3 ms·

I feel like my devils advocate argument was in good faith, however if it didn't come across that way, my apologies. To answer your first question, I'd say 90mp

I feel like my devils advocate argument was in good faith, however if it didn't come across that way, my apologies. To answer your first question, I'd say 90mph is probably the most you'd need to use in pretty much all circumstances to safely overtake or maneuver out of a bad situation. If we need to enforce a limit, I'd be erring around that number, personally. The current 155mph limiter that we get in the EU is overkill for road cars outside of Germany, unless there's other places with unrestricted public roads. I don't recall saying any artificial limit is less safe, I suggested a 65mph limit would be less safe. I think parents buying a 90mph max car are doing nothing wrong, as that isn't artificially limited to 65mph and would still have the acceleration potential to move out of the way when going the speed limit, albeit slower than some higher spec'd cars would. My first car was a Mazda 2, with no limits on it. It's top speed is 106mph according to Google, and I probably saw 90 once or twice within 4 years of having it. I'm not sure comparing what we're talking about to tractors is a fair argument - we can drive tractors on the road at 14 in the UK, they don't go on motorways, nor are they the same type of vehicle as a car. I think this goes for a bus as well, it's not only a professional vehicle, with a different class of licence, but they are significantly larger, bright colours, lots of signage stating their restrictions (at least in the UK). Yes, if the car is only used on the 45/50mph roads then I'd agree 65mph would suffice. If the parent limited to 65, and requested their child didn't go on the highway should we start including GPS limiters as well just incase your kid thought they knew better? It seems like people can't trust their kids anyway in this discussion, as you're wanting to set a limiter on their car, so may as well include some measure to stop them even trying in the first place. Not particularly sure of your focus on buses here, as I said they're a totally different class of vehicle and clearly don't accelerate the same as personal vehicles for many reasons. Public liability, efficiency, comfort, safety and longevity for starters, and I reckon physics probably comes into play somewhere. The limiter can be another deterrent, or parental restriction, I just think it's a potentially dangerous one, personally.

eesmith 3y ago
> I don't recall saying any artificial limit is less safe Your devil's advocate position was "if you limit the speed for your teen and then need to accelerate to get out of a dangerous situation, what will happen" further clarified as "You should probably start funeral planning anyway if you can’t trust your kid in a vehicle without artificially limiting their speed.". Had the original limit been 70 mph, I assume you would have said the same thing, as your comment didn't suggest any artificial limit was reasonable. Hence my devil's advocacy. > we can drive tractors While the name comes from farm tractor use some 50 years ago, a Swedish A-tractors is not farm tractor like what you are thinking of. See for examples https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/regional-car-culture-explained-the-history-of-the-swedish-a-traktor/ https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/regiona... and https://www.archivish.com/epas-and-a-tractors-the-slow-swedish-hotrods/ https://www.archivish.com/epas-and-a-tractors-the-slow-swedi... for examples. They can be can be a regular car modified to limit the speed, take out the suspension, shorten the length, and have max two seats. See those links for some images. > with a different class of licence ... If you got the same training, does that mean there would be fewer situations where you need to exceed 65 mph on the motorway? Since you asked what could make things safer, it sounds you think additional mandatory training would help. > should we start including GPS limiters as well just incase your kid thought they knew better? No clue. That's a far more complicated question which I am ill-informed to answer. I can make some obvious comments: Exposing the controls for an existing and well-tested speed limiter seems a lot easier than creating an entirely new geofence input system and adding GPS, to say nothing of the more complicated set of failure conditions. The geofence mapper needs to stay up-to-date because road change, so someone has to pay for that service. Most parents who want GPS tracking can already ask their teens to keep their phone on while the car is in use, for viewing aftewards, so the differential safety improvement of a built-in system - if it exists - seems rather low. But I don't care to defend all conjectural possibilities, only to point out that electronic speed limits for teen drivers is not unreasonable, and already exists for some places, so if it were dangerous we should see that already.

eesmith 3y ago

> I don't recall saying any artificial limit is less safe Your devil's advocate position was "if you limit the speed for your teen and then need to accelerate to get out of a dangerous situation, what will happen" further clarified as "You should probably start funeral planning anyway if you can’t trust your kid in a vehicle without artificially limiting their speed.". Had the original limit been 70 mph, I assume you would have said the same thing, as your comment didn't suggest any artificial limit was reasonable. Hence my devil's advocacy. > we can drive tractors While the name comes from farm tractor use some 50 years ago, a Swedish A-tractors is not farm tractor like what you are thinking of. See for examples https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/regional-car-culture-explained-the-history-of-the-swedish-a-traktor/ https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/regiona... and https://www.archivish.com/epas-and-a-tractors-the-slow-swedish-hotrods/ https://www.archivish.com/epas-and-a-tractors-the-slow-swedi... for examples. They can be can be a regular car modified to limit the speed, take out the suspension, shorten the length, and have max two seats. See those links for some images. > with a different class of licence ... If you got the same training, does that mean there would be fewer situations where you need to exceed 65 mph on the motorway? Since you asked what could make things safer, it sounds you think additional mandatory training would help. > should we start including GPS limiters as well just incase your kid thought they knew better? No clue. That's a far more complicated question which I am ill-informed to answer. I can make some obvious comments: Exposing the controls for an existing and well-tested speed limiter seems a lot easier than creating an entirely new geofence input system and adding GPS, to say nothing of the more complicated set of failure conditions. The geofence mapper needs to stay up-to-date because road change, so someone has to pay for that service. Most parents who want GPS tracking can already ask their teens to keep their phone on while the car is in use, for viewing aftewards, so the differential safety improvement of a built-in system - if it exists - seems rather low. But I don't care to defend all conjectural possibilities, only to point out that electronic speed limits for teen drivers is not unreasonable, and already exists for some places, so if it were dangerous we should see that already.