble to figure out where to source the chemicals they need. So you say you want a hydrogen revolution? No, you didn’t? That’s just an OEM thing? Well, California is also a little less sure it wants to change the world in that specific way.
And, finally, GM is going to fork up about $145.8 million after excessive emissions were found in a bunch of its vehicles that weren’t quite at the emissions levels that were promised.
Mandatory Speed Limiters Are Happening
Speed limits are real, but they’re not generally hard limits. It’s a feature of the social contract that there are laws we expect to be strictly enforced and ones that no one expects to be rigorously applied. I drink beers with my buddies in the parking lot after our ultimate games and, technically, that’s not legal but no cop would deign to bother us for doing it.
Put another way: You can drive one mile over the speed limit and expect to get away with it, but you rob one bank, and all of a sudden there’s a manhunt.
In most places, it’s generally understood that there’s a roughly 4-6 mph grace period above the speed limit where the effort required by the law enforcement officer to pull you over and write you up isn’t worth it to them. There are exceptions, of course. Speed limits in school zones tend to be hard limits, and for good reason. Of course, if a cop wants to pull you over for some reason, they can pop you for doing 55 in a 54 as a pretext for a deeper search.
If you wish to go faster than the speed limit it’s up to you whether or not you want to risk a ticket, points on your license, or possible jail time if you reach felony speeds.
Lately, automakers have been applying new technologies to limit exceeding the speed limit. Most new cars will let you know what the car thinks the speed limit is and warn you, one way or another if you are exceeding that limit. Some cars beep. Most cars flash some sort of symbol on the dash. Some new cars can even be set to stop the driver from going any faster, but that’s a choice the driver makes.
If you’re in Europe, it’s now a choice that the government makes. As of July 7th, all new cars sold on the continent or in Northern Ireland have to have a mandatory speed limiter installed. The system is generally known as Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA) and it’s probably going to show up on a lot of vehicles in the United Kingdom as well because the country basically shares a car market with the rest of its neighbors.
Here’s Highway News with some reaction from Britain’s Royal Automobile Club:
Steve Gooding of the RAC Foundation explained that although the ISA tech can be stopped temporarily by drivers, it resets itself every time the car is turned off.
He said: “For now, UK drivers will have the option of disabling ISA where it is installed but I think many motorists will tire of switching it off and they will just learn to live with it.”
He added: “Arguably ISA will mark the beginning of the end of a world in which people choose their cars on the basis of its top speed and the time it takes to accelerate from 0 to 60mph.
“It’s a sign of things to come,” he continued. “Increasingly, the car is going to decide what you can and can’t do.”
The system is defeatable, though that comes with its own potential issues as The Guardian implies:
With the precise readings of computers replacing wobbly speedometer needles, however, and a new generation of speed cameras upping the ante on the enforcement side, it may be ever harder to disown responsibility. Lawyers say those who switch off the speed limiter at the start of their journey may have a difficult time if they end up in court.
There’s an obvious solution to this, which is that you can just buy an older car. No one is talking about banning old cars and, therefore, old cars are going to become inherently more valuable to people who want more control.
New cars are mostly not designed for enthusiasts, they’re designed for regular people. Reducing speeds is better for the environment, it’s better for pedestrians/cyclists, and it’s generally safer. It’s hard to argue that other people should be able to go 120 mph in their GMC Acadia because I don’t trust other people. I think many people want this and some people should have it.
But I don’t want it. Increasingly, carmakers are trying to take the role of driving away from the driver. This view sees the driver as an unfortunate necessity, a stand-in for a computer until a computer can do the job. That view is winning. It’s winning in California and it’s winning in other places.
Whether this would work in America is a matter of debate as we’ve already experimented with a national speed limit and it didn’t last long. The great paradox of the American road is that the speed limits in denser urban and suburban areas are clearly too high, while speed limits on America’s higher-quality interstates are arguably too low.
Should Car Companies Become Battery Companies?
The battery requirements in the Inflation Reduction Act are impacting most domestic manufacturers, but even without it OEMs were already trying to figure out the best way to control their own supply chain.
With a few exceptions, the powertrains in most new cars are made by that automaker. On the other hand, no automaker makes its own gas. Because batteries are such a huge part of the value/cost of a vehicle it behooves automakers to not necessarily outsource all of it.
The analysts at S&P Global Mobility have a breakdown of the different approaches to this problem, though the bottom line is that outsourcing is increasingly going out of vogue.
S&P Global Mobility forecasts that sourcing under value chain integration, where the cell, module and pack are manufactured in-house, will increase from 16.7% in 2022 to nearly 21% in 2030. During the same period, outsourcing is expected to fall from about 21% to less than 11%.
OEMs are increasingly looking to balance the risk against the investment required to have a highly vertically integrated battery supply chain. That is the reason behind a lot of partnerships between OEMs and suppliers. This trend will gain more momentum through the end of this decade. Sourcing through partnerships is expected to increase from 7% in 2022 to 26% in 2030.
If you were curious, BYD is the automaker that uses the least outsourcing (it uses zero) because BYD is a battery company that makes cars and not the other way around like everyone else.
Will California Kill The Hydrogen Truck?
I still am highly skeptical of passenger hydrogen vehicles. Unlike electricity, hydrogen is a much less flexible fuel and requires either onsite production or more infrastructure than I think we’re ok with building everywhere. But big trucks? Big trucks follow set routes and already carry huge amounts of fuel.
I don’t hate the idea of a hydrogen semi, whether it’s an internal combustion engine turned into something that can burn hydrogen or a hydrogen fuel cell where the hydrogen creates energy for electric motors. A hydrogen semi would emit less than a typical diesel-powered truck and might otherwise be more efficient.
The less there is the key piece as Automotive News reports:
While emitting only trace amounts of carbon dioxide from the lubricants used in the engine, they still produce smog-forming nitrogen oxides and other pollutants.
California’s Advanced Clean Fleets regulation governs the operation of trucks. It defines zero-emission vehicles as those that produce zero exhaust emissions of any of six commonly found air pollutants identified by the EPA, precursor substances that react chemically to form pollutants or greenhouse gases under any possible operational modes or conditions.
“Under this definition, a hydrogen combustion engine does not meet the definition of a ZEV,” said Kate Lamb, a California Air Resources Board spokesperson.
Given that many other states follow California regulations this is a bit of a roadblock for the non-fuel cell trucks.
GM Agrees To Pay Big Emissions Bill
Here’s another fun thing about the social contract and the legal system in the United States. You can essentially say ‘I don’t think I did anything wrong, or at least I don’t want to admit to it, but going through the legal motions is such a chore I’ll just agree to pay a fine or whatever and get this off my plate.’
That’s what’s happened with General Motors, which agreed to pay $145.8 million and give up the 50 million metric tons of carbon allowances it claimed for vehicles built between 2012 and 2018. Basically, automakers estimate what their emissions are and tell the government.
If the government doesn’t think that’s the case it can investigate and, in this case, it did and found that GM was a little too favorable to itself.
From Reuters via the Detroit Free Press:
In a statement, GM said it “has at all times complied with and adhered to all applicable laws and regulations in the certification and in-use testing of the vehicles in-question” but added it believes “this is the best course of action to swiftly resolve outstanding issues with the federal government regarding this matter.”
GM also paid $128.2 million last year for a similar issue. Both of these were the first time the company had to pay one of these fines in the 40 years or so since the rules were put in place. Is that, too, an enforcement issue?
What I’m Listening To While Writing TMD
It’s a bad girl summer, with Charli XCX, Chappell Roan, and Sabrina Carpenter dominating. Here’s another one to get stuck in your head, this time featuring actor Barry Keoghan as the bad boy in Sabrina Carpenter’s “Please, Please, Please.” I’m less interested in the lovebirds (though they have some great chemistry here) and more interested in that 1978 Dodge Magnum XE. Holy hell, that’s some great car casting.
The Big Question
Speed limiters, should everyone else have them? Do you want them?
Am I the only one who wants a speed limiter? Now, my ideal version the user would need to set and enable it. I would love to have one so, when driving through a speed camera trap or similar, I can just set the max speed to the speed limit and focus on driving instead of watching my speed to make sure I don’t tick over the limit.
Wait until you hear about this wonderful new invention called cruise control that does exactly what you are looking for here.
Ask about it at your Chrysler-Imperial dealer! They’ll be happy to show you the all-new 1958 models with the wonderful system!
Unfortunately my cruise control doesn’t let me set it to 20 or 15 mph. It has a minimum speed of 25 mph and it also means I have to brake or disengage it if I want to coast for some reason.
I actually use cruise control a lot for this very reason but there are numerous scenarios where a speed limiter would be preferred and just better.
streets with speeds that low often involve frequent stopping anyway, so no need for cruise control
Normal cruise control doesn’t allow for changing speed limits.
There is a road I used to drive all the time in VT. Speed limits are generally 50mph between ‘towns’ and locals seem to buzz along at 70 without worrying about it. Every so often you come up on a town (which may just be a town hall and a post office), and the speed limit drops to 30 or 25. There often isn’t too much obvious signage leading up to the change.
I use the up and down buttons to adjust speed. This is typically cause of traffic, more then speed zones. I just hit cancel at the speed zone, then resume when through.
From your name I assume you may understand.
I’m speaking specifically about Route 30 (more specifically – from Brattleboro to Manchester). I’ve made it through many times without cruise control. If I were relying on CC, I’d probably roll past as town hall or two well above the speed limit.
The guys going 70 are the folks who moved to VT for a slower place of life and get frustrated that everyone is driving so slow all the time. I get it, the state speed limit of 50 is slow.
The true Vermonters are the ones doing 45 regardless of the speed limit and don’t have care about when they get there. . . .50, they go 45. . 30, they go 45. Doesn’t matter. Your are going to be struck behind a tractor or something anyway eventually, so what’s the rush.
You forgot to mention the Road Soda. A true native tell.
As a Masshole, I’m pretty happy just moving along around 50 and appreciating the scenery. If i feel like I’m holding someone up, I’ll go up to 60. That’s usually until they get a chance to pass and shoot on. It’s always been a VT plate – usually on a pickup truck.
Really? 1958 cruse control automatically adapts to local posted speed limits?
If you don’t have the proficiency to know how fast you are going, you shouldn’t be driving. It’s Driving Class 101.
But a lot of people don’t and they are still driving. I’d rather they don’t kill me with their car.
A lot of this safety shit is annoying and buggy. But if they can get the technology right, I’m all for features that reduce the 40K deaths and 5M injuries that drivers cause in the US every year. And I say this as someone who loves to drive. It will be worth the trade off to me.
Don’t worry. Six foot hood heights are shifting more of those deaths towards pedestrians.
Just stay in the car and you’ll be fine.
I drive a Golf. I don’t think it’s going to offer much protection against a Silverado. 🙁 Sometimes I think I should just jump on the bandwagon and drive a Tahoe or something.
Someone parked a new Chevy pickup behind my Miata yesterday. The hood was a couple of inches taller than my roof.
That already exists, my car has normal cruise control and a speed limiter. In the second you “throttle the car”, but it will not exceed the speed limit unless you floor it.
I use it extensively in ring roads and average speed camera zones.
Driving requires a certain level of attention and cognizance; being able to watch your own speed being one of them. It’s pretty basic. If this is so much a concern for you, you might consider just not driving. You may not be able to handle it.
As a Brit who moved to America two years ago, I’m generally shocked how much speed limits are ignored in the US. Back home the combination of fixed position, average speed and mobile cameras mean that speeding is just not worth it (beyond 1-2 mph. Not to mention much higher fuel prices often mean travelling more quickly is more expensive. I suspect this will be something that is moaned about for a while then is generally accepted.
In (continental, at least) Europe high(ish) cruising speeds are normal. It is true that it has gone down from 20 or 30 years ago (for the reasons you point out, but seeing a car do 140km/h in a 120km/h motorway is perfectly normal.
The problem in my state of NJ is that our speed limits are set by politicians and not math. So you’ll end up a 4 lane road divided by a grass median and the speed limit is only 25 mph. And then in other areas you’ll have the same scenario but a 50mph limit because the local politicians felt differently.
A bill was introduced recently at the state level to align our process with others states (ie, an actual process) wherein you measure traffic for a period and then use the 85th percentile, etc. It gained little interest so 20mph+ over the speed limit will continue everywhere in NJ.
I don’t mind the idea of speed limiters, but I’m concerned about how well they would work. My Tesla recognizes speed limit signs and adjusts speed accordingly. Unfortunately, it regularly gets the speed limit wrong. It is frustrating when the car decides to slow down to 45 on the highway because it misread a sign. Fortunately, it is easily overridden by pressing the accelerator. If a system couldn’t be easily overridden, it could be dangerous.
I would use a speed limiter system as a punitive measure, though. I’m envisioning something similar to a breathalyzer ignition lock. If you get too many moving violations, you could be required to add one of these devices to your vehicle. For some drivers, the system would limit speed based on speed limits (I’d use a combination of GPS and cameras to make the system as accurate as possible). For other drivers, the top speed of the car could be limited at all times (i.e. 25 mph for reckless drivers).
Also rightmost lane only with flashers to warn others to expect poor decisions.
That would be a great idea, but state governments are not gonna go through the trouble of refitting a camera/sign recognition system to an 03 Altima.
I’ve always been a bit baffled why cars even needed to go more than 100mph, ever. I get it from a marketing standpoint, but not a practical one.
I’m mixed on limiting speed. Philosophically, sure, it makes sense. But, in reality, I think it’s a bad idea, and going to be a nuisance in the long run. Sometimes you can speed responsibly, and shouldn’t have some nanny telling you to stop. And, while writing that last sentence, halfway through I realized this is effectively going to turn into a discussion
aboutsimilar to that of gun rights. That’s the zone where this falls, IMHO. There is no winning argument either way at this point in time.The 100 MPH limit is about what I would be willing to accept. Volvo made an ok decision limiting everything to 112mph. I also have an e-golf that is limited to 85mph, and I forget that sometimes, so while all traffic is moving around 80(65 is posted limit) trying to overtake can become difficult when I reach the limit.
Oof 85, that’s too low especially in a country where there are some speed limits at 85.
“Sometimes you can speed responsibly”
The problem is very few people correctly identify those situations. Even race trained James Dean driving a racecar made a fatal misjudgement.
For speed limiters, I agree with some folks that in like school zones and high density areas, but then Police and Emergency vehicles would probably need to exempt. But then how do motorcycles work with that? They just buzzing down the highway at 75 passing all those locked in at 70? And of course the older cars.
I’m not going to say never but I just don’t see it flying in the US with all the states and their different regulations. Like in NC we have inspection, SC doesn’t, we’re right on the border, I see almost as many SC plates as NC around here, so half can coal roll and have 100% limo tint on the windshield, and the others at least gotta know a guy.
Like the whole Vermont loop hole, and how people with FL relatives just get their registration there, people gonna get away with whatever they can get away with.
Speed limiters, should everyone else have them? Do you want them?
Yes. I for one welcome them.
Why? Because cars without them are grossly wasteful, much more dangerous things. Cars only need double digit horsepower to maintain any legal speed outside of an autobahn. With limiters cars can focus on being safe and more fuel efficient than squandering fuel for potential performance forbidden on public roads.
I’ve gotta be honest, given this comment, why are you on a car enthusiast website? Like what content could possibly be appealing?
I’m an enthusiast of of safety, efficiency ergonomics and low NVH. “Slow Car Fast” give plenty enough thrills for me well within the law.
“I’m an enthusiast of of safety, efficiency ergonomics and low NVH.”
-me in bed ????????????
Bed or Buick, your choice.
(The latter will actually get you places though.)
Because he is actually James May?
You say that like it’d be a bad thing.
haha, no I absolutely did not mean as as a bad thing. I love James May!
Careful. He’s the same guy who will die on a hill about why he doesn’t get out of the passing lane while he’s specifically doing the posted speed limit. You’re not going to get satisfaction.
Always nice to meet a fan.
In my town, the speed limit is 25mph and it is definitely enforced at busier times. However, my Honda, without fail, always shows that the limit is 85mph. There are no signs anywhere that could cause the car to make that mistake. This is a problem on Honda’s part, but also potentially troubling if this kind of forced-behavior tech becomes common.
Sounds silly but sometimes it’s a struggle to keep the car under 25. I often use adaptive cruise to force it to stay at 25. I’m still the driver, not the car.
Laws like this will make fixing such problems a much higher priority for manufacturers.
If it’s the manufacturers responsibility how long does it stay that way? Are they responsible for a car out of warranty? 20 years old? Who holds them accountable?
All good questions. For lawyers.
I absolutely wouldn’t mind if my car was limited to 15 or 25 in 15 or 25 mph zones. I only drive a friggin Juke and I often find it difficult to get the car to go that slow, especially if I have to slow down to that speed.
I would often hate puttering along at those speeds, but it would be nice not having to worry about it.
In other situations it might not be so bad if the car let you go 5-10 mpg above the limit but then capped it. Most people would be in a comfortable, familiar zone but it would prevent most egregious speeding.
Great! Now the Western states are going to tap into Eastern Europes strategic reserves of previously stolen Mk 4 VWs!
More like carefully preserved Mk1 Octavias… 😀
Having driven a new Mk1 Octavia TDI estate you can sign me up for one as well.
There should be a maximum acceleration for cars, as well as maximum speeds based on road conditions. I recognize those parameters will change car culture, but it needs to be changed. There are plenty of really cool and fun cars that aren’t fast.
A lot of local municipalities are going to be upset over their lack of ability to generate revenue via speeding tickets.
They could start ticketing for lights instead.
Or not using the right-most lane except for overtaking, not using indicators, not obeying stop signs…
Rules for thee but not for me!
Call me a communist, but I think it’s a good idea. Do we all need cars that can do 150mph? No, we do not. Make rural interstate speed limits 80 or 90mph and we have a deal.
AT MINIMUM, these should be mandatory in school zones.
You and the EU are making the false assumption that these systems actually work correctly. They don’t. They screw up – a lot. I’ve been on the freeway with my adaptive cruise control set for the speed limit and suddenly the system reads a sign off on the weigh station road of 25, hits the brakes, and I have to goose the gas and disengage. There are other places where it thinks the speed limit is 55 when it’s 25 (no idea why). Until this technology is a lot more reliable, it should not be mandated. Even then, I’m not thrilled with the idea if the car belong limited in case I need to speed up to avoid something.
Communist.
Rural interstate speed limits are often 80 mph already.
Graduated tiers of licensing is better for the “thee not me” issue.
So… you’ll be able to buy a literal “license to speed”? Because of course it’ll be the rich people with fast cars that want (not need, want) this. Because it’ll take extra training, in fast cars. That’s a rich person’s game.
And how does that work from an enforcement perspective? How would a police officer know you have the license to speed? Maybe the police could have special yellow stars for the cars to wear…
Or is it a “swipe your license to unlock super speed mode” built into the car?
My ideal vision for it would be a driving test that is quite difficult to pass paired with recurring retests, a one strike and you’re out policy for DUI or similar, and a special license plate/drivers license that display the driver’s status.
The idea that a professional race driver and a guy with 10 at-fault crashes and 3 DUIs are presumed to have the same competence operating an automobile and subject to the same rights and privileges with their drivers licenses is bit odd to me.
I agree. The weight and power of the car you are allowed to drive should be based on your proven competency in doing so.
Pretty sure speeders gonna speed regardless of their licence tier status.
Not sure the point of this reply.
Speeding is illegal now and would remain illegal. Higher speed limits for those who have demonstrated a high level of competence controlling a car doesn’t affect the privileges of the rest of the driving population in any way.
Because how exactly will a cop know which cars are driven by those authorized to drive those higher limits vs those not? They won’t.
All you’re doing is enabling illegal speeders to speed more.
From my earlier post.
If you borrow someone’s car with the plate and you don’t have the right license, your punishment is twice as high as a normal person caught at the same speed.
Plates and cars can be faked or stolen. Plus you have to be caught to be prosecuted.
Also look at the hassle Mercedes has had with her motorcycle. The system already can’t get the owner right based on the plate, now you expect them to get the licencing correct?
I remember a time in Italy where different cars had different speed limit numbers on the bumper for the LEOs to see who had paid to play. My plate said AFI so I got a smile instead of pulled over. Between that and the raffle ticket looking gas tokens that cost me pre-tax US prices but paid the station owner some rate that must have been more than they usually got (based on how happy they were to get them), driving was good.
> The great paradox of the American road is that the speed limits in denser urban and suburban areas are clearly too high, while speed limits on America’s higher-quality interstates are arguably too low.
35 through a neighborhood on the way to my GF’s feels like a hilarious dangerous rollercoaster, as people try to back out of their driveways or make turns onto their blocks, as people are wont to do.
65 when I can see clear ahead for two miles is criminal.
And can you see the moose about to step out onto the road from the trees too?
If the butthole-clenchingly close calls I’ve had with deer in the last month alone are any indication, line of sight is great but absolutely no assurance when one of those oversized forest rats is gonna pop off into the road.
One time was close enough that I remember thinking “if I die I better take this goddamn deer with me. I wonder if 48-42-37-31-27mph is enough to take it out.” That was on a 45mph road. I heard its hooves click on the asphalt as it decided being cut in half by a bike was not advantageous.
That doesn’t get around your point that going slower would certainly give more time to react, and I ride with extra caution on secondary rural roads for that exact reason (I have my fun, too, lest I be all smug and saintly). But it’s still a question of “what is that deer gonna do and when is it gonna do it?” If we slowed down safe ramming speed* every time we saw a deer anywhere along a route, traffic would pretty much cease to function.
* Let us assume for the sake of the argument that you swore a blood oath against deer and will not relent, no matter the cost
Moose >> deer though. Moose can be HUGE!
https://www.acsh.org/news/2019/03/16/hitting-moose-your-car-13-times-deadlier-hitting-deer-13881
That’s with a car so I have little doubt hitting a 1300 lb moose on the highway with a motorcycle will be fatal for all involved.
“Let us assume for the sake of the argument that you swore a blood oath against deer and will not relent, no matter the cost”
No blood oath but I do find deer quite tasty. Elk, reindeer and moose too.
Damn! Now I want some.
No doubt at all. We don’t have mooses down here. Whereas I’d be pissed to hit a deer in the truck, I suspect I’d be grateful to be alive after hitting a moose.
On the bike, we’re all just barely contained meatbags.
Moose? Trees? There’s a large section of the US from about the Rockies to the Ozarks where that’s really not a problem, then another one between the Rockies and the Sierra Nevadas.
Seems like the speed sign recognition could be defeated with a piece of gaffer tape.
Not even that but where I live Semis have a different speed limit and my car will read that and not the actual speed limit for passenger cars.
“Let’s see, if I just fill in all the spaces on the segments it’ll recognize, I get… 88! Woohoo!”
That won’t defeat the GPS speed limiter.
No but some strategically applied aluminum foil will.
Which might trigger a lockout until its removed.
So if your vehicle GPS goes on the fritz, you are parked until it is fixed? What happens in tall skyscraper areas where GPS is sometimes blocked?
No. Vehicle GPS can also use cell towers which is how cell phones locators work downtown.
In Texas the statutory speed limit is what is reasonable under the circumstances. In many places this is the de facto limit, as it should be, and why these regulations are silly. Better regulations would encourage more driver attention, and would not replace good judgment with blanket rules applied by a machine.
Sec. 545.351. MAXIMUM SPEED REQUIREMENT. (a) An operator may not drive at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the circumstances then existing.
Montana was like this for a long time. America’s Autobahn. I was disappointed it had changed a couple years back when I drove through. Doing 75 across all 600 miles of that state is not an option!
That’s the problem, drivers in the US have terrible judgement.
The regulation(s) that should be better revolve around driver training, and that’s in most states. Teach people better than just showing them a couple movies along the lines of Red Asphalt.
That is at best a partial solution. You’re still going to have the unlicensed/uninsured /IDGAF/adrenalin junkies.
You’re not wrong, however I don’t think that’s a good-faith argument. People these days tend to amplify the bad actors out there. Blame the 24-hour news cycle and social media if you’d like, but the point still stands: yes, there are still going to be idiots out there, however how much safer could the roads be if the (vast) majority of people out there had better training on how to handle a bad situation in a car?
The roads would be safer with stricter training and requirements. I don’t question that and why I said its at best a partial solution. Its just not a slam dunk/mic drop. You’re still going to have bad actors. It only takes one to kill or maim you.
This is partly true:
Presumed Speed Limit Laws:
“Presumed speed limit laws establish a prima facie speed limit, which means that drivers are presumed to be in violation if they exceed the posted speed limit, but they can present evidence to the contrary in court. In states with presumed speed limit laws, drivers may be able to argue that they were driving safely even if they exceeded the posted limit. This places the burden of proof on the driver to demonstrate that their speed was reasonable given the conditions. However, it’s important to note that Texas does not have presumed speed limit laws, and drivers are expected to adhere to the posted speed limits without the ability to present evidence to the contrary.
It’s worth mentioning that speed limit laws can be further nuanced and may vary within each category across states. Additionally, specific circumstances, such as school zones or work zones, may have different speed limit regulations. To ensure compliance with speed limit laws, it is always advisable to refer to the specific laws and regulations of the state or locality in which you are driving.”
https://www.bryanfagan.com/blog/2023/august/the-five-over-myth-and-debunking-it/
I think if there is ANY other speed limit adhering traffic on the road near you you’ll have a harder time arguing why exceeding the limit was safe and prudent.
Nope; completely true. You’re conflating the elements of the offense with evidentiary considerations. And your source hasn’t read the Texas Transportation Code. As just one example, where he says, “Texas does not have presumed speed limit laws,” he is giving advice contrary to Section 545.352 entitled, “PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS.” He’s also wrong about other stuff, but the point is: Never ever get your legal advice from Internets my friends.
This is from a Texas law firm so its a bit more authoritive than a Reddit or Facebook post. That said it’s true I’ve found lawyers who really should have known better to make mistakes.
Even so I don’t see how this contradicts the prime facie law. If you’re pulled over it’s because the cop disagrees with your assessment of “reasonable and prudent”. That I think could be for something as simple as speeding past someone going well below the speed limit rather than slowing to minimize the gradient. It’s then up to you to argue to the court why the cop was wrong. Have fun with that.
BS. Maybe they’re not outright banning all old cars, but there are zones in some cities where if your car is older than X year it’s banned in said zone due to emissions. They’ll probably never outright ban old cars, they’ll just make it so you cannot drive them on public roads, via a lot of little annoying laws that cumulatively make it so that only the rich and powerful can do so.
These things are almost always incremental. Realistically all it takes is for insurance companies to stop insuring old cars and in 48 of 50 states it would be illegal to drive them on public roads. This became most apparent to me during the “Kia Boys” string of Kia and Hyundai thefts, and even though the effected models were a minority of the lineup, and for obvious reasons manual transmission variants of the effected models were almost never stolen, insurance companies were flat out refusing to insure many Kia and Hyundai owners.
Yeah this is the same argument I have when someone says “eV mAnDaTeS dOnT bAn GaS cArS nO 1 iS cOmInG 4 yOuR tRuCk”….there are hard bans and there are soft bans, and if you think the climate people are going to stop at new EV sales, you have more faith in their good nature than I do.
No-one is coming for your truck.
No, but they are coming for your guns.
Just the bullets
My thoughts, exactly. Some areas in Europe also charge you everytime you drive an older car in certain “zones”, due to emissions. I love my NA Miata, but could not justify spending 15 bucks every time I drive it.
Not charge, here in Barcelona is an outright ban, at least on weekdays during working hours.
Although if I am not mistaken, the regulation was recently oberthrown in the court.
I was referring to London https://www.theautopian.com/what-it-was-like-being-forced-by-the-government-to-give-up-my-dream-car-to-reduce-emissions/
On the plus side, speed limiters will help maintain the value of used cars. Because I would never buy one of these.
Ngl, while I got a kick out of your comment, if you believe that seriously and did not write it as a joke, then I’d point you to the housing market and see how that’s going for us.
The only reason the used car market is so terrible right now is twofold: one, we’re coming down from a peak high, and the values now feel lower. Two, used car financing rates are so much higher than new car rates, to the extent that it can actually be advantageous to buy new on a monthly payment basis. I’m not sure how the US housing market plays in except for the high(*) interest rates.
*in that they were unusually low, and now that they’re back to what’s actually somewhat historically
normal, it feels high.
The speed limit thing is crossing the line, what if you have to speed up to get out of a situation? There will be a mix of cars with speed limiters and the ones that are driving today with all the freedom. Speed doesn’t kill, speed differential does.
Or my favorite variant of that train of thought:
Not taking the argumentative pedant angle in any serious way, as it’s mostly and generally true, but as a motorcyclist I think a lot about road rash and the things you can lose on a long slide.
Limiters don’t put a hard stop the gas pedal. They have a few MPH leeway and take a few minutes to nag you to slow down and/or MAYBE record the violation.
At worst such limiters will automatically call for the nearest LEO which in your hypothetical would be a GOOD thing. Because if you have a genuine emergency that LEO can get you where you need to be much faster and safer than you weaving through traffic on your own.
That “genuine emergency” had better be a lot more serious than needing a bathroom or getting home in time to watch your favorite show though.
The article is wrong: ISA is not a speed limiter. It is a warning system. But you can still go as fast as you want.
As long as you’re OK with the disembodied voice of Big Brother screaming at you to slow down and recording everything for the court and your insurance adjustor.
The Big Question is a total gimme today. Although, it’ll be interesting to read any comment that justifies it.
As far as car companies becoming battery companies? Once again, Tesla is doing it first because they are more nimble than the super-conglomerates. It’s pretty obvious that the answer is yes. It’s where the money is. Good, bad, or indifferent.
Can’t wait for the Eurofetishists in government to pitch that we bring this one stateside… Or will it be NHTSA acting on its own as an unelected, unaccountable executive branch extension? Wait, I think there was just a court case about that u3u
California is already on it.
I weep for the future of driving.
In Europe it is not on “someone’s decision” to fine you if you are caught speeding. Speed cameras usually have a margin (7-10km/h in Spain usually), but if you are caught speeding, you are fined.
Also, I doubt very rarely anyone “ends up in court” for speeding (except in the case of being a criminal ofference, for example driving over 200km/h in a motorway in Spain).
Those two are mostly American concepts.
Some states like Maryland have speed cameras like in Spain. Speed cameras on state roads require state laws to implement.
Now that is bleak, but probably true.
I opined in a post on another page that reasonable speed limiters (85-90 mph) on heavy trucks over 8500 GVWR would make some sense. Society has the most interest in seeing those vehicles slow down, there is no real justification for driving them way over the limit, and they already get breaks on emissions, fuel economy, etc.
I can’t justify limiters on anything else though. That is just a bridge too far for what driving represents (or used to) in this country.
I may have misread it, but I took this as like it knows the limit and yells at you or stops you from speeding whether the limit be 90 or 40, it’s not just a top speed thing. Did I completely misunderstand? Admittedly I am reading while doing computer training at work so my attention is very divided.
Computer training? Is it the kind where you have to watch videos filmed decades ago, from the HR department, that you already know what the answer “should” be, but can’t skip ahead?
Those are fun 😉
Pretty much nailed it. There are a couple questions I have missed so it’s not all just common sense, but close enough that I am cursing whoever made this a mandatory requirement.
Everyone has to justify their paycheck somehow. Doing something for the sake of doing something, because that’s how it has to be done…according to the legal team. Quality time spent, lol
This doesn’t sound like a mere warning system.
Back to that training with you!
Fair, but it’s also not like a top speed thing, my point was that this is not just going to limit cars to 90 or whatever, if the limit is 40, you’ll be limited to 40. That’s the “intelligent” part of this as opposed to just being a top speed thing. That is so much worse than just telling me I can’t do 100 on the freeway, it’s also telling me I have to do 35 on that windy road out of town that I have never seen another car on and is just so much fun to do 50 on.
I also remember when trucks used to be limited to the two right lanes (at least where I am in Georgia). That restriction was lifted ~10 years ago I think. There are probably too many trucks on the road now but some limit on travel lanes would also be helpful.
I realize anecdotes don’t equal truth but I swear traffic moved much more calmly when that limit was in place. Speed limiters would also help safety, especially in more rural areas. There was a case of several college students being killed/hurt near Savannah here about 2 years ago because a trucker was going way too fast on too little sleep out in the middle of nowhere.
We still nominally have that restriction on some local highways and it is routinely ignored.
They have that restriction on I-95 south of Jacksonville, but it ends just before Jacksonville, Fl (coming north.) I was driving on I-95 and traffic was moving just fine. I passed the sign saying the truck restriction was no longer there, and you could (1) see the trucks moving left as fast as they could and (2) I immediately had to put on the brakes because traffic instantly started backing up.
When has a heavy truck ever gone that fast? They struggle to get up to 50 and hold it in a 65 zone
8500 GVWR is an F250 or Hummer EV, not a semi.
Ah, yeah, speed limits and turn signal rules don’t apply to them
*used to*
The rational side of my brain wonders why speed limiters weren’t implemented decades ago. The irrational side is screaming and throwing its toys all over the room.
Mostly because the tech wasn’t cheap enough to mandate. It either has to be GPS connected which then requires limits to be uploaded and frequently updated in that, even google maps and others struggle here when things change, or have very well performing speed limit sign recognition which is even now also hit or miss.
Let’s call the police on our parents for kidnapping and hide in the crawlspace.
Car companies should definitely become battery companies. Think of all of the famous and popular car brands that got that way because of their engines in one form or another. If batteries are the thing that buyers look at instead of engines, then that will be what the companies lean into.
Fully agree, people don’t realize that in electric systems, the battery is more akin to the engine and the motor acts like a transmission. It’s all about battery performance, the motor only has to be big enough to take whatever power the battery can output. The battery’s architecture defines the whole car, down to the chassis configuration. I’m hopeful that once manufacturers can design packs at will we’ll finally ditch the skateboard platform. I somehow doubt they’ll start making their own cells any time soon, though.