Slashdot Mirror
Ford's New Car Tech Prevents You From Accidentally Speeding
An anonymous reader sends word of Ford's new "Intelligent Speed Limiter" technology, which they say will prevent drivers from unintentionally exceeding the speed limit. When the system is activated (voluntarily) by the driver, it asks for a current maximum speed. From then on, a camera mounted on the windshield will scan the road ahead for speed signs, and automatically adjust the maximum speed to match them. The system can also pull speed limit data from navigation systems. When the system detects the car exceeding the speed limit, it won't automatically apply the brakes — rather, it will deliver less fuel to the engine until the vehicle's speed drops below the limit. If the speed still doesn't drop, a warning noise will sound. The driver can override the speed limit by pressing "firmly" on the accelerator. The technology is being launched in Europe with the Ford S-MAX.
My GPS already does a great job at noticing I'm speeding and warning me, even in the rain with poor lighting. The interface to a fuel cutoff would not be that hard.
I think Ford should invest in getting everyone a moving map GPS rather than letting pranksters plant signs that mess with their vehicles, which will speed at night in the rain slightly more often than I would, were I to care.
So, bad tech, toward a bad goal. Go Ford!
Let me be the first to say, Hell no! No more Nanny State/Corporations
In Europe, speed limiters seem to be common in Mercedes and Smart cars, Renault, Citroen and Peugeot cars, plus some of the newer Vauxhall/Opel models and Fords. It is built into the cruise control system.
The bad points? Well, reading signs is a so-so thing when it comes to accuracy, and satellite navigation systems sometimes get the speed very badly wrong if they have incorrect data. And just because the speed limit *says* that you can drive at up to whatever-is-on-the-sign, it doesn't mean it is *safe* to do so in the road conditions you actually have.
Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com
Once in a while a sign gets overpainted a little by someone: 35 changed to 85. What does the vehicle do then?
is a system I can set the minimum / maximum speed too...put the minimum at 70 and max around 85...
Bonus if it includes speed reductions for things like poor visibility or wet/icy/snowy roads.
The system would be really awesome if could also maintain the proper distance from the car ahead of you.
I have cruise control, thanks. Somebody who can't pay attention to the street signs shouldn't be driving.
I don't respond to AC's.
Average, every day drivers will realize that speed limits in some areas are generally set slower than they are used to driving, and they'll grow tired of the warnings and turn it off.
If Ford pushes out an update to create an optional 10 over buffer zone (if selected), at which point they'll get sued by an "activist" lawyer for getting a ticket while using Ford's system. At that point, the feature will quietly disappear in the next model upgrade.
Mobileye developed road sign recognition tech a while ago. I think BMW was integrating Mobileye software into their cars. Ford is listed as an OEM partner - I wonder if this is the same tech?
Because most people who speed do it "accidentally".
This is coming from a company where the CEO bragged about knowing who was speeding in their cars or not. Having a company with a CEO like that is probably not a good idea.
Will make a bunch of people push the off button, or push their foot down on the accelerator to override the system?
1. Print out some 25mph speed signs
2. Post on a freeway
3. ???
4. LOL!
And only slow down when near them. Speed limits are merely suggestions.
Why not just shove a GPS chip up your ass so I can track your every movement, and at my whim, fine/tax you based on distance, speed, location, & time of day.
How much havoc will a bunch of nails in the road cause? People have plenty of ways to do bad things with relative ease.
"Sorrow is better than laughter, for by sadness of face the heart is made glad." [Ecclesiastes 7:3]
... to have a 15 mph speed limit sign painted on the side of your van?
What I'd really like is for the lane assist technology to automatically move you to the right if you're going too slow for the passing lane. It should also be possible to disable that; but the ability to disable it should be in some obscure place where granny can't find it. Really though, I'd prefer to see a more Autobahn-like enforcement of lane discipline, with less focus on speed enforcement. I'm not saying the USA is ready for unlimited roads; but if we started ticketing people for going 60 in the left lane on a 65, maybe we'd get somewhere. Does anybody else drive I-680 on a regular basis? I've got to get a dashcam so I can record the insanity there. It's not unusual for me to have 1/4 mi clear ahead of me in the right, and the left is full of people following at dangerous distances.
As you can see, the defendant's Speed Limiter was set much too high for this jurisdiction....
I'm going to mount a 25mph speed light sign on the back of my vehicle. Nobody will be able to pass me!!!
Let's make like a bird... and get the flock outta here.
Cruise control already controls the speed of the car. Adaptive cruise control will drive at whatever speed it needs to drive at based on the distance to the cars in front and behind. Why not extend the adaptive cruise control system so that it will drive no faster than the speed limit (as determined by whatever this system uses) unless it has to drive faster due to the speed of the car behind (i.e. the car behind is going faster than the speed limit and therefore this car has to in order to not get rear-ended).
It could then, like existing cruise control systems, be overridden by the driver if need be (via pressing on the accelerator pedal) but by default it would keep the driver at the speed limit unless it needed to go slower due to the car in front or faster due to the car behind.
those little podunk villes make half their budget on harassing speeders...
in fact, not speeding is more dangerous. You'll get people tailgating you, honking at you, harassing you, etc. Speed limits are crazy, why would I want my car to make me drive more dangerously?
Make a video about your vehicles ability to automatically SLOW IT SELF DOWN, and then post a slogan at the end of the video which reads "Ford - Go Further"
Let's make like a bird... and get the flock outta here.
How long before "voluntarily" becomes required by law.
preventing accidental speeding, just as long as it leaves me alone when I'm speeding deliberately.
You need to stomp the gas to get out of an oversteer situation or go off the side of a cliff? The speed limiter kicks in and you go over a cliff because you couldn't accelerate out of it. Ask any drift racer, they'll say fluck that crap.
... but being able to manually set a speed limit (i.e. like cruise control but = rather than ==) would be useful.
I'm surprised that this isn't already common. Well, unless it's due to pressure from The Powers That Be (in the US, local governments worrying about their revenue if no-one speeds; in the EU, national governments worrying that everyone will drive dead on the limit even when it's not safe).
In the UK, you wouldn't even need controls. Speed limits are invariably in 10 mph increements (30, 40, 50, 60, 70), so just requiring a firm(er) press on the accelerator to go over the next "notch" would eliminate most accidental speeding.
Potential downside: drivers operating on "autopilot" even more than they do already.
How much havok will a 10 mph sign cause on the highway?
None at all. Drivers aren't that stupid, and still maintain enough control over their car to react appropriately.
You, however, might be so stupid that you'd slam on your own brakes to 10 MPH just to make another idiotic point, at which point you get rear-ended by an 18-wheeler who is unlucky enough to be following you. Fortunately, there is only one you, so the gene pool will be thinned out to the point where this situation won't repeat.
John
yea, this is a great idea until you realize that driving the speed limit is as stupid as driving double the speed limit. This would be especially bad if you cant switch it off quickly when you need to make that quick lane change.
Seriously, there's is absolutely no reason to go above the speed limit.
I mean being accustom to nanny state requirements is part of the culture.
Really, you are trained to follow the speed limit. That's pretty much the #1 question in the driver's test... in both written and driven parts! Accidential? Right. At that literal point you shouldn't be driving at all.
In the end:
in Europe: will work
in US/AUS: forgettaboutit.
Does it come pre-hacked, or does each individual police force in your area have to rape it separately?
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Kurig 2.0 coffee makers will only brew if the little camera inside sees a properly printed lid. Shortly after someone realized that if they just taped a proper lid over the camera they could brew any coffee they liked once again. The solution to this troublesome piece of crap is to tape a 1.08x10^9 km/h (the only true speed limit) speed sign over the camera and move on with your life.
Sounds good until you are a in a two lane road trying to takeover a big truck and you find yourself limited by the speed limiter.
It's been a couple of decades but I recall my drivers' ed teacher making it pretty clear that speed of traffic was usually more important than any speed limit signs, going so far as to point out that you could be ticketed for unsafe driving (or impeding traffic) if you were driving the speed limit (e.g. 60mph on the freeway) but the rest of traffic was going 90. Even in that absence, pretty much everywhere in the US drives at least 3-5mph above the speed limit, even in the slow lane (that theoretical/alleged margin of error for radar guns, even though police are all using super accurate laser-based systems now).
Do you really need reason for beer? Wingman Brewers
Yes, sometimes we can't control the car's speed. In Vietnam, a non-highway has limit speed to maximum 80kmh. And I found that I usually get the speed over that limitation!. If Ford apply this idea then I think it helps much, at least for me!
"Do you know what a goddamn LIMIT is, fool? You are not supposed to ever reach it, much fucking less go past it!"
The pnly speed limit that applies to is c
This tech could lead to a decline in revenues for local governments. Yeah, I'm bitter. Thank you Utah!
The insecure wannabe tyrants supporting the left would love that.
It seems like texting is a far bigger problem with driving than simply going a few miles over the speed limit.
And sometimes to extract oneself from a dangerous situation one needs to be able to speed the car up a bit before getting back down to the speed limit.
The summary says it is overridden by "firmly" pressing down on the accelerator!
Exclamation Points!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1eleventy!!!!!!!!!!!!
No pun intended.
I had a 1972 Buick with an adjustable indicator needle on the speedometer. You set it to whatever speed and it would set off a buzzer if you reached that speed. I always wondered why this feature wasn't standard in all cars. It's pretty rare that people are going slower than intended but going faster than intended is common. Why slow the car down if a speed is exceeded? So the driver isn't "bothered" to pay attention? No! Make a damn buzzer go off so the driver is alerted that they are not paying attention. They should be "driving", after all. If you want your speed automated, turn on cruise control.
The truck behind you should be maintaining a large enough distance to react to someone slowing down, and is at fault if they rear-end someone.
Make your own luck on the road.
I would be stunned to find that this system is actually cutting the engine's fuel supply. More likely, it's simply adjusting the throttle (which is, in fact, cutting off airflow to the engine) and then the fuel system compensates accordingly. This operation would be no different than cruise control functionality. Actually restricting fuel supply to a running engine is a good way to it lean out and eventually make things go boom.
Just being a pedantic auto enthusiast.
It ain't that hard to turn 30 into 80.
Glad they put subtitles into this video for those of us who only understand English.
Why not just a warning light and/or sound for the driver? Having it directly control the speed is both extra cost and extra risk.
Table-ized A.I.
next step a discount on your insurance for having it.
and then a penalty for NOT having it.
mandatory! without being legally mandatory!
I've got a system in my current car (BMW M5) that uses a camera to read speed limit signs and puts the current speed limit on my heads-up display. It's a cool system, but it's not perfect. It frequently has problems in school zones where it sees the 25 MPH sign and displays that whether the "school zone" rules are currently in effect or not. I'd agree with most of the posters here that allege that speed limits are set by ass-covering bureaucrats with absolutely zero consideration to actual public safety. Slow zones in residential areas are fine - I don't even have to be told to drive between 20 and 25 MPH is a neighborhood with kids out and about. But the speed limits on major roads and highways are ... I would say "childish," but that would be an insult to children. We're living with generations of people who grew up playing video games, and our car's steering, breaks, suspension, steering, etc. are massively superior to what our parents had (or even what we had a decade ago). When speed limits are set too low people get bored and find other ways to distract themselves, which virtually all more dangerous than going faster.
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
Well the sentiment here definitely seems to lean toward "let me speed, limits are for dummies" camp. I, for one, would be in favor of a system that enforced posted speed limit signs. Each day that I take to the road I'm putting my life and those of my family members at risk because some other driver HAS to get to the next red light faster than me. I've also found that in many areas around me, speed limits are entirely unenforced, creating a situation where there is a posted limit of 55 mph but an average speed of about 75 mph. If you choose to be the law-abiding citizen, then you are met with inconsiderate gestures and road rage for being, what I can only assume they deem to be, a douche.
Perhaps if everyone were actually restricted to going the same maximum speed, then the maximum speed might be increased slightly due to less variability. That is what has always perplexed me about the resistance to automated cars. People seem to be in a rush to get places, presumably out of some need for transportation efficiency. But think of how much more efficient the entire system would be if it were automated? Following distances could be reduced, speeds increased, stop lights practically eliminated, the list goes on. My safety, and those that choose life, should be given priority on roads and for their sake, cars should be limited in reasonable ways to ensure compliance with posted limits and other traffic laws. Remember that driving is not a right, it's a privilege, and my safety shouldn't be subject to someone else's desire to see if their raised 4x4 is stable at 95 mph in the rain.
Stop lights are needed for pedestrians. Unless you want to build lot's of over and underpasses for them?
keep this shit off the il tollways as no one does the 55 on them. Unless you want trucks on your ass.
Given how Ford has eviscerated any American qualities from their lineup, the feature was already there - by virtue of their golfcart-like engines and European form factors. The only thing that Ford had to do was add a camera.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Let's hope you don't drive past an ad for 1 000 000 years B C
Will it also help them Keep Right Except to Pass and make them let others who need to exit the freeway 'in' to the exits?
Kinetic energy goes with the square of the speed, so a 40mph crash has not quite 2X as much energy as a 30mph crash. (16:9 ratio)
How about adaptive tailgate control, that automatically closes the distance with the car ahead of you (just enough so that no other car will squeeze in) when someone enters your blind spot from the rear.
It's hard to credit safety as the determining factor for the speed limits when the same sort of road in the same condition will have a different speed limit in one state than it does in another. Adaptive speed limits would have to adapt to the vehicle also. A heavy car from the 1950's will have a much larger stopping distance for a given speed than the new NSX.
I've seen this on very affordable cars that are 5 years old (Opel Insignia). It didn't try to make the car go slower, but just warned the driver with a sound that it saw a speed sign and that the car was exceeding that speed. Hooking up that system to the actual speed of the car is not new tech, just something extra that most people don't actually want.
You don't do anything other than CLAIM it's bad, but you don't actually prove why your claims are true.
If all cars had the same thing, then you'd be going slower in the rain.
Which is exactly what you should be doing.
"Oh, I'm a good driver, I know what I'm doing!". So say all the others involved in the 3,000 deaths in car accidents a year in the UK. The terrible statistics show that people can't be trusted to drive correctly and safely. Even if they did, it would not help much because there are too many "accident infection carriers". Drive close to someone (everyone does) and when THEY have an accident, YOU get included. As do the next three drivers behind. Remember the old joke: Never been in an accident. Seen THOUSANDS.
So what if it's made mandatory? I see no problem with giving guns a mandatory safety lock because they're dangerous and people don't know how to use them. Same here.
American designs don't sell. People don't like huge ugly cars with poor cornering and badly fitting parts made of inferior materials and they prefer their cars to actually fit in parking spots. If Ford would try to sell their American models elsewhere in the world they would go bankrupt.
Its all well and good it looking for new speed limit signs, but some speed limits are contextual in the UK e.g. National Speed limit (black line crossing a white circle), and most 30 limit areas are not signposted at all as its implied by the urban setting and street lighting.
American designs don't sell.
The folks at Chrysler-Fiat would like to have a word with you, accentuated with the growl of an engine with all cylinders present.
People don't like huge ugly cars with poor cornering and badly fitting parts made of inferior materials and they prefer their cars to actually fit in parking spots.
Well, people don't like being duped about important aspects of the car, such as the engine. Faked audio and turbochargers won't make up for an underpowered car.
If Ford would try to sell their American models elsewhere in the world they would go bankrupt.
The environmental laws over there are to blame.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Some wealthy well connected person will kill a kid crossing the street while doing 90 MPH in a 25 MPH zone. His defense for his reckless driving and negligent homicide charges will be that the technology existed to prevent him from speeding, but the NTSB didn't make it a mandatory standard safety feature in his brand new car. From his jail cell he will sue the NTSB and win. Now every new car must have this technology installed and thus costs an extra 5 grand. If you complain and state that regulating the speed should be the drivers responsibility and those regulations are too costly, the do gooders will say that cars were too cheap to begin with and you selfish are in favor of speeders killing children.
Who modded this down? I already posted so I can't mod it "underrated", but there's nothing wrong with that post to give it a -1 rating.
worldcup updates
national awards
match previews
... each year with our cars if we can't speed?
Improvements could still be made keeping pedestrians, bicycles, and motorcycles in mind.
For instance, a stoplight would be left in place, but switch to "automatic mode" when it doesn't detect any non-automated cars and no one has pressed the button for the cross walk... the light flashes green on all directions (meaning "proceed with automation only" or maybe some other signal) when a non-automated car/bicycle/motorcycle trips the sensor the light re-enters legacy mode and works as normal lights do now, does the same when a pedestrian presses the button.
Identifying non-automated vehicles is as simple as looking for something on the sensor that hasn't identified itself to the stop light via V2V (Vehicle to vehicle)or V2S (Vehicle to signal) communication.
Probably not a system worth putting in at every stoplight... at least not right away, probably wouldn't work in major cities where foot traffic is near constant, but in suburbs or even on some rural highways in place of expensive overpasses a system like that would allow for basically unimpeded traffic flow (cars may adjust speed to go through the intersection at their target time, but they wouldn't stop) with out the need for complicated and expensive interchanges.
Who modded this down? I already posted so I can't mod it "underrated", but there's nothing wrong with that post to give it a -1 rating.
Someone who read the summary (and probably even the actual story).
Dumbass, in the scenario posed the danger was coming from behind. How the fuck is slowing down gonna save your ass when a Semi is barreling down on you and has no room to stop before slamming you as it is. Or I have a real-life situation where burst speed got me out of certain death.
I'm cruising down a 2 lane (one lane each direction) road with my wife on the back of my bike at 55 (posted limit). Good visibiltiy and no blind curves for about 3 miles down the road, and I could see the road for 2 miles behind me in the mirror. There's a Bar-B-Q place on the right hand side of the road that we're coming up on about 500 feet ahead, Black Ford explorer is coming at me slowing down with the left turn blinker, I instinctively roll back off the throttle and now I'm 60 ft away at 52 MPH...then she turns left. I looked her dead in the eyes and she still turned left. I have two choices here, brake hard and slam into her, or gear down, lay on the throttle to pick up Gyro Force, and go into a swerve around the back of her. When I made the commit, I had about 20 ft of space and she was still in my lane, oblivious to the havoc she just caused. Once my swerve started, I put my thumb on the red button throwing the quad Stebel Air Horns on. I made sure that I did this after the path commit was going to be guaranteed to be behind her turn just to make sure that I didn't throw her into a panic that would have made the situation worse on me. In roughly 40 ft. passed the SUV I was back in my lane and at level cruise at 72 mph, letting off the throttle to get back down to the limit and continuing my Sunday ride to the next gas station where I could figuratively change my underwear. Another biker a ways behind us saw the scene unfold and caught up with me at that gas station and asked why I didn't stop and confront the woman as I would have loved the look on her eyes after she heard the Stebel go off right behind her. I just said "I have an aversion to 20 to Life," and left it at that.
If I had followed your logic, I'd be either dead or in the hospital right now as this only happened a week and a half ago and in no case would my bike have come out of it in ridable condition. If I had hit the brakes, I would have slammed into her and that's the end of our ride. If I slowed down to initiate the swerve, my tail would have fishtailed and either my wife would have been the first one into the SUV, or we would both be flying off the other side of the road into the ditch with the bike following us, again ending our ride. If I touched on the brakes at any time just before and during the swerve, as soon as I touched into the swerve, I'd lose all maneuvering traction to the brake traction and likely the 900 lbs of sport touring bike would have bit the pavement on the front wheel and done an end over end flip down the road behind the SUV, yet again, ending our ride.
because some other driver HAS to get to the next red light faster than me
I just want to elaborate on this a bit. A lot of times this is not the case, and is a self-fulfilling prophecy for people who drive excessively slow. When I get stuck behind the guy that does 5-under and takes 10 seconds to get up to 40mph, I will hit *every* single red light on a westward route in my part of the city, which are spaced about a mile apart, on a two-lane road where I can't pass. That's because these lights are timed for traffic at the speed limit for 10 cars at a light. If I'm not behind that guy, I hit one red light and 6 green lights. Sometimes its not that they have to go faster, its that they know the light timings better. Its a 5-7 minute difference in my commute. The person's behavior, in this case, actually causes more traffic and a higher chance of accidents than driving at the posted speed limit or 5-over. This also happens in two other places I frequently drive.
Nissan has had for a while traffic sign recognition and speed limiter. I quess they don't talk to each other?
If you don't want to drive then live somewhere where you can take the damn bus.
My safety, and those that choose life, should be given priority on roads and for their sake, cars should be limited in reasonable ways to ensure compliance with posted limits and other traffic laws. Remember that driving is not a right, it's a privilege, and my safety shouldn't be subject to someone else's desire to see if their raised 4x4 is stable at 95 mph in the rain.
You're the type that says, "Just because the speed is 55mph, doesn't mean you have to go 55 mph," right? You make some good points, but not following with traffic is what's dangerous. You can be right or dead. But sticking to 55 mph when everyone around you is going 75 mph is darn right foolish and you are the one being a road hazard. That isn't "choosing life." To think you deserve priority on the road is just dumb. You're going slower than everyone else you've chosen to forgo any priority. That's just life.
The real problem is that, in the USA anyway, roads are engineered to allow faster speeds than the speed limits. Take away the banked curves and people will have to slow down. Sure it'll be more dangerous, but rush hour is only 40 mph anyway. Truth be told, you don't need to go any faster in a city setting.
Or you could just get the hell out of the way.
The fallacy in your argument is that the other person's behavior (slower driving) causes more accidents due to his speed. I'd wager that's not the case. It likely causes more accidents due to everyone else's impatience. An example would be if everyone drove 5 mph the likelihood of a car accident fatality would plummet. Why? Because there just isn't enough energy imparted in a 5-10mph collision with a modern vehicle to cause any loss of life. So don't try and sell me that their slowness causes accidents. It only creates a dangerous situation when other people on the road can't cope.
Your argument also addresses a few things I did not. For one, stoplight timing is an issue and, as you said, it can be set to correspond to the speed limit. If so, then little is gained by speeding, and I have no argument with you there. Remember that my argument is that cars should not exceed the speed limit.
> "Well the sentiment here definitely seems to lean toward "let me speed, limits are for dummies" camp."
I don't think that's quite the sentiment. I think the predominant sentiment is more like "let me speed - speed limits are artificially low as a revenue generator". Which, 99% of the time, they sure freaking are. There are *so* many places where if you drove even remotely close to the speed limit, everyone would be justifiably honking at you because you were going way slower than you had any safety-related reason to be going.
Vast majority of places, at least around here, speed limits exist as a guideline, and the guideline is actually "it's safe to go about 5-10 mph faster than whatever is posted". Vast majority of places, if you are driving the speed limit, you *are* going stupidly slow, and *are* kind of being a dick unless you know there are cops around. So let's, instead, make speed limits *actually* reflect safe driving speeds, and at *that* point I'm fine having automated systems like this and harsher penalties for ignoring it.
You don't want to just cut fuel with the same air intake... then you just run lean and ruin the motor with detonation.
The car simply closes the butterfly valve, cutting air, and thus cutting fuel as a result of less metered air in the plenum.
-- Dave
up 12 days, 22:30, 2 users, load averages: 993.20, 994.21, 994.56
*makes note to limit user processes...
I had your example scenario happen to me a couple years ago, except it was a Crown Vic. I was turning left onto a 6-lane street in my little Tercel (it was my light). The Crown Vic comes barreling through the intersection just behind me at 80 mph (speed limit is 50). His light was red. Cars to the left of me, cars to the right of me, I had no choice but to speed up until there was space for me to change lanes because he was not slowing down. I think he was riding my bumper for a while before I could get out of his way and let him barrel down another red light ahead. The brakes on that car aren't the best, so I probably shouldn't have done that, but at the time it made sense because I had plenty of space ahead of me and there were no intersections for another mile.
You're on a bike (motorcycle). Safety is clearly not your primary concern.
The rest of your post is irrelevant, so I didn't read it.
Troll-tard.
You do know that there are motorcycles with anti lock brakes, do you?
The change of speed within 60ft should be almost entirely neglegible if you're acclerating, had you been brakeing on the other hand...
You do know that there are motorcycles with anti lock brakes, do you?
An '87 Venture Royale don't have em... And 60 ft. across an intersection is all I need to get up to 50mph from a dead stop without the front wheel coming off the ground once. That's 1st gear with 2k RPM left to go before redline. 2nd gear tops off at about 70. Running 65 mph in 3rd gear at 5k rpm is considered "babying the engine." I usually cruise 55 in 4th at 3k rpm and I don't touch 5th until I'm above 60 and 4k. Redline is just under 8k. The reason for all this info is just to show that dropping into third and rolling on the accellerator at 55 is right within the Torque band of the engine to give a nice 10mph / 10ft boost to speed, which increases Gyro forces, which increases the maneuverability of the bike considerably. Oh, and she squats and settles in real nice at 95. I've yet to reach her top speed, and I'm not certain what speed I did reach as the spedo only reads up to 125, which she hit at 5500, I got her up to 7k before I had to roll off for a turn in the track.
First thought, this is terrible. Drivers who obey the speed limit to the point they brake and accelerate around it are a bane on the streets. On freeways, well there was an experiment one time where four cars drove at the speed limit side by side so no one could pass. It was not pretty.
I think the main issue with speed limit is that it's easy to encounter cars driving at the same speed side-by-side with no way to pass them. Other speeds have a reasonable distribution that avoids such deadlocks.
SInce speeding will be a thing of the past, so will the abilities of municipalities and state troopers to earn their daily salary. This will cause municipalities to ban Ford vehicles with that technical option.
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
Funny that. I really dislike my Ford because it's loaded with disclaimers and mandatory safety bullshit from the American market.
...some wag posts a sign somewhere: SPEED LIMIT -670,616,630 and then we're all screwed.
Bob Stein, http://bobste.in
All of 405 and 5 have speed limits that state 65... yet literally everyone goes 70-80. If you are going 60-65 you end up obstructing traffic rather badly. Hopefully California either updates their speed limit signs or everyone just stops buying Fords cause lol they suck anyway.
Well, good thing you're playing up your little action movie scenario after the fact, acting as if you knew exactly what you were doing, with cool and calm reactions. You even threw in a little tough guy comment afterwards. Yeah, you would totally have killed that woman, way to guy, mr. Tough Guy.
Bull. Shit.
You fucking panicked and reacted in a stupid-ass way. Don't try to act as if what you did was in any way a rational move.
If you had taken any sort of serious rider training (as is mandatory in most western countries other that the US), you would have received extensive training in evasive maneuvers. In fact, you wouldn't even have been allowed to take the second on-road part of the rider's test before demonstrating acceptable skill in evasive braking and swerving.
What you should have done was brake hard, then release and swerve hard by countersteering strongly. Accelerating into a dangerous situation like you did is approximately the second-stupidest thing ("I had to lay 'er down" is still the stupidest) you can do in an emergency situation.
I have seen riders brake so hard the rear wheel left the ground, then countersteer and swerve so hard the front wheel actually left the ground momentarily, and then come out of the maneuver in perfect form.
You're not nearly as tough as you think you are. Advanced riding classes are an absolute must, especially in the US where there is basically no mandatory rider's training at all.
Eat the rich.
Uh no, by increasing your speed, you're actually reducing your maneuverability. The faster you go, the less sharp your turns can be. That's why you can pretty easily do slow figure-8s at alternating full steering lock on most bikes at idle in 1st gear, but try to do so at even slightly higher speeds, and it just goes to shit because you have to lean excessively.
If you want to do proper evasive maneuvers, you have to bleed off as much speed as possible first, by braking as much as you can in a straight line.
If you had had any sort of actual rider training, you would know this.
Eat the rich.
Yeah... because you were totally in my seat and under my helmet at the moment I did all that that you can say for absolute certain what was going through my head and the actions I performed in the situation given, as well as the perfect criticism of what I should have done and how I'm a moron for not following it. Now who's full of bullshit. STFU.
#1 Have you ever handled a fully loaded Full Dresser bike before? Two saddle bags and Trunk loaded to near maximum safe limits? My guess is you've touched nothing bigger than a little Vespa Scooter because otherwise you'd know that if you break unnecessarily hard under those conditions, that tail end is going to whip around on you so fast and there's no amount of counter steer you can do to keep control; it's fish-tail and wipeout city. #2 if the wheels ever come off the ground, it's not even CLOSE to perfect form, unless you're doing stunt riding, and is a maneuver that can get one's Class M endorsement pulled even if done in an emergency situation. If a cop had seen that stunt as you stated, not only would the person who caused the situation that forced a near collision be getting a ticket, so would the biker for not keeping his wheels on the ground. Wheelies are illegal. Stoppies are illegal. No exceptions.
Next, you pull into question my rider level and training. Fuck you for assuming I'm a run of the mill Harley rider that passed a basic test at the DMV and got his Class M. When I first got my permit, I took the Motorcycle Safety Course offered by Honda. This included basic operational maneuvering as well as first level emergency avoidance. Hard breaking, Swerving, Emergency breaking in a curve, obstruction handling, weave control, Figure 8's in a box...etc. This included a minimum test that is substantially more encompassing than the standard DMV test of which I scored best in class and perfect score, after which they give the voucher to take to the DMV that exempts you from their test...because you've already exceeded what they expect out of the run-of-the-mill. I also take an advanced rider course every other year to both keep my skills up to date and keep my insurance premiums low. You know what both have stressed? If you're going to break, don't swerve. If you're going to swerve, *DON'T BRAKE* and make sure you put on the accelerator to make sure your wheel is pushing you through the maneuver, because the instant it lags and understeers, your tail is going to lose stability and increase the danger of the situation. I'll also tell you, on a loaded Yamaha Venture Royale...That's exactly what happens.
I've not once laid a bike down in 6 years riding to "avoid an accident" either (if you lay it down...that's an accident, isn't it?), and only laid a bike down twice ever from stopping where the pavement was slick (fresh rain on oily asphalt with a 1k lbs bike with high center of gravity, stopped in a dedicated turning lane, put my foot down and the boot slid on the oil slick to where the bike was more than 7 degrees off center, on those bikes there's no stopping the fall at that point, just gotta let it down gently; first ride on it too, so not yet used to the weight) or the front wheel got sucked into mud and no place for my boot to hold it up (friend's driveway on that one with an 800cc Suzuki Volusia Intruder).
Yes, I have ridden heavy bikes. I have also ridden medium bikes and light bikes. Thumpers, twins, 4-bangers, sports bikes, standards and cruisers, on and off road. Trust me, I know the difference.
I also know that if you brake hard, and do it correctly, the back end will not come around. That is unless you brake using the rear brake only, in which case you should not be allowed on a bike ever again until you learn proper braking technique. And of course you should only ever brake hard in a completely straight line. That's pretty basic stuff.
In ideal hard braking on a motorcycle, the rear wheel should just barely be on the ground. That means you're putting the maximum amount of braking through the front wheel. Of course, some bikes are so damn pig-heavy, long-wheelbased and underbraked that they can't do this, so adjust accordingly. The point is that you have to put as much braking force through the front wheel as possible. Again, basic physics that everyone who rides should know.
Yes, of course you shouldn't be off the gas when swerving, but you shouldn't be accelerating, either. Neutral throttle, learn it, live it.
Your overconfidence is still showing.
Eat the rich.