[luvDriving]

Voted yes even though my current car does not have any of these speed alerts. If there were to be such an alert then I think that I would be prompted to glance at the speed indicator first while taking weight off the accelerator.

All of us will agree that many times on the highway we become unaware of how fast we are going. Concentrating on driving can also be a distraction from speed awareness. While such a device is needed, I also feel that it will only be the safety conscious driver who will take this into account and act accordingly.

We also see many drivers riding and driving at high speeds even on city roads, leave alone highways. For such drivers even the occasional fine may not be enough of a deterrent.

[varman742]

I dont own a car with audible speed alerts. Whenever I will have it, I think I will take a note of it and stay within limit. I just hope that the car which I will own in future does not have too much loud beep so that the sound (especially 80+ KMPH) itself will be distracting and loss of concentration!

[braindead]

If I am driving on an undivided 2 lane intercity highway and need to overtake someone, the stupid beep would be very distracting especially when I really needs to focus on the manoeuvre.

I actually don't particularly mind the 120 buzzer, but the 80 kph one feels ridiculous!
Beeps don't make you safer, they distract you.

[antz.bin]

First day on the new car yesterday and the first time I was driving with the warning beep.

As soon as I could hear the beep, I would subconsciously let go of the accelerator and steady myself on ~80kmph. So it was definitely affecting me, but then it was Day 1 and I was not completely used to the new vehicle.

Maybe we need to learn to ignore it, at least that's what Wifey tells me (that's a good thing that she is on board with ignoring it ).

[VaidhiR]

I cant believe I stumbled upon this thread so late.

I live in Germany currently and have driven through almost every major European nation. And the USA. And northern Africa. And India of course. I can say that enforcing a speed limit on the highways/freeways/autobahn is probably the right way to go ahead.

Regular studies in Germany have always resulted in the same conclusion - no correlation between speed and accidents. On the contrary, Germany is one of the safest places to drive in the world.

Article Link

Statistics PDF

And yet there is a party (the greens) that is proposing a speed limit of 130kph overall on the autobahns. I wholeheartedly support this.

My reasons are..

1. Almost everyone who drives long distances, calculate time based on an average travelling distance of 90-100kms a hour. Add about half hour break every 4 hours. So to travel 900 kms, it will take 10-11 hours. To travel 180 kms, it will take 2 hours. The speed limits are way higher than this.

2. Here in Germany, I drive a Mazda3 2.0l 120PS petrol hatchback. In the city with a moderate stop & go traffic, I get an average fuel consumption of 7l/100km (14.3kmpl). In the autobahn, at a constant 120kmph, I get about 5.5l/100km (18.2kmpl). At constant 140kmph, the fuel consumption increases to 7.5l/100km (13.3kmpl). At constant 160kmph, it increases to 8.5l/100km (11.8kmpl). For my driving style, I lose 7l of petrol every 100km for a measly 40kph difference. To me, it doesnt make sense because I (and other Europeans) plan our trips considering #1 in mind.

3. It helps the environment. ADAC is the automotive club in Germany and they undertook a study to analyse the effect on environment. And they had this to say.

ADAC Link

Original Text
Im Hinblick auf die Reduzierung der CO2-Emissionen sollte die Wirkung eines allgemeinen Tempolimits nicht überschätzt werden. Unter Zugrundelegung des Handbuchs für Emissionsfaktoren (HBEFA) ergibt sich bei einem Tempolimit von 130 km/h für die Pkw-Flotte des Jahres 2019 ein CO2-Einsparpotenzial in der Größenordnung von bis zu 2 Millionen Tonnen pro Jahr. Dies sind knapp 2 Prozent der CO2-Emissionen des Pkw-Verkehrs.

Translation
The correlation between reducing the CO2 emissions through general speed limits can not be overstated. The manual from HBEFA suggests that a speed limit of 130kph on cars in 2019 has the potential to save 2 million tonnes of CO2 per year. It amounts to approximately 2% of all car CO2 emissions.

And this is only in Germany.

1. In India, an average speed of 60-70kmph is used while travelling. To travel 350km, we calculate 6-7 hours including breaks.

2. The emphasis on awareness of safe driving is still nascent. The study on impact on environment is nonexistent. Bicyclists and livestock are everywhere. Lorry drivers drive on all possible combinations of lanes. Motorcyclists drive as if they are the only ones on the road. Autos and share autos overload and drive as they wish. Not to mention the wrong side drivers of all of the above.

Bearing in mind all of this, I agree with a speed limit and its enforcement through an acoustic warning.

[wildsdi5530]

Most cars reach 80kmph in 2nd gear and 120 mph in 3rd gear. Why the additional 2/3 gears? Also the Honda CR-V goes into 9th gear only at 129kmph, How is that to be dealt?
Anyone who drives fast does so with experience and knowing consequences, The inexperienced will not cruise at a high speed, but will rip for short durations. Consider the Volvo buses which drive at a constant 130-140kmph, these drivers are highly trained and very rarely cause accidents.
Also is this rule only for private vehicles and not for commercial vehicles? what about 2 wheelers?

[Roy.S]

Recently drove a car with the speed alert warning feature. I found it useful as it saved me the trouble of checking the speedometer to make sure I was under 80kph.
This was a Hyundai Venue and I did feel that the beep was a little louder than it needed to be. In a regular urban driving scenario I don't see any reason to drive faster than 80 and it is quite normal to do lower triple digit speeds on the highways. However there is rarely a reason to go past 120 unless you are on a closed track.

[null]

I believe yes. My friends Xylo had that warning which I used to feel that it was very helpful esp since Xylo wasn't very inspiring at higher speeds. He however used to crib about that 5 sec beeping.

Off late, esp with frequent runs on the NH, I am seeing that irrespective of whether you drive at 80-100kmph OR 120-30kmph, the travel time hardly varies by 5-10min max. Actually, I find it very comfortable mentally to drive at 80-90kmph speeds (below 100), take my foot off the accelerator when I see trucks ahead to let the racers go ahead n squeeze through & I pass behind them peacefully.

My only nagging part of the travel, other than toll lines, is the need to switch lanes very often because of trucks/jeeps/marutivans/etc in wrong lanes/speeds.

[Turbanator]

Originally Posted by VaidhiR

I can say that enforcing a speed limit on the highways/freeways/autobahn is probably the right way to go ahead.

Regular studies in Germany have always resulted in the same conclusion - no correlation between speed and accidents. On the contrary, Germany is one of the safest places to drive in the world.

Aren't your statements contradictory or am I reading something wrong?

And yet there is a party (the greens) that is proposing a speed limit of 130kph overall on the autobahns. I wholeheartedly support this.

It looks, they have lost for good

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/inter...ml#post4677350 (German Parliament votes to keep their autobahns speed limit free)

In the Indian context, there will still be accidents even more than before as the number of automobiles keeps on rising until the people get educated and start following the rules, not just for challans. I am more than sure 99 % of our driving Junta won't understand term " Yield" or Right of way.

[reddify]

At the risk of voicing an unpopolar opinion.

Many national highways today are suitable to cruise at above 120kmph in a capable car driven by an alert and experienced driver (for eg: bangalore-hyderabad). Might we also keep in mind that 120kmph is only 75mph.

A beep every 30sec or so beyond 120kmph would have made more sense. And less infuriating for a driver.

Is anyone here aware of how these buzzer systems are implemented in the cars, has anyone any idea of how to go about disabling them in theory ? Or better yet, attempted it themselves.

[surechim]

Is it not illegal to disable the speed alarm?

[Sandman689]

I feel beeping of any sort is distracting and irritating. I have a speedometer in front of me which I can glace at. I don't need any auditory reminder to reinforce what I can already see.

Here in Kolkata, we have speed limits on most major roads and anyways I'll be using the good ol speedo to coast just short of the limit. Even in highways I never go beyond 120 and always tend to keep a constant speed since it's good for fuel economy.

[AJ56]

Speeding doesn’t cause accidents, incompetent drivers do. A proficient driver can easily judge the road conditions and adjust their speed to cruise safely and efficiently, without the need for arbitrary nanny alarms. A dangerous driver will be a hazard even at speeds lower than the set alarm thresholds. Just see the German autobahn system, it has very low fatality rates despite unrestricted sections with no speed limit, mainly thanks to a great driver education and testing system that produces competent, safe drivers.

If the authorities want to reduce fatalities and accidents on our chaotic roads, they need to tackle the heart of the problem - poor infrastructure coupled with poorly educated drivers, with a joke of a driving test at the time of licensing. Changing all this takes up immense resources and effort, which it seems they are in hurry to undertake.

Another point I wish to highlight, is inadvertent driver fatigue and sensory overload, a similar concept is used to implement critical and non critical alarm systems in aircraft as well. If you have a driver cruising safely within the speed limit on an expressway and the speed alarm keeps going off, ultimately they’ll mentally start ignoring it and this can be catastrophically dangerous in actual critical failure events such as a coolant temperature or low engine oil or sudden loss of tyre pressure alarms.

[for_cars1]

Originally Posted by AJ56

Speeding doesn’t cause accidents

The above is a myth. Speeding is the major cause of accidents.

Humans have a reaction time which is typically 1/4th of a second.
At 120 KM/hr, if anything comes in the way 60 feet away from the driver, the driver will not even realize that there was something in front of the vehicle 60 feet away and will hit the object 100%.
In 1/4th of a second, the car would have travelled 60 feet and hit the object even before before the human(driver) can even react, irrespective of how good the driver is.

Now to the above 60 feet, add about 300 feet of braking distance under dry conditions. At 120 kmph, if any person/vehicle/object comes in the path 360 feet away which is quite a distance, still the chances of hitting object is very high.
Related link for reference.

The above human and vehicle limitations are the main reason why the highest speed limits are set to around 110 to 120 kmph in most countries worldwide.

[AJ56]

Originally Posted by for_cars1

The above is a myth. Speeding is the major cause of accidents.

This is simply untrue, I can point to dozens of studies that show speed has zero correlation with the majority of road accidents, if speed alone was the primary cause of accidents, the German autobahn would be the most deadly road to drive on in the world - it isn’t, it’s one of the safest in fact. Here’s the data someone quoted earlier in this thread regarding traffic injuries on different German road networks, including city roads and autobahns:

https://www.bast.de/BASt_2017/EN/Pub...ident-Data.pdf

Over speeding is a separate issue, and just like distracted driving, drowsiness and drunk driving will contribute to accidents. If you read what I said earlier, I assumed the driver to be proficient and by extension not likely to indulge in any of the above, otherwise all bets are off. A decent driver can gauge road and weather conditions and drive at a speed that’s relatively safe for said conditions.

Also, an alert driver has a much better reaction time than 25ms (1/4 sec), it’s close to 12-15ms for civilians and can be as quick as 8-10ms for race car drivers.

Originally Posted by for_cars1

At 120 KM/hr, if anything comes in the way 60 feet away from the driver, the driver will not even realize that there was something in front of the vehicle 60 feet away and will hit the object 100%.

Again, not true. One can easily swerve to avoid obstacles that suddenly appear if braking is not an option. The more important question is, why did something appear in the first place if the expressway was properly barricaded? And if one is driving on roads where there is such a risk then the driver is being negligent in failing to assess road conditions properly, either way it’s not the speed itself that’ll cause the accident, it will be either poor infrastructure or human error (often both) that’ll lead to a bad outcome, and as seen in these studies; higher speeds are not necessary for traffic accidents and fatalities to occur, even at 60-80 km/hr, a dangerous driver on poorly made roads is as much of a hazard to other motorists (if not more).