[vasudeva]

In feb 07, the US based NHTSA had posted vehicles' collision loss experience in relative terms, with 100 representing the average for all passenger vehicles. Thus, a rating of 122 reflects a collision loss experience that is 22% higher (worse) than average while a rating of 96 reflects a collision loss experience that is 4 percent lower (better) than average.

In almost all the segments, sports versions of various cars had a higher collision loss rate. In large cars, sports models had almost a 2 times higher rate than normal 4 door models.

[Elito11]

Originally Posted by bottle

thats a very well thought out post. but i think you have missed the point (or maybe i have) driving slow alone doesnt reduce accidents. rather put the focus on educating people on following rules. as in look if the road is empty and then cross rather than running across and some people even think they can beat the car and save 2 seconds and instead lose their life if the driver doesnt react fast enough.

pedestrians need to learn to cross at designated crossings and car drivers have to learn to slow down and give way at those crossings.

I think thats a very valid point.

Educating the masses and enforcing less/basic rules stringtly is more important than having a plethora of useless and antiquated laws that are badly enforced!

[vasudeva]

Here are some more facts:

The IIHS in 2005 reported that higher travel speeds on US rural interstates reportedly were responsible for about a 35 percent increase in death rates. This was primarily after the speed limits on rural interstate highways were raised to 70 or 75 mph during 1995-96. States that increased speed limits to 75 mph experienced 38% more deaths per million vehicle miles than expected. States that increased speed limits to 70 mph experienced a 35% increase. By comparison, in 1974, when the national maximum speed limit lowered the limits across the country to 55 mph, fatality rates dropped significantly.

Another frequently quoted report is from Hungary. In 1993, the decrease in speed limit from 60 to 50 kmph proved to be an efficient road safety measure. The decrease resulted in a reduction of 18.2% in accident fatalities. However, by 1995 the accident data and results of speed measurements showed that the initial effect of the 50 kmph speed limitation was fading and speed, as well as the number of fatalities increased again. In May 2001, the speed limits on all road categories was increased by 10 kmph. The safety level on roads and in particular on first category main roads, deteriorated sharply.

[carboy]

Originally Posted by vasudeva

Accepted statistics from WHO indicate 1.19 million deaths in road accidents per year. Of these, around one third or 0.4 million are because of overspeeding, or 1000 people killed everyday in the search for thrill.

Next thing which needs to be found out, is how many of these 0.4 million
were people who thought they were skilled drivers & never had an
accident in 'x' years of overspeeding.

[vasudeva]

Originally Posted by carboy

Next thing which needs to be found out, is how many of these 0.4 million
were people who thought they were skilled drivers & never had an
accident in 'x' years of overspeeding.

Perhaps exclude the people out with an intent to commit suicide that particular day and the balance is what you get.

[sbasak]

Personally I find driving faster (road condition permitting) is safer than driving slower while on a long distance journey (and when there is no other driver to share steering).

At high speed, usually concentration level is more and after several hours of continuous driving (even with small natural breaks), fatigue comes into play!

There are numerous incidents where drivers had fallen asleep on steering and caused accidents.

If you can reach destination faster, you can avoid fatigue.

[shatrughna]

Originally Posted by sbasak

Personally I find driving faster (road condition permitting) is safer than driving slower while on a long distance journey (and when there is no other driver to share steering).

At high speed, usually concentration level is more and after several hours of continuous driving (even with small natural breaks), fatigue comes into play!

There are numerous incidents where drivers had fallen asleep on steering and caused accidents.

If you can reach destination faster, you can avoid fatigue.

I agree with what is written as I have personally experienced it. However, supply of good music, candies etc( you know what I mean like redbull and etc) also helps. Continuosly going at slow speed induces sleep even on Mumbai - Goa trip while have been able to reach Jaipur and Delhi non stop with fair mix of speeds and thrills- Of Course- safety first and road permitting.

[rks]

Originally Posted by sbasak

Personally I find driving faster (road condition permitting) is safer than driving slower while on a long distance journey (and when there is no other driver to share steering).

At high speed, usually concentration level is more and after several hours of continuous driving (even with small natural breaks), fatigue comes into play!

Well, this is arguable because if you are fatigued your reactions could also slow down. But for other reasons I strongly believe what you have asserted, namely, fast driving = safe driving, especially on (good) Indian roads.

The arguments given below apply only to those who can drive fast confidently and safely. Ultimately everybody must drive in his own comfort zone.

(1) Frequent overtaking is better than being frequently overtaken.

This is one of the most important and neglected principles of safe driving (of course, only for those who can safely and confidently overtake). When you overtake, you rely on your skills to avert accidents. When you are overtaken, you rely on somebody else's skills.

(2) Fast driving implies less chance of being rear-ended

When you go fast, there is ususally nobody within striking distance behind you. Then the chances of your getting rear-ended reduce dramatically. If you go slowly, the chances of geting hit from behind or from the side are very high in our road conditions. A slight mistake on your part in crowded roads is enough to cause an accident.


(3) Fast driving means you get a clear view of the road ahead, since you will get ahead of slow-moving vehicles.

In particular, if, say, a Volvo bus is ahead of me at 80-100 kmph on the Expressway or on the narrower 4-lane Pune bypass road, I quickly and painlessly overtake the guy. I regain full view of the road and put distance between myself and the bus in double quick time.

Whereas the advocates of slow driving in this thread will undoubtedly follow the Volvo, since it can be safely overtaken only if you increase speed beyond their acceptable limit. That could be more dangerous than my style, for if the Volvo guy steps on his power brakes (which he will do frequently on narrow roads) or straddles a massive pothole, you could be left high and dry. And you will not be able to see what is ahead of him, which is very important for good anticipation.

(4) Fast driving means less chances of being blocked and stopped by highway thugs.

This may seem far-fetched, but it is the pirnciple used by VIPs. I have started to take this principle seriously when I am driving alone at night in desolate stretches of the Expressway or returning late in the night from office. By the way, do the advocates of slow driving complain about the way VIP vehicles are driven? I am willing to bet that they will hit very high speeds in order to minimize the chances of getting ambushed.

I am particularly worried about being chased by crooks, who, it seems, follow you from the city (say, from an ATM where you withdraw cash) and then try to accost you in some desolate stretches. I believe that this happened to an IT guy recently and he got killed somewhere on the outskirts of Mumbai. Fast and skilled driving will discourage such types.

I have been chased by two-wheelers on two occasions in road rage incidents, and the skills and confidence I acquired via fast driving helped me to shake them off. Had they got in front of me and forced me to stop, I could have been robbed or beaten up or worse. Of course I don't advocate trying to run when the road is not clear. Then you have to stop and face the music.

[csentil]

Obsession with high speeds is a primeval instinct. fastest runner, fastest horse, chariot, bike, car.... goes on.

Its like that urge to fly, or find out the meaning of everything... I guess its what makes the human race tick or probably hurtle towards extinction !!!

I haven't read the whole thread.. I'm just giving a different point of view....

[anupmathur]

Originally Posted by carboy

Next thing which needs to be found out, is how many of these 0.4 million were people who thought they were skilled drivers & never had an accident in 'x' years of overspeeding.

Originally Posted by vasudeva

Perhaps exclude the people out with an intent to commit suicide that particular day and the balance is what you get.

I commend your wit, Sir!

Originally Posted by Elito11

Why this obessesion? Well its NOT an obsession - its just a desire!
Why should ABS be made MANDATORY? i would rather have a CHOICE. Forcing it is as bad as not giving us the choice! Thats freedom according to me.

Speed might not be an obsession with you, but it seems freedom certainly is! Even there, regrettably, society will not always allow you to live by your definition of it.

Originally Posted by Elito11

Is it only me that feels this thread is reaching preachy levels!
Often there is so much anguish with citizens over small things and tolerance levels are so low!!
I often notice small instances of this creeping in india too.

I too have read this thread in entirety and fail to see a 'preachy' nature to it.
Assuming I have missed it, I would still accord the gentleman the courtesy to say what he is saying. There is a wealth of 'interesting' data he is presenting. The least I can do is try to understand what it could mean, why people in various countries are collecting and collating such data and whether some of it could in some way apply to us.
If I cannot derive ANY benefit whatsoever from all this 'statistics' I would still commend Mr. Vasudeva for the efforts he has made to find it and present it to us.
I consider this as basic tolerance level.

[carboy]

Originally Posted by rks

The arguments given below apply only to those who can drive fast confidently and safely. Ultimately everybody must drive in his own comfort zone.


(2) Fast driving implies less chance of being rear-ended

(3) Fast driving means you get a clear view of the road ahead, since you will get ahead of slow-moving vehicles.

(4) Fast driving means less chances of being blocked and stopped by highway thugs.

What if my comfort zone is to drive on the wrong side of the road - i.e in
opp direction to everyone else

1) Absolutely no chance of being rear ended when driving in the opp
direction.

2) Absolutely clear view of all vehicles you are likely to hit - no need
to ever look into the mirrors - any cars in the mirror are going away from
you & not towards you.

3) If the thug is on foot & on coming in the opp direction, just mow him
down. If he is in a car, by the time he turns around & follows you, you
can be gone.

4) I doubt if anyone will fall asleep while driving wrong side - you really
have to be alert to do this. Plus all those people honking at you.

[vasudeva]

No wonder that of the estimated 1.2 million people killed in road accidents every year, nearly 1.07 million are in poor, developing countries. IIHS, NHTSA, International Road federation, ECMT have stats available that show that teenagers have higher death rates in accidents (4 times higher than older drivers), and that a higher percentage (close to 40%) of teenage deaths in road accidents are due to overspeeding. Also the conclusion that higher teenage deaths are due to peer influence, having a male passenger, immaturity and inadequate experience in sudden emergency situations. We should always consider that there would hardly be a fatal accident if the driver had say more than 5 secs to react. As already posted, the higher the speed, the higher the reaction time, higher breaking distance, and vastly higher probability of fatalities.

[Venkatesh.C]

Originally Posted by carboy

What if my comfort zone is to drive on the wrong side of the road - i.e in
opp direction to everyone else

1) Absolutely no chance of being rear ended when driving in the opp
direction.

2) Absolutely clear view of all vehicles you are likely to hit - no need
to ever look into the mirrors - any cars in the mirror are going away from
you & not towards you.

3) If the thug is on foot & on coming in the opp direction, just mow him
down. If he is in a car, by the time he turns around & follows you, you
can be gone.

4) I doubt if anyone will fall asleep while driving wrong side - you really
have to be alert to do this. Plus all those people honking at you.

Boy, i was planning on responding to this. You just took wind out of me by making me
But oh boy. There is something called moving with the traffic. Thats what i can call as the right speed. In the US you could get pulled over by a cop for driving too fast thats way faster htan the traffic or too slow as in way slower than the traffic.
Generally if the whole traffic is doing 70 - 75 mph in a 55mph zone the cops dont stop you. But if you are singly doing 75 with the rest of the traffic doing 55 or 65 you get pulled over.

I guess that also makes some sense. Everyone here is just talking of two things fast or Slow. What about moving with the traffic guys? That is the safest speed.
If you see a caravan of cars, trucks doing 80kmph join them. you see them all doing 100 join them. If you are the odd guy in the traffic doing 100 where others are doing 60s due to whatever reasons. The odds are that you will hit something / someone .

[razor4077]

Very informative thread. Thank you vasudeva for digging up so much of data for our benefit.
My observation - I noticed that a lot of the stats/data were obtained from studies carried out in countries in North America and Europe. IMHO, what is applicable in one country may not be applicable in another.

Take India vs the US for example...
Anyone who has seen the road network in America would not even start to compare it with Indian roads. While the highways are in much better shape here nowadays than they used to be even 5 years ago, they still have a way to go before they reach US standards. I won't even bother talking about city/suburban/rural roads.

Second would be the population - not just of people alone, but of cars and people combined (since they share the roads). I think it's fair to say that this density is far more in India than in the States... less road surface/car+person.

Third, education levels - And by education, I don't just mean someone with a degree...I refer to knowledge about roads, traffic and laws. This is sorely lacking in our country, and this is something that even the most illiterate slob in the US is aware of.

Finally, laws and law enforcement. As some have already pointed out, some of the laws border on ridiculousness. The enforcers of law are a corrupt bunch looking to make a quick buck and complete their monthly quota of siezed licenses. In contrast, the cops in the US are respected and feared, and they take their jobs seriously. Plus, every traffic sign on US roads is fitted after a fair amount of scientific research and thought, and not just as an aribtrary figure that has no business being there.

Nicely summed up by Elito11:

Originally Posted by Elito11

Educating the masses and enforcing less/basic rules stringtly is more important than having a plethora of useless and antiquated laws that are badly enforced!

I do not condone rash driving. Driving fast, if done responsibly, is not a bad thing in itself. One needs to take into account the location, traffic & pedestrian density, time of day, weather conditions etc.

As far as the stats are concerned, I will say again - while they are helpful and give us a probable trend, they must be interpreted keeping all factors in mind.
What is that saying about stats? "Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital."

Just my 2 cents.

[aseem]

This thraed reminds me: Why the obssesion with hot chics, when marrying one would result in divorce...