Sense of Speed

Originally Posted by SailFree

There has been much scientific research about speed limits and safety, and essentially 100% of the data is ignored by bureaucrats, politicians, police, and even voters when it comes to establishing traffic laws.

1) Joan Cimino, a researcher with the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration, analyzed all the available data about speed limits and safety back around 1984, as I recall, and found NO relationship between speed limits and safety. Don't try to find this information anywhere. It appears it was shredded, thrown into the trash, burned, deleted, and has vanished entirely from the known universe. I suspect Ms. Cimino was taken to the desert and killed for her traffic safety heresy and buried outside Las Vegas. I have been able to find no mention of her since this study appeared, nor any mention of her research and findings.

2) In the 1950s, a study was done which demonstrated that unreasonably LOW speed limits actually INCREASED the speed of drivers--perhaps they were just showing their rebellious American nature toward bureaucracy.

3) Around 1950, a study out of Massachusetts found that a high percentage of accidents wherein police listed "speed" as the cause were actually due to mechanical failure in the automobile. Police were just defaulting to "speed" as a cause of accidents even when no direct evidence of speeding was present and without conducting any actual investigation.

4) Analysis of the safety record of drivers showed that the safest drivers habitually drove 10MPH OVER the speed of the rest of the traffic. Insurance companies don't want you to know this!

5) Yield signs are safer than stop signs, and yet law requires you to come to a complete stop at a stop sign even though that IS MORE DANGEROUS.

6) Traffic lights produce more danger than yield signs, and yet citizens often clamor for traffic lights at street corners.

7) The greatest dangers occur when traffic is forced to slow down. Keeping the traffic moving is the best safety principle. (See Maxwell Halsey's great book on highway safety printed back in the 1940s.)

8) Research has conclusively demonstrated that, when left to their own devices (no speed limit set), almost all drivers rationally drive at the speed which is SAFEST FOR THEM. This may be a completely different speed from that which is safest for another driver. One size of pantyhose does NOT FIT ALL.

Don't expect ANY scientific research to get you excused from a speeding ticket or from rolling through a stop sign.

But I think this does explain your problem. You are subconsciously attempting to drive at the speed which which is safest for YOU AND YOUR AUTOMOBILE. I note that driving at a slow speed allows my mind to wander and thus I am likely to be more vulnerable to making a driving mistake. Driving faster forces more concentration. That may be part of the answer to the above data.

I'll be 71 years old in a couple weeks. I resent the "old driver" comment! (Just kidding...) My average speed on my latest road trip of nearly 1000 miles was 71MPH and my gas mileage was 27.2MPG. Not bad numbers at all. Indeed, the MPH figure was HIGHER than the advertised highway mileage for the 370Z. Before radar and laser speed guns were common, I often averaged around 90MPH on trips and once 98.7 over 300 miles. Paul Newman was an old guy who, at 80 years old, could still drive racing speeds around a road course. One size (stereotype) of pantyhose does not fit all! (A song by The Waitresses had that title around 30 years ago...)

Originally Posted by Tribalpinoy91

Your a nut. And disagree with everything you say.

Originally Posted by wstar

Well the essence of the speed argument is that there are two ways to look at the speed factor. Speed definitely does increase accident mortality. A crash from cruising at 90 is going to be more fatal than a crash from cruising at 55, that's just physics. The counter-arguments don't deny that. The other side of the argument though, is that restricting speeds leads to traffic patterns and driver behaviors that are more likely to cause an accident in the first place.

Originally Posted by wstar

Well the essence of the speed argument is that there are two ways to look at the speed factor. Speed definitely does increase accident mortality. A crash from cruising at 90 is going to be more fatal than a crash from cruising at 55, that's just physics. The counter-arguments don't deny that. The other side of the argument though, is that restricting speeds leads to traffic patterns and driver behaviors that are more likely to cause an accident in the first place.

Originally Posted by SailFree

JORDO!

You say "here's the link" but I find no link. I would really appreciate said link, as I've spent much time trying to find the old Cimino study.

Originally Posted by SailFree

JORDO!

You say "here's the link" but I find no link. I would really appreciate said link, as I've spent much time trying to find the old Cimino study.

Originally Posted by Bucketlist2012

You need to come to the Bay area...

People are angry fools..

If you do not have rules of speed, and stop signs, you will have Chaos, no matter what your reports say..

It is the attitude and mind set of the driver that is the problem...Not the slower speed.

It is all about EMOTION, that causes wrecks.. People are not paying attention. or are too selfish and angry, that cause the accidents...

Not the slower drivers...And the argument that driver's that drive slow due so because they need to because they cannot handle the speed ?hahaha.

I drive slow to protect my License...Get to the track with me and good luck keeping up...And if you do, you will be driving your car at the limit, and well done..