Should cars have built-in speed limit?

shrubnose said:

Wrong.

Governors control the flow of fuel to an engine for the purpose of regulating the engines speed.

The speed controllers that we are talking about would control the speed of motor vehicles with some type of linkage to the accelerator.

Click to expand...

Stop! There are no absolutes,

Many current vehicles have no throttle cable and are true fly-by-wire; there is no linkage.

Most vehicles today AFAIK, are limited electronically for top speed - it is cheaper, safer and more accurate than manual systems.

SMTA said:

The technology is still in infancy.

Nissan did have a neat package where the car would find a spot in a parking lot and park itself.

It also requires a 4G connection:

Click to expand...

I remember the test in the late '90s. I think the cars were Buicks or something. There were 4 or 5 cars front to back following closely in a middle lane on the LA freeway.

I didn't see how this could work if anybody in one of those cars had to get off the freeway earlier than the rest.

What if you get a call that your kid was hurt at school and you have to go NOW?

When they take away control of the vehicle, many more problems crop up.

Nope, it violates personal freedom and is a symbol of the government getting to much control over someone's life.

Lovebug said:

Aside from a car parking itself, driving long distance quite more than I like to, I often wish cars would be programmable so that you could just sit, relax and arrive at your destination refreshed and ready to go, instead of red eyed, tense and exhausted.

Click to expand...

I think that is called a train or taxi or maybe a limo.

TacticalEvilDan said:

They don't need a black box on your car. The courts have already decided that the feds can slap a GPS beacon on it. Get with the times, man.

Click to expand...

I always just assumed they were tracking my phone anyway.

Really if you want nanny-state control over speeding, that's the way to do it. Any navigator/GPS app in a Droid will know when you're speeding, it *could* notify a police server who then just fines your bank account and sends you a nice little text (the same program will send you another fine if you check that text while moving). If you don't sign permission for the state to do this, then you don't get a license to drive. Driving is not a right, after all. And to reinforce compliance, every licensed driver in the speeding car will be fined as if they were driving, because if the driver is speeding they should have stopped him. What's that? Not everyone has a Droid? Sounds like Obama needs to upgrade the ObamaPhone and launch another "people have a right to access information" campaign.

That's how a nanny-state should do it, not with mechanical speed controllers.

Mason66 said:

What happens at 3 in the morning when there are not 5 cars to put together?

Will the car be smart enough to drive itself?

There are so many questions to be answered.

Click to expand...

five was an arbitrary number; i'm sure the number would be adjusted to meet flow of traffic.

i don't know how i feel about it, honestly. i like to control my own car, especially in adverse conditions. however, i have probably spent years in my life stuck in traffic because someone hit the brake or because everyone can't figure out that when the light turns green, everyone all the way back should take their foot off of the brake at the same time. my guess is that cars will become increasingly self driving because of these problems.

Mason66 said:

I still have my first car which is very much like the one in my avatar.

I would rather buy a 1970 Mustang or even a Falcon over a Fiat or any car made in Europe from the last century.

Here in Mexico I just saw a 1975 Fiat X-19 for sale and the guy wants like $15,000 dollars for it. I just laughed. What a horrible car that was, and I had a few.

As for the new cars, I don't really care. The are disposable and made to take you to work.

There is nothing exciting out there and my cars will be on the road long after all the new cars are in the junk yard.

There is no incentive to fix or restore a newer car as the cost is prohibitive with all the computer systems, so they will be junked.

Click to expand...

Snort! We used to call the X-19 a pregnant skateboard.

Personally, I had the following:

1971 Plymouth AAR Cuda, 340 4 speed with six pack induction
1971 Dodge Dart Swinger, 340 4 speed with six pack induction
1969 Plymouth Road Runner, 440 automatic
Early 1970 Ford Custom 500 6 cylinder that I paid $80 for and drove for 3 years with no maintenance at all

Mason66 said:

I think that is called a train or taxi or maybe a limo.

Click to expand...

Nope, I like the comfort of my own vehicle.

Mason66 said:

I remember the test in the late '90s. I think the cars were Buicks or something. There were 4 or 5 cars front to back following closely in a middle lane on the LA freeway.

I didn't see how this could work if anybody in one of those cars had to get off the freeway earlier than the rest.

What if you get a call that your kid was hurt at school and you have to go NOW?

When they take away control of the vehicle, many more problems crop up.

Click to expand...

You're preaching to the choir - no way do I want to be controlled at all.

Mason66 said:

I don't want his to ever happen.

Computers have been known to go crazy or get bugs and that would put the occupants lives in danger.

The human should always have control of every aspect of the car.

The car companies had better realize this and give back control to their drivers.

Click to expand...

Good point.

Remember the “runaway Prius” incidents from a few years back?

A car as complex as a Prius isolates the driver from any direct control over the power train and brakes. You push the “gas” pedal, and you're not really operating the throttle on the engine; you're telling the computer that you want the car to go faster. Press the “brake”*pedal, and you're not really operating the brakes; you're telling the computer that you want the car to go slower. The computer manages the brakes, internal combustion engine, electric motors, and all the systems related thereto, in order to cause the car to behave according to the computer's interpretation of the driver's will.

And sometimes, computers malfunction. Sometimes there are hardware malfunctions, or errors in the software. And in at least a few known incidents, such malfunctions have resulted in Priuses behaving in incorrect and dangerous ways.

I think we should always be wary of any proposal that involves having a computer in a car that has the power to override the will of the driver.

Mason66 said:

That would kill most drivers. the sudden burst of speed would make them loose control.

Click to expand...

Good point, so the car will need to control steering, too.

And in the event of another mall shooting, the cops can just shut down every car in the area.

SMTA said:

Snort! We used to call the X-19 a pregnant skateboard.

Personally, I had the following:

1971 Plymouth AAR Cuda, 340 4 speed with six pack induction
1971 Dodge Dart Swinger, 340 4 speed with six pack induction
1969 Plymouth Road Runner, 440 automatic
Early 1970 Ford Custom 500 6 cylinder that I paid $80 for and drove for 3 years with no maintenance at all

Click to expand...

Is that all you had? :mrgreen:

I can do without the Cuda and Road Runner but I have 2 darts right now, one I drive every day, 1974.

I have had a lot of '60s Fords and they are my favorites and I grew up in the back seat of a '68 Galaxie 2 door.

I have a chance to buy right now a 1970 Galaxie that was made into a Limo, with a middle piece added professionally, that is V8, auto and air. I can tell you that is extremely rare in Mexico as almost all of the big cars were sold with inline 6 engines in those years.

It needs paint but he only wants about $3000.00 dollars. I am trying to find a way to transport it to where I am.

Bob Blaylock said:

Good point.

Remember the “runaway Prius” incidents from a few years back?

A car as complex as a Prius isolates the driver from any direct control over the power train and brakes. You push the “gas” pedal, and you're not really operating the throttle on the engine; you're telling the computer that you want the car to go faster. Press the “brake”*pedal, and you're not really operating the brakes; you're telling the computer that you want the car to go slower. The computer manages the brakes, internal combustion engine, electric motors, and all the systems related thereto, in order to cause the car to behave according to the computer's interpretation of the driver's will.

And sometimes, computers malfunction. Sometimes there are hardware malfunctions, or errors in the software. And in at least a few known incidents, such malfunctions have resulted in Priuses behaving in incorrect and dangerous ways.

I think we should always be wary of any proposal that involves having a computer in a car that has the power to override the will of the driver.

Click to expand...

My buddy let me borrow his 2010 Toyota Camry and I didn't like that feeling at all. The computer controlled everything. When I let off the gas, I want the engine to decelerate and not when the computer wants it to.

After I drove that car, I had no doubt the automatic accelerating car stories were true. A crazy computer will do that.

Jerry said:

Good point, so the car will need to control steering, too.

And in the event of another mall shooting, the cops can just shut down every car in the area.

Click to expand...

It may come to that, but my 1974 Dart won't shut down.

If one of those electric pulses ever hit, the diesel cars won't shut down either.

Mason66 said:

Isn't this what happened in the communists countries?

The cars couldn't go over 30 or 40 MPH. Did that make the population happy?

Click to expand...

I don't think that was a result of an intentional effort to enforce speed limits by installing speed limiters in automobiles; but rather a result of the cars that were made in Communist nations being so crappy that that's as fast as they were capable of going. Not by intentional design, but by extraordinary incompetence.

Bob Blaylock said:

I don't think that was a result of an intentional effort to enforce speed limits by installing speed limiters in automobiles; but rather a result of the cars that were made in Communist nations being so crappy that that's as fast as they were capable of going. Not by intentional design, but by extraordinary incompetence.

Click to expand...

But they would have the same end result, right?

At least the country would save billions. No infrastructure repairs would have to be made because at low speeds, it doesn't matter if the roads are in bad condition.

Bob Blaylock said:

Good point.

Remember the “runaway Prius” incidents from a few years back?

A car as complex as a Prius isolates the driver from any direct control over the power train and brakes. You push the “gas” pedal, and you're not really operating the throttle on the engine; you're telling the computer that you want the car to go faster. Press the “brake”*pedal, and you're not really operating the brakes; you're telling the computer that you want the car to go slower. The computer manages the brakes, internal combustion engine, electric motors, and all the systems related thereto, in order to cause the car to behave according to the computer's interpretation of the driver's will.

And sometimes, computers malfunction. Sometimes there are hardware malfunctions, or errors in the software. And in at least a few known incidents, such malfunctions have resulted in Priuses behaving in incorrect and dangerous ways.

I think we should always be wary of any proposal that involves having a computer in a car that has the power to override the will of the driver.

Click to expand...

Manual transmissions are computer controlled now, too. That's not very 'manual' imo.

Mason66 said:

It may come to that, but my 1974 Dart won't shut down.

If one of those electric pulses ever hit, the diesel cars won't shut down either.

Click to expand...

No not an electric pulse, a command sent via satellite to the computer. The car turns itself off and the computer is locked until the cops send the command to release them.

If I remember correctly, there are a few REALLY long roads that don't have speed limits.

TacticalEvilDan said:

I think it would be far more useful for cars to have a black box, which could be accessed only via search warrant or court order. That way, you can be held responsible if your driving causes an accident.

Click to expand...

I have a big problem with this.

In my opinion, it would violate the Third, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments.

The Fifth Amendment is obvious—one cannot be compelled to testify against one's self. By extension, I think one cannot be compelled to have one's own property equipped to testify against one's self either.

The Fourth is also obvious. Government doesn't get to put recording devices in our homes, even with the restriction that they need a warrant to access what is recorded. Government doesn't get to put such a device in our homes unless it first obtains a warrant. So why should our car be any different than our home in this respect?

So, how do I think this would violate the Third Amendment? I have a rather unusual view of what the Third Amendment is really about.

Ostensibly, what the Third Amendment prohibits is government compelling citizens to quarter soldiers (or government agents) in their own homes.

Now consider that when the Bill of Rights was invented, we had no electronics. No telephones, no sound recording devices, no radio, no microphone—nothing like that. If government wanted to eavesdrop on a private conversation, the only way to do so was to put a human being in a position to hear that conversation.

So what would be the purpose of government quartering its agents in private homes? It's not about housing; it's about putting those agents in a position to spy on the legitimate occupants of that home.

And what would be the purpose of government requiring such a “black box” device in a private automobile? It would be to spy on the owner or operator of that automobile.

We could just embed microchips into everybody and control their actions, money, etc. that way when they don't comply with a law or become dangerous to society we can just use gps trackers and pick them. We could also just shut off the money on them when we want to suppress them from not conforming to society as others feel it should be.

We also could make more laws and more laws because we all know the criminals don't break them only the honest people do.

I may have taken this a little overboard with this nonsense but at the same time isn't it just another way to slowly strip our personal choices away from us even if it is only speeding? I would think that if you wanted to go fast that you would just buy an older vehicle to bypass the solution anyway. It isn't like people buy new cars every year.

Carjosse said:

American muscle cars are ugly and they sound horrible.

Click to expand...

Says someone who is surely just jealous because his own pussified nation has never been able to produce anything comparable to a classic American muscle car.

The very worst of American cars looks, sounds, and is in every way superior to some Honduh or other piece of riced-out Japanese trash that sounds like a pissed-off weed whacker.

Bob Blaylock said:

Says someone who is surely just jealous because his own pussified nation has never been able to produce anything comparable to a classic American muscle car.

Click to expand...

Not without Americans help.

Remember where the Camaro and Firebirds were built.

barbarian_style said:

We could just embed microchips into everybody and control their actions, money, etc. that way when they don't comply with a law or become dangerous to society we can just use gps trackers and pick them. We could also just shut off the money on them when we want to suppress them from not conforming to society as others feel it should be.

We also could make more laws and more laws because we all know the criminals don't break them only the honest people do.

I may have taken this a little overboard with this nonsense but at the same time isn't it just another way to slowly strip our personal choices away from us even if it is only speeding? I would think that if you wanted to go fast that you would just buy an older vehicle to bypass the solution anyway. It isn't like people buy new cars every year.

Click to expand...

It's not just the speeding, but now the state will know all kinds of trivia. Go over an arbitrary mileage allowance: there's a tax for that. Didn't get your oil change within 200 miles of the odometer? There's a tax for that. Fuel cap was opened at a station that doesn't serve ethanol formulas? There's a tax for that.

shrubnose said:

Wrong.

Governors control the flow of fuel to an engine for the purpose of regulating the engines speed.

The speed controllers that we are talking about would control the speed of motor vehicles with some type of linkage to the accelerator.

Click to expand...

No. We are talking about speed on computer controlled fuel injection systems they control the speed by limiting fuel through the injectors when the set speed is reached. Thats controlling fuel flow. The only linkage to the accelerator is the data lines from the throttle position sensor to the computer which doesn't even play a part in limiting speed on modern vehicles. The speed sensor senses the speed, the computer then shuts down/limits fuel flow when targeted speed is reached.

So what exactly is the difference? Is there really one or are you trying to play semantics because you don't have any real argument?