[Rajeevraj]

I voted no, but it is a bit of yes and no.

Not specific to safety systems, but a car that is well equipped does give the confidence to go faster when the conditions permit.

For example, when I had my Zen, I used to stick to 70-80km/h as I did not feel comfortable beyond that. Now with my Vento, I am comfortable and confident at the 100-110km/h band (again-when conditions permit).

Having said that, if I buy a BMW next, although it would be safer than my Vento and would mask speed much better, I still would not go beyond the 100-120 range, because in my view, that is kind of the max limit our roads are suited for considering all the variables.

[SchumiFan]

Voted no for two primary reasons.

1. I am a miser and I always try to achieve ARAI figure or better it when I drive the car. So it means sticking to below 100 and gentle acceleration and defensive driving.

2. Another reason is that driving below 100 gives me a feeling of safety no matter what car I drive. I feel less tired and the occupants are also happy, relaxed when I drive this way. I know the car is under my control and I have a decent amount of time to react to anything on the road.

Works great for money and health as well.

[rovingeye]

I drive a car loaded to the gills with safety tech. But, I never get the itch to drive fast, since the car is heavy and as a result, braking distance is on the higher side. So, I safely stay within limits, except for when I'm driving on Yamuna Expressway, which is the only road where I spread my wings a bit, if you will.

[StepUP!]

I find this thought of 'driving faster because my car has ABS Airbags' absurd. It's like maintaining all sorts of unhealthy habits because I have health insurance.
Personally I find driver oriented cars can be driven at faster speeds with great confidence. For ex, I have old gen Figo and new gen Figo. The driving experience is poles apart. Old Figo's HPS, solid build, tight chassis and suspension imparts great confidence on highways, corners and overtaking. Whereas new Figo's EPS, not so good build quality, soft suspension don't give me confidence to push her to limits.

[fhdowntheline]

I believe this poll has to have an "in-between" option. This is not as binary as it looks. Speaking for myself, I'd say I would tend to drive a bit faster in a car which has the extra power and torque simply to conduct any overtaking manuevers. Safety isn't just about airbags and ABS/ESP. There is inherent safety in 'availability' of power reserve. I know for sure that I will be able to carry out a quick overtaking manoeuvre in my Polo GT vs my City (CVT) from say 40 to 80 kph. There is also the aspect of braking (all disc vs disc-drum). No amount of airbags are going to help if you are in a heavy SUV with poor braking performance, for example.

[BoneCollector]

What do we mean exactly by safety? Having ABS and airbags only doesn't mean that the car is safe. It depends on so many things like the driving dynamics of car, brakes and a host of external factors. I mostly stick to speed limits. I drive a Brezza and Wagon R and occasionally S-Cross and City. I've driven my Wagon R upto 80kmph but now I hardly take it over 60kmph. My Wagon R has ABS and airbags but the dynamics don't let me do high speeds. In Brezza, I stick to 70-80kmph and 100kmph on expressways. Same with S-Cross and City. Itch is always there but one has to control his/her emotions.

[GTO]

Voted for no, because I don't necessarily drive faster just because I'm in a safer car. However, I have noticed that I push a little bit more if I am in a faster car (e.g. 100 BHP car vs 200 BHP car). This might be the same for most BHPians .

Agreed with 2000rpm too. If I take my antique Jeep out, I intentionally restrict the speed. Not only is it unsafe due to its 70 year old design, but also because of its 23-year age. Many components would be end of life; I have replaced almost all of them, but you never know what can fail & when in such an old car. Mahindra parts aren't exactly the last word in quality anyway (although I would be cautious in a 23-year old Toyota too).

[PrasannaDhana]

This is a common misconception thinking a solid 5* rated Tata or a German can save us in a high speed crash versus being in a tincan maruti/Honda.

Crash tests are done at 65kmph. Our usual highway speeds is almost 110-120 kmph, even if you decelerate and have an impact (to be considered is that the opposing vehicle will also carry some speed like us even upon deceleration). The impact speed on highways is almost always at the range higher than crash testing limit.

It is definitely a fact that probability of getting out alive in a safer is more than unsafe ones. But then, it isn't as much of a difference to become carefree (say careless) and go crazy on the gas pedal believing your safe car will turn shaktimaan and save you .

[tajender]

The variable, in this case is usually not the fact that the car is safer or otherwise, but is between the steering wheel and the seat (i.e. the driver). If the driver is conscious of the fact that rash or fast driving would lead to accidents, they would definitely drive in reasonable fashion.

In fact, one of the best safety features that I noticed was in my Mazda CX-8 (overall, the car was not good though), was dynamic speed limiter and it was tied to road signs. So basically, no matter how hard you push the car, it would not exceed the speed limit and anytime you go into a different speed zone, all you need is push a button to program the system to the new speed limit. Also, anytime the car goes above the speed limit specified in the area, it would start giving a loud audible warning.

Even the safest car will lead to fatalities and injuries, if the driver drives in a rash manner. Safety measures are there in the car to augment the capabilities of the drivers and play handy in situations which go out of hand.

For example, most of the new vehicles being sold in Australia are equipped with Automatic Emergency Braking. However, there are situations in which AEB will be operational i.e. at speeds over 10 and under 90. Similarly other features have their tolerance limits.

The car is just another machinery that adds to human capabilities (of course they add a fun factor to day to day life), but, if the driver is not operating within the safety framework that it is designed to be used in, then it would lead to injuries and deaths. The safety features should not be seen as a measure to curb stupidity, but should be seen as driver aids. Even the manufacturers who make cars capable of autonomous driving, like Tesla, always say that autonomous driving is an aid to the driver and driver should always be alert, even when the vehicle is in autonomous mode.

[charanreddy]

I do push a bit more on my Nexon Vs my Beat earlier.. Depends a lot on the conditions. Driving in night, speed is definitely -20 KPMH Vs the max speed allowed on the road for both cars, but during the day time on a sunny day on the Bangalore - Chennai highway, I do try and push a wee bit more But as the speed goes up, I consciously increase my concentration levels and keep watching for any potential concerns, villagers suddenly jumping out etc. In our driving conditions rather than our own mistakes it is the uncertain environment and lack of driving common sense on our fellow road users that needs to be controlled for.

[Rahul_]

Speeding is dependent on lot of mental factors.
For me usually the acceleration that is more exciting than the top speed itself. Speeding for me usually happens for a short stretch of road (outside city limits) where there are small bursts of speeding and then its back to normal prescribed road speed.The times I have seen myself speeding more than usual.

• Pressure to meet timelines and if I am running late. Its more of a mental thing rather than making any significant difference as someone pointed above. Using google maps for inter city commutes would be a good parameter to measure this. Not worth the amount of fatigue and risk when you compare the time gained. Mostly its just a mental gratification. Most of the times I end up realising this and remembering that this is one of the first things my dad taught me about driving and I lower the speed

• Lesser traffic on the route.

• Good straight tarmac with good visibility

• Vehicle that drives more stable and inspires confidence

I think it works the other way around for me.
Its always about how car makes you feel at the back of your head but there are times when while driving I realised that the particular car was rented and might not be maintained as good as I would do mine or the fact that it doesn't have ABS and that triggered me to slow down and maintain a lower speed. Its been never been like - Hey I have more airbags and technology so lets increase the speed by X !

[Sanidhya mukund]

What I think is that if we notice safer cars being driven more rashly, it is usually not because of the safety kit. In Delhi, I have seen quite a lot of luxury SUVs and sedans that are driven by people who think that just because their car is bigger and more expensive, they can drive the way they want.

[audioholic]

I belong to the minority here, I have to admit. A safe car for me is one which also gives good control at higher speeds be it the suspension or more majorly the brakes. Hence, a car with a superb braking setup and braking aids like ABS and ESP would give me confidence to stretch its legs when possible rather than a car with poor braking or bad dynamics. That is because I would have got used to shorter stopping distances, ability to do quick steering maneuvers in case something goes wrong. In that way, I would not have this confidence in a car with poor dynamics and brakes, irrespective of what other features it has. In general, the much expensive cars have a good overall package and hence, it makes the situation easier. But for the mass market cars in India, I have to admit that I push cars whose brakes and handling I trust and drive the rest of the cars like a grany.

[octane_100]

I once used to! I have pushed our old Ikon 1.6 and the first gen Elantra Diesel to silly speeds. BUT, today I am a much calmer and safe driver regardless of the kind of car I am driving! So, voted for No.

[PearlJam]

Originally Posted by BoneCollector

Attachment 1926826

This table is wrong, by the way.

At 80 Km/h, 25 Kms will take 18m 45s
At 136 Km/h, 25 Kms will take 11m 01s

So time saved is 7m 44s, not 4m 57s! Much more significant that what is portrayed in the table.