Speed limiter? - 986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/27/tech/europe-speed-limits-scli/index.html Thoughts?

i've no problem with it on the street. friend had a fleet van that was speed limited at 135 kmph or so - engine would cut out. sounds like this technology would vary the limit depending on the speed limit of the particular road. just as long as there is a was to disable it ... https://www.autotrader.ca/newsfeatures/20170411/bmw-club-banning-cars-with-active-safety-features-from-track-day-events/

Quotes source posts: 591824, 591825

Total. Utter. BS. Ahhh govt 'protecting me from myself'... no thanks, I'll pass on. You may not but I absolutely do on privately owned vehicles. If a fleet owner or govt agency wants to install such a device on their vehicles by all means go for it. Theirs to decide how, when, where etc. they should be driven. But, should NEVER be applied automatically to privately owned vehicles. Period. Anecdotally, I've had more than a number of circumstances in which SPEED HAS SAVED ME... a lack thereof or even active braking would have instead created devastating results. One such was just this past Saturday while driving my truck (at/just above above the legal limit) pulling my trailer w/ my P-car on a multi-lane hwy. I was in lane 1 passing a SUV in lane 2. Lane 3 had a box truck who decided to slide into lane 2 in effort to give way to a car merging from on ramp. Except box truck didn't see SUV (in trucks blind spot but who also had a vehicle following too closely). Seeing it unfolding I slide a smidgeon left and stomped on the throttle. Doing so put me well above the 'limit' but I was able to make room for SUV (initially even w/ my trailer) in lane 2 to slide behind me in my lane and avoid getting hit by box truck... whereby also avoid hitting my trailer loaded w/ my car which most likely would have caused me to jack-knife (at best). But hey, what do I know versus some dumb@ss bureaucrats 'solving' our problems. As to BMWCCA, first off, that article and the action is 2+ years old. If I recall correctly BMW sued or at least threatened to sue the Club regarding that policy so it was rescinded. Active "safety" features are extremely troublesome on track if the 'eyes' aren't properly focused [cough] obscured [cough]. [/rant]

That would be really cool thing to install in some of my friends cars when we are at the track

Now that I think about it... it's on my Edge. A couple of times I've maxxed it out at 112 mph... and then it just cuts out. Engine doesn't stall... just cuts... and is recoverable at ~105. At 112 it wants to keep going, the revs aren't being pressed, but likely something catastrophic would fail.

This is part of the push to prep people for autonomous cars. Of course, autonomous cars will be programed not to exceed the speed limit due to liability concerns. But no one will use an autonomous car if it won't go over 65mph while everyone else is doing 80mph. It fact, it could often be more dangerous for an autonomous car to drive at the speed limit when all of the traffic is flowing substantially faster. Thus, they will have to slow all of the rest of the traffic down to the speed limit so autonomous cars and regular cars are all moving at about the same speeds. This is how you get that started. First, its an option. Then its on but you can turn it off. Then its on all of the time with no provision to turn it off. Just like stability control. Also, on the list of must-have's for autonomous cars is no-fault insurance (across the nation). When the car drives itself, who is liable for an accident? The car owner will refuse responsibility because they weren't driving and the car mfg's don't want that liability, so there will have to be an agreement where regardless of what happens or who is at fault, each party covers their own repair/medical/etc expenses.

Quotes source post: 591824

My thoughts? Don't get your news from opinionated propaganda machines like "CNN". I can't comment on the article since I have that site blocked on my router. However, I do think speed limiters are a great idea for everybody else (just not me ). In just about every corner of the US, more than half of the drivers on the road are speeding and it's very aggravating. I guess they're all just special since traffic laws don't apply to them.

Quotes source post: 591859

Where do you get your news from?

Quotes source post: 591845

I used to do Good Guys VW swap meets and drag race events all the time. One of the items that we had for sale was a 2500 rpm rev limiter distributor rotor that fit all the common VW, Porsche, 009 distributors. I still remember watching the drag races, and hearing this one Manx cutting out at about 2500 rpms as it went down the strip. ON topic, at work we sell a GPS driven speed limiting module. Very popular with the fleets. The company can track the truck from their office, govern the trucks speed, and even shut it off all from the office. I seriously have been thinking about putting one in my Boxster, as I can can also set a geo fence. Car leaves it, and it is dead. Viper sells an alarm that does this too, I had one in my R32 Skyline.

As mentioned, big brother forcing me to control myself... nope. Honestly I’m more concerned about these devices insurance companies are now suggesting are a good thing. Allstate has their plug in monitor to tell you what you are doing and reporting “safe operation” to the company. How long before they start to require such a device to get insurance? Totally off topic for this forum, but appropriate.

When the black helicopters drop into your city to deliver the speed limiters, then you know we are all screwed.

Don’t worry about the black helicopters. Worry about our benevolent legislators dropping “speed limiter” legislation into larger bills that are easily passed into law. Welcome to the “Brave New World” predicted decades ago.

Quotes source post: 591883

well, realise that the man cares nothing about you, especially once you are too old to pull a trigger for him. what the man does care about is how much it costs to take care of you and your dependents if you become a bent, broken, non-productive member of society. or your actions create a bent, broken, non-productive member of society. not such a big deal in countries without socialised medicine (ie, not europe or canada) but, as you stated, of great interest to the insurance companies who (whom?) are a very large lobby. i do agree w stone that it is the next step in the adoption of autonomous cars - they only work if you remove the unpredictable variables - us. we have lane control systems already, next is speed control - all designed to make us play well with the robots. and, like seat belts, stability systems and backup cameras, soon to be required products; if not then that unpredictable variable still exists. ultimately, cars are transportation. i've never really understood what 'canyon carving' or 'spirited driving' is; sounds like justified speeding and stunting to me. that's why sports cars are considered a sign of affluence - they are a thing with no purpose, like art and silicone.

Your 986es already have the technology. The rev limiter cuts the ignition and fuel injection if you exceed the redline. All that's needed to add speed limiting is a DME software update. The same will apply to most or all modern cars. I Europe all trucks over a certain size must have speed limiters going back many years. Its really annoying that trucks don't go over 55 on the motorways. If you can't pass them, you have to slow waaaay down.

Quotes source post: 591907

LOL - then with all due respect why are you here on a car 'enthusiasts' forum and why do you (if you even do) have a Boxster? Your words not mine... it's a 'thing with no purpose'. Even if just as an appliance it has a 'purpose'. Some people like art. Some like silicone. Many a Canadian Ballet performer probably insist on having silicone to perform and create what they deem art. Sounds like you are content and enjoy being controlled by others including government. What color shirt were you told to wear today? To each his or her own, I say.

Quotes source post: 591913

well, i try to obey the law. if that is being controlled by others then then i encourage you to try life in a lawless state like somalia and see how you fare. i get my speed at the track where i can do it legally. i am not a perfect person and occasionally i make mistakes. for example, i recently had to give a paycheque to the man when i got caught doing 170 on a hwy onramp. i've been tagged at 190 before. i see that as my fault and my price to pay, not the man for enforcing the rules that are sensible and are designed to keep people safe - safe from my actions in this case. full disclosure - i am sort of the man myself - one of my job duties is managing the bylaw enforcement group in my community - the speed cops. we don't do it for revenue, we do it to keep residents safe - most of our enforcement happens in school zones and around playgrounds. one of the things i have learned is that prevention is a lot more effective, inexpensive, and lower risk than enforcement; if they can keep me from going fast then they don't have to try and catch me going fast. i also know that laws, like life, taxes and hockey rules, are not static; they change and evolve to reflect new realities and new societal norms. and most of society wants safer roads, because most people just want to get from point a to point b without getting slammed into by someone driving foolishly. and if i insist that my right to drive as fast as i want supersedes the rights of the rest of society to be safe on the roads, i'm not sure i'll see much success. but i encourage you to rage on; get mad at the police officers who pull you over, get mad at the car companies, get mad at the sri lankan call centre guy that answers the telephone when you call your insurance company, get mad at your local politician that will say one thing and do another. i think all you'll accomplish is being mad a lot.

Quotes source post: 591919

+1 . . . What he said.

laws and their enforcement are a necessary evil, because (some) people can't behave. Now the question is...who wants access to a "private" car and why. Looking at the accident statistics for Germany, speed is interestingly NOT the TOP reason for e.g. fatal traffic accidents. And most fatal accidents DON'T happen on the Autobahn (without speed restrictions). Most fatal accidents happen on rural and city roads due to disregarding the right of way (for whatever reasons). That annual report is very interesting and often leads to the conclusion, that discussions over speed restriction are OFTEN politically motivated. A general speed limitation for the Autobahn won't really help to reduce the numbers of fatal accidents (which declined in the last 50 years over 75%, contrary to the fact the that there are milions more vehicles on the roads nowadays). Will it help to reduce the CO2...marginally yes. Will it make the Autobahn safer...marginally yes. If the cars are maintained and regularly inspected...they are pretty safe these days, capable of running at much higher speeds than 30 years ago. What really kills is not speed, but distraction (e.g. texting, or phone, or browsing your internet capable car computers) or a knowingly violation of laws (speed, red lights, right of ways...you name it). so speed limiters for certain areas might be okay, but can only help so much.

Quotes source post: 591974

Finally - a voice of reason.