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.

Comments

How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

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!

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[viperidaenz]

Don't forget roads with variable speed limits and electronic speed signs. They should invest in up-to-the-minute over-the-air GPS map updates!

There's also temporary limits imposed by road works.

If the conditions are so bad you can't read road signs, you shouldn't be driving.

GPS is not the answer.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

Most speeders know they are being dooshbags and they dont give a flying turd about the safety of others. Every speeder I see also speeds in construction zones.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

Kids in the back seat of the car in front of you will hold up a sign that says 10 MPH. Get ready for the fun.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[ShanghaiBill]

I think Ford should invest in getting everyone a moving map GPS

That will happen soon. The big cost of GPS navigation is not the receiver, but the display. But displays will be in all new cars starting in 2018, because backup cameras will be mandatory. So sticking in a GPS is a minimal cost. For many current cars, the backup camera and GPS are part of the same package. You get both or you get neither.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd like a citation on "don't give a flying turd about the safety of others" statement. I've looked for stats on accidents where speeding was the primary factor. All you see is where speed was a contributing factor. Well, that's just a BS term there. Of course speed was contributing, if no parties involved in the accident were moving, there wouldn't have been an accident. From piecing things together though, as far as I can tell from numbers from other causes vs the total number, speeding results in less than 1% of all traffic accidents. Stop and think about the number of incidents of speeding vs the accident rate. It's as close to zero as you can possibly get. Now remember, more than 20 MPH over is no longer speeding, that's reckless driving, and that one does show up in statistics as a primary cause.

You want to get on somebody about not giving a damn about the safety of others, go for distracted drivers. They're the second leading cause behind DUI accounting for around a third of total accidents.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[circletimessquare]

there's also the problem of written speed limit versus the actual speed that will get you a ticket

so here in new york the limit might be 65 but i'll drive 75 all the time, not a problem

but if i drive over 80 i can get into trouble

sometimes i'll look down and see i'm going 85, without noticing or thinking about it

so it would help if the system rate limited me at a speed i choose, or automatically adjusted as some function {speed limit}+10/15

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Kjella]

If the conditions are so bad you can't read road signs, you shouldn't be driving.

Under the right conditions snow will stick to the signs looking like these signs even though it's otherwise clear. It doesn't happen often, but when it does I think the self-driving car is pretty much screwed. Humans seem to get by on a combination of routine and heuristics.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

A bigger expense is the license for the map data. The companies that own the data still think they can gouge the automotive market, even though the mobile prices have been driven down to the floor by the likes of Waze and Google Maps.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[steveg]

My Ford has a speed limit database set up as part of the Nav data for the GPS. However, it is apparently set with a maximum permissible speed limit of 74 mph. That means that it is artificially low for most of the Interstate highways in the west. Most western states have a limit of 75 on the open road -- some have stretches of 80.

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

>legal limit is 75
>whines that you fall just short of hitting it

Do you know what a goddamn LIMIT is, fool? You are not supposed to ever reach it, much fucking less go past it!

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[swamp_ig]

so it would help if the system rate limited me at a speed i choose, or automatically adjusted as some function {speed limit}+10/15

Presumably the car still has cruise control for this function.

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[DigiShaman]

Just lock in your speed with cruse control within the legal threshold. That's what I do on the interstate when it's clear. You get there safe and can not stress out about blowing past posted speed limit. Besides, let someone be the jackrabbit.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

The actual construction zones, where there are workers and construction is occurring, or the very common "construction zones" that extend beyond the work for ten miles in both directions and won't actually see a worker for months?

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[beelsebob]

Causing an accident is far from the only negative outcome of speeding.

It also massively increases the severity of accidents (remember, a 40mph crash has 4 times more energy involved than a 30mph crash).

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

if the conditions are that bad, knowing what the speed limit signs say is the least of your worries, and you should be going a tiny fraction of it anyway due to the conditions.

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think soon my older car will be worth a lot of money to anyone who wants to be grandfathered in!!!

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

Mandatory? No way. Those speeding tickets are a revenue source after all..

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

If the conditions are so bad you can't read road signs, you shouldn't be driving.

Or at least not trying to drive at the maximum speed allowed for the road. You would not want to be doing 70mph on a motorway when there's 6 inches of snow on the road. It's a limit, not a target. The speed you should drive at should be suitable for the combination of the current state of the road, car and driver.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[hcs_$reboot]

Problem also when passing another car - especially when the other car accelerates a bit at that moment. Sometimes you just need to be able to gain a few mph quickly and with no condition.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[CohibaVancouver]

The companies that own the data still think they can gouge the automotive market, even though the mobile prices have been driven down to the floor by the likes of Waze and Google Maps.

Not really. We just licensed Google Maps for an application. Literally cost millions of dollars. Google doesn't give that stuff away for free.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Dutch Gun]

pranksters plant signs that mess with their vehicles

Pranksters planting signs? Hmm... how many times have I actually seen this in my entire lifetime? Oh yeah... zero. Let's see... how easy would it be to simply put a logical limiter so it doesn't ever read 170mpg instead of 70mph? Trivial.

This technology is simply an incremental step to a completely autonomous car, in case you didn't figure that out. You're going to see more and more incremental steps like this as we move along the path first to partially autonomous and finally fully autonomous vehicles over the next decade or two.

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[jd2112]

Correction: Car manufacturers and/or dealers still try to gouge their customers by charging more for a 1 year update subscription than a decent standalone GPS unit that includes lifetime updates.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[DavidRawling]

Meanwhile here in AU, it's quite common to see dual-sided speed signs. The "front" has the normal road speed (which might be 110km/h - around 70mph). The "back" has a roadworks speed limit of 40km/h (25mph). Watch for shenanigans as the Ford sees the wrong sign on the wrong side of the road (not uncommon either) and suddenly decides the road is 1/3 of the normal speed.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

Haha.

Scenario A:
Car A: Sign says 60. Assuming km/h
Car B: Sign says 60. Assuming mph

Scenario B:
Car A: Approaching an electronic sign. Slow down before measurement. Speed up after passing
Car B: Sign says 5. Set speed to 5 km/h

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[linuxrocks123]

http://www.openstreetmap.org/

Getting better every day. Used in several popular offline GPSes like Navmii already. Only a matter of time before it either takes over or at least drastically depresses prices.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

Better yet, "2,147,483,648 MPH"

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[paul.hatchman]

Meanwhile here in AU, this technology is already available and works perfectly works fine as is. I have it in my own car. Both Mercedes and Audi offer speed sign recognition that feeds in to the adaptive cruise control. Mercedes have been offering it for over 5 years now. If it ever did recognise the wrong sign, you can easily override it, either via the pressing the brake, the accelerator or manually adjusting the limit from a control on the steering wheel.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[RightwingNutjob]

It would also help if it used GPS, INS, and/or visual odometry for the speed instead of tachometers on the wheels. More exact, verifiable, and not subject to the "we'll turn it up the gain on the speed display a little to be conservative" methodology reportedly used by all car companies to avoid liability ("I wasn't speeding, the speedometer said I was doing XX").

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't get it. Alcohol? One half mv squared divided by one half mv squared where v(top) is 40 and v (bottom) is 30 yields 1.78. That's not four times... Unless there's relativity somewhere

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[RightwingNutjob]

DBL_MAX+1.0

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

Speeding rarely causes accidents. Period. The reason being that speed limits are set artificially low across the country for political and revenue raising purposes. You have to work at it to exceed the maximum engineered speed of most roads.

Sure there are exceptions, but quit the hate on garden variety drivers who know these laws are stupid.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[armanox]

And how would you know what reason someone has for what they are doing? There are legitimate reasons to exceed posted speed limits you know. Not that most people are doing it for those reasons, but they do exist.

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[armanox]

Yes, we know what a limit it. Most of us studied Calculus.

lim f($speedOfCar).
x-> $speedLimit

is just a point on the graph

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[circletimessquare]

exactly

"when it's clear"

this is not the case on the roads where/ when i drive 9-% of the time

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Mashiki]

Strange, because on my GMC Terrain I can download the map updates for free. That car is almost 4 years old now, strange that it *was* the companies that made the stand-alone GPS units that didn't have lifetime updates for a very long time, I've still got my garmin from 6-7 odd years ago, where they wanted to charge $190/year for map updates.

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[ToasterMonkey]

exactly

"when it's clear"

this is not the case on the roads where/ when i drive 9-% of the time

Why would anyone need to mind the speed limit in any situation not flowing smooth enough for cruise control??

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[kelemvor4]

Don't forget roads with variable speed limits and electronic speed signs. They should invest in up-to-the-minute over-the-air GPS map updates!

There's also temporary limits imposed by road works.

If the conditions are so bad you can't read road signs, you shouldn't be driving.

GPS is not the answer.

Or they could use the existing gps augmentation systems. SiriusXM and FM radio both provide traffic updates. It would probably be simple to add information for variable speed zones.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[NeutronCowboy]

That's not even the worst offender. CA has lots of freeways that sit right next to frontage roads and on the same level as them. The only thing that separates the two is a bit of chain link fence and about 10 feet of grass. Guess what those frontage roads have? Yep, speed signs. Guess what a car I test drove picked up on as the speed limit for the freeway? Yep, the speed on the frontage road.

This is a terribly thought out idea. I'd rather trust a GPS map that has the speedlimits assigned to it.

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[circletimessquare]

when everyone is going well above the speed limit

80% are hovering around 75 mph in a 65 mph zone

except for a few outliers going 60 mph and 90 mph

so you get bunching, then break out, then bunching, then break out, etc.

cruise control is impossible, and you're always occasionally going 85 mph without noticing

obviously the best solution is to change the fucking speed limit

or give us driverless cars, now. please!

i hate driving, driving sucks. i'm not talking about cinematic back roads, which represent 2% of driving experiences people enjoy... and you can turn automatic driving off then. i'm talking about the drudgery highway crap most of us deal with daily

of all new technological development, most i don't mind missing in my youth

but driverless cars? that, i am extremely jealous of the younger generations

to just nap and wind up at your destination? what a dream

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[sublayer]

I think Ford should invest in getting everyone a moving map GPS

... displays will be in all new cars starting in 2018, because backup cameras will be mandatory. So sticking in a GPS is a minimal cost. For many current cars, the backup camera and GPS are part of the same package. ....

That's all very well, but I don't usually have a problem navigating when I'm reversing - I want the GPS to work when I going forwards!

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[ToasterMonkey]

Problem also when passing another car - especially when the other car accelerates a bit at that moment. Sometimes you just need to be able to gain a few mph quickly and with no condition.

"The driver can override the speed limit by pressing "firmly" on the accelerator."
That's what you already have to do to make an automatic downshift. Have you driven one lately that didn't do this?

If there's multiple lanes, I have NO problem leaving the cruise control on, sliding over, and letting them fiddle with their speed for a minute.
I wouldn't use this tech in the left lane though, unless it had configurable +10ish offset at highway speeds at least. And if anyone really must go variable 15+ over the posted limit, either put the siren on or add passing someone on the right to that list.

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[DigiShaman]

so you get bunching, then break out, then bunching, then break out, etc.

Bugs the shit out of me. That, and the "pacers" that refuse to break formation with the car beside them when only two lanes are available in a single direction. I've found the best way to deal with this interesting. Just back off a ways until they slow down some, then accelerate hard and pass in front of them! Use safe judgement of course. So while you can't reason with someone else's subconscious, you sure can "hack" it to your will.

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[circletimessquare]

yeah that enrages me

to not be aware of the 20 cars piled up behind you closely and unaware of that peripheral sense there is another car right alongside you... for 5-10 minutes. even if there are no other cars or you don't give a fuck, this positioning increases the danger to both of you for various reasons

people do it on sidewalks too

and it goes against basic human psychology. like being in a restroom with 20 empty urinals and a guy walks in and uses the one right next to you

people without this simple perceptual awareness aggravate the hell out of me

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[hcs_$reboot]

"The driver can override the speed limit by pressing "firmly" on the accelerator."

ok, but what if the driver, like me, didn't read the doc?

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[byornski]

Interestingly, I had the police in the UK pull along side me and do this on a 3 lane motorway for about 5 minutes late at night(1am). I slowed down thinking it was just another asshole in a SUV and eventually they pulled off. They actually sat in my blind spot most of that time just a few yards behind...

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

Speeding rarely causes accidents. Period.

Correct. It's the inability to stop... often caused by going just a bit too fast (e.g. going 45mph on a city street instead of the posted 25mph).

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[circletimessquare]

they were running your license plate. your car matched a current description of interest to them

you should have rolled down your window and thrown stuff at their windshield. establish dominance

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not the only way the car's speed is limited, dumb ass. The driver still sets the speed 99% of the time. You ever looked down and noticed you were going 10kph over the limit? Yeah. This is for the 1% of the time you do that accidentally.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Zakabog]

Did you even read the remark under that line?

"The driver can override the speed limit by pressing "firmly" on the accelerator."

That's what you already have to do to make an automatic downshift. Have you driven one lately that didn't do this?

The person driving the car will already be pressing firmly on the accelerator to pass, it's just normal behavior that is learned quickly through driving on a highway.

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, we know what a limit it. Most of us studied Calculus.

    lim f($speedOfCar).

x-> $speedLimit

  is just a point on the graph

Indeed. Like he said, most of us studied calculus. However, Rossdee, there are multiple uses of the word limit, not all of them are YOUR specific one.

That said, the value of a function that is CONTINUOUS at a point IS EQUAL TO the limit of that function as it approaches that point.

So in fact, you can "reach" it. You can also go past it. For example. suppose f(x)=x. This is the familiar linear graph in a Cartesian coordinate plane, in which y=x, and is a diagonal line from lower left to upper right, when the scales are identical, passing through the origin, with a slope of 1. The limit as x approaches 0 of f of x, is 0. The limit is the value the function takes on at that point... fool. If you take x away from 0, f(x) either increases or decreases beyond the limit, depending on which direction you choose to go, so... yes, you can in fact "fucking go past it!" (sic).

The only cases where you have a goddamn LIMIT, as you put it, that you can't ever reach, is when the function is for whatever reason DISCONTINUOUS at the given point.

If you're going to try to show off how smart you are, best to BE smart in the first place...

Oh... my... god... wait. Were you trying to be FUNNY, Rossdee? Because if you were... Jesus H., M.F. Christ, you failed super hard, dude!

Also, you misspelled "only".

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Chrisq]

I don't get it. Alcohol? One half mv squared divided by one half mv squared where v(top) is 40 and v (bottom) is 30 yields 1.78. That's not four times... Unless there's relativity somewhere

You are right, to get 4 times the energy you need to double the speed - i.e. 60 mph has 4 times the energy as 30 mph.

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed, thank you

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[jd2112]

My Garmin from 3-4 years ago costs $120 and came with lifetime updates.
About the time I got it my boss got a new car and he told me that the Dodge dealer quoted him $150/yr for map updates.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget roads with variable speed limits and electronic speed signs.

Don't forget that traffic cops can override posted speed limits temporarily. They can tell you to go slower due to some accident up the road - or tell you to go faster today to clear up a traffic jam.

Automatic enforcing is silly. Those who want some hand-holding can get a gps map unit (or road sign reader) that beeps when they're over the limit. But no automatic shit. Sudden meddling when overtaking is dangerous - I need to pass that car before meeting oncoming traffic. And I know the acceleration characteristics of my car. Having something abruptly change - even if I merely need to step harder - will cost some tenths of a second in reaction time.

And you never know when someone is speeding to save a life, racing to the hospital.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

And openstreetmap is available for free - and with better data in some places.

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Drethon]

For the most part you can stop from 45 MPH in under a second and 25 MPH in a quarter of a second. The average human reaction for breaking is 1.5 seconds and I assume this is under fairly ideal circumstances. So I think all this means paying attention makes a lot more difference than speed (assuming you aren't doing 70 on a city street).

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

I dont know where you live but residential roads here are 35mph, side roads are 45mph, highways range from 60mph to 80mph depending on where you are.

Ill also note that on any of the highways around here, if you are doing the speed limit you had better be in the far right hand lane. Even then you will get people honking at you for going slow. In most instances the people in the right lane are doing SL+5 (Speed Limit + 5mph) Middle lane tends to run SL+10, and the far left lane runs SL+15 or more.

The best part is, if you are doing the speed limit in the middle or far left lane you will get pulled over and issued a ticket for "Impeding the flow of traffic." That ticket costs more than getting one for doing 20mph over the speed limit. The whole thing is a racket.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

I beg to differ, I have seen lots of small towns with the construction zones on the highway. Every Saturday and Sunday there is a single guy in an orange vest, with a broom on the side of the road, just sweeping the pavement. 1/4 mile beyond him is a cop just waiting.

They see workers, when the cops need to up there ticket quotas.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[fisted]

(remember, a 40mph crash has 4 times more energy involved than a 30mph crash).

Eh, what?

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[endus]

"Speeding" in terms of, "exceeding the posted speed limit" does not cause accidents. Driving at a speed which is out of line with the flow of traffic causes accidents.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Cro Magnon]

I've seen writing on a speed sign that made the 35 look like an 85. That could get messy if an autonomous car couldn't tell it was fake.

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[tompaulco]

>legal limit is 75 >whines that you fall just short of hitting it

Do you know what a goddamn LIMIT is, fool? You are not supposed to ever reach it, much fucking less go past it!

You are speaking from a mathematical perspective. You simply can't go past a limit in math. In real life, you can go past arbitrary assigned numbers easily and usually safely. If the speed limit were really a hard and fast number then the people who travel 20 mph under the minimum speed are far more a danger than the people going 5 mph over it, and the people going to be slow should be singled out more frequently for tickets.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[PrimaryConsult]

Part of this problem is unrealistically slow speed limits. In the NYC area all highways have a maximum speed limit of 50, including the interstates. So you have the "local" speeders and the out of towners who are used to the faster speeds all travelling happily at speed, and then some douche is going the speed limit in lane 3 of a 4 lane road, causing people to split around him like Moses parting the sea and re-enter that lane. Countless unnecessary merges.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[cayenne8]

The only time I bother to look at what the posted speed limits are...are when he radar detector goes off.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

Kids in the back seat of the car in front of you will hold up a sign that says 10 MPH. Get ready for the fun.

I really like the way that you think!

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

DBL_MAX+1.0

Too meta

#define DBL_MAX (9.999999999999999e999

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

Easy to think of examples where speeding is the root cause of an accident - corners, joining or leaving roads which have traffic moving a different speeds, junctions, probably more.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[viperidaenz]

If the system was designed to break the law by driving faster than the posted speed, they would get in trouble with the authorties

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

Kids, schmids - I'll tie one to the back of my car.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Jack Griffin]

It also massively increases the severity of accidents (remember, a 40mph crash has 4 times more energy involved than a 30mph crash).

Yeah we've all heard the bullshit line "every km/h over is a killer". The problem with that logic is that if 50 is safer than 60, then 40 is also safer than 50, and therefore 30 is then safer than 20, and so on until 0 is the only "safe" speed there is.
At some point there is risk, and the risk of a modern vehicle at 100km/h is still a lot less than an old clunker doing 60km/h when the current speed limits were decided.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[visavillem]

Signs covered with snow (or other stuff) are fairly common in winter where i live. But our Traffic law says, that if the sign is unreadable, you can ignore it. If it's a speed limit sign, you just go with the universal speed limit (50 km/h in towns and 90 elsewere). So it should not be a problem for the automatic sign reading system.

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Marxist Hacker 42]

For which the camera can also help, as proven by several other car companies with adaptive cruise control.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[hucker75]

What we need is to remove all speed limits and allow drivers to choose their own speed. Wimps like you can drive safely, and people with more guts can go really fast and have fun.

Re:How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[hucker75]

The good thing about GPS is it tells you where the cameras are, not the limits. I don't want to stick to a limit with no cameras in it, what would be the point in that? I used to get nicked for speeding once a year, but since I got the GPS almost a decade ago, no tickets at all.

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think he was assuming a head on collision, which means twice as much energy.

Re: How many minutes until this is mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

Somebody mod this bullshit physics/math down. It is literally burning my eyes to read this with a +3 informative rating.

Hell No

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me be the first to say, Hell no! No more Nanny State/Corporations

Re:Hell No

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah! Leave me my god-given right to speed on public roads!

Good points, bad points

[Dynamoo]

I've driven a car with a manual speed limiter for 10+ years now. I don't understand why all cars don't have one. Entering a 30mph/50kmh zone? Set that as the maximum speed on the limiter and you can drive around normally without having to keep checking your speed. Less time checking your speed equals more time looking where you are going. This is only a good thing.

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.

Re:Good points, bad points

[Em Adespoton]

Yeah; I'd love a speed limiter similar to cruise control where I can set the speed myself from the wheel. A notification when the car *thinks* the limit has changed would also be useful.

Using this method, if traffic routinely flows at 10km/h over the limit, you could set your limit to that value; if it's bad weather, you could set your limit to 5km/h under the posted limit, with the notifier flagging when it thinks you might want to change that.

I don't like the idea of using signs and navsat to adjust the limit; if that could be toggled to notify only, I'd be a HUGE supporter of this tech.

Otherwise, If the tech becomes popular, I can foresee miscreants making fake "5km/h" signs and the police making mobile "0km/h" signs to abuse the system. Seems like this dovetails really well with a government-controlled killswitch too.

Re:Good points, bad points

[rmdingler]

Otherwise, If the tech becomes popular, I can foresee miscreants making fake "5km/h" signs and the police making mobile "0km/h" signs to abuse the system. Seems like this dovetails really well with a government-controlled killswitch too.

Killswitch. Right, right.

There are too many municipalities suffering from the fallout of a fatal traffic incident caused by the ambiguous pursuit of a suspected criminal for that not to be of interest.

Let your vehicle be controlled just a little, and the next thing you know, someone in gov't is testing boundaries.

Re:Good points, bad points

[Registered Coward v2]

While I appreciate your point of view I also think that having drivers maintain some sembelance of situational awareness is worthwhile. I can fairly accurately guage my speed and inly occasionally need to look at the speedometer to validate my assessment. However, as drivers turn over more functions to automation they become less aware of what is happening around them as the come to rely on the automation to take care of things. As a result when things go wrong they may not realize it in time to take effective corrective action. In essence, automation can lull them into a sense that all is well when in reality it is not. Automation should assist, not replace, human actions.

Re:Good points, bad points

[mattack2]

I agree with you in general, but I think it's fairly easy to leadfoot it *unintentionally* and go fast, especially on big open freeways.

Actually, it seems easier in my electric car (smart electric, one of the wimpiest ones), because I'd at least notice the higher revving of the engine in a gas car, even in a high gear.

Re:Good points, bad points

[Anonymous Coward]

I've driven a car with a manual speed limiter for 10+ years now. I don't understand why all cars don't have one.

Because we're not all retards.

Re:Good points, bad points

[Anonymous Coward]

To be perfectly fair, the government has the ultimate kill switch for any car -- it's called a missile.

Re:Good points, bad points

[mjwx]

I dont have a speed limiter and have no trouble keeping my speed in check. As such, I've never understood this excuse.

Less time checking your speed equals more time looking where you are going.

How long does it take you people to check your speedo, for me it's a fraction of a second. This is for every car I've ever been in.

Also, if you spend all your time with your eyes glued to the road in front of you, you're driving horribly wrong. You should be focusing on multiple things, mirrors, instruments, blindspots. If you're not checking your mirrors every 10-15 seconds you're dangerous. Same if you change lanes or turn without checking your blind spots. As for your instruments, well your car may not overheat every day, but when it does you want to know about it long before it reaches the red and you need a new head gasket.

I check my speedo every 10-15 seconds, same with my mirrors. It hardly changes unless I move my right foot. Realistically if you need more than half a second to read a speedometer or cant keep a consistent speed for 10-15 seconds, you need to hand in your license and admit this driving thing is beyond your capabilities.

Re:Good points, bad points

[cyn1c77]

I've driven a car with a manual speed limiter for 10+ years now. I don't understand why all cars don't have one. Entering a 30mph/50kmh zone? Set that as the maximum speed on the limiter and you can drive around normally without having to keep checking your speed. Less time checking your speed equals more time looking where you are going. This is only a good thing.

I completely disagree. If there is roadway traffic, you don't need to check your speedometer as the safest and smoothest thing to do is to simply travel with the traffic. If you drive much faster than the bulk traffic flow, you risk causing an accident. If you drive much slower than the traffic, you risk getting rear-ended or clipped as irritated drivers people pass you. You also substantially disrupt traffic flow and actually slow down everyone's commute.

If there is no roadway traffic, it really shouldn't be much of a burden to check your speedometer every 5 seconds, preferably right after you scan your mirrors.

Devices like this actually promote driver inattention and complacency. People get bored and their minds wander. Or they think that it allows them to spend more time on the phone. All this new feature is going to do is result in some idiot driving at the speed limit, in the passing lane, exactly matching the speed of the car right next to them and perfectly blocking all traffic, while dicking with their cell phone while 2000 irritated drivers piling up behind them.

Re: Good points, bad points

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't be bothered to log in (not the same poster as the one you're responding to), but half a second every ten seconds would mean that you're not looking at the road 5% of the time. Reducing that seems, to me, to be a positive effect.

Re:Good points, bad points

[bloodhawk]

I would add a few bad points. generally you should not be watching your speed anyway, if you have trouble estimating and maintaining your speed then you probably lack driving experience, you should be staying at a safe consistent speed as the rest of the traffic, significantly slower or faster regardless of the actual limit is dangerous. I also absolutely hate the idea of not having speed when it is required, shit does happen where you need to be able to react quickly and any system that may limit my ability to do that with artificial limits is something I am not keen on.

Re:Good points, bad points

[hackertourist]

In my country, the police issue ca. 7 million speeding tickets each year. With around 7 million cars registered, every car owner gets one speeding ticket/year on average. To get this many tickets, speed is checked automatically and rigidly, with a margin of only 3% to allow for measurement errors.
This means situational awareness is not enough to avoid speeding tickets. If you rely on situational awareness alone, you end up with a margin of 10% (more on motorways), which is just too much.
Last year I bought my first car with cruise control. One of the big surprises was how much the cognitive load dropped from not having to constantly micromanage my speed and look out for speed cameras. My situational awareness improved (less time spent glancing at the speedometer).

Re:Good points, bad points

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, you are. You just don't know you are. Dunning and Kruger did a study of people like you.

I guess that's REALLY why there's this horror at speed limiting cars with the BS "What if there's an emergency?" whine.

You claim he needs it because he's a retard, you don't because you're not a retard. Therefore if you're MADE to have a car with it, you think this means you're being told you're a retard, and that angers you.

Solution: Stop thinking only retards have speed limiters.

Re:Good points, bad points

[rioki]

I drove a BMW with a speed limit detector. If I am correct, it did not feed that back into the cruise control, but seeing the current speed limit on the side of your current speed in the heads up display, hovering above your hood, was sufficient to not speed by accident. The system worked quite flawlessly, even in medium snow. It is a mix from nav data and forward sign detection. The only mistake I notices was when merging back onto the Autobahn, that was under construction, it showed unlimited on the acceleration lane, until it saw the first sign (at the end of the lane).

Re:Good points, bad points

[GuB-42]

I would add a few bad points. generally you should not be watching your speed anyway, if you have trouble estimating and maintaining your speed then you probably lack driving experience, you should be staying at a safe consistent speed as the rest of the traffic, significantly slower or faster regardless of the actual limit is dangerous.

Getting a sense of speed is not that easy. Tree-lined smaller roads for example feel faster than the highway for example, and you are not surrounded by other, careful drivers all the time. Add this to the recommendation to drive at the speed limit and the prevalence of accurate speed traps and watching the speedometer or using a limiter becomes a necessity, at least for the safety of your wallet.

Re:Good points, bad points

[rioki]

THAT is what cruise control is for. This is the exact situation that is was designed for, a open freeway with little to no traffic. In stations like these put the cruise control and stop worrying.

Re:Good points, bad points

[michelcolman]

I absolutely love my limiter. Not to limit myself to speed restrictions (which I don't really... errr... respect), but as a safer alternative to cruise control. Just keep your foot on the pedal and the car will keep the set speed just like when it's on cruise control. However, when there's traffic ahead, all you have to do is lift your foot to decelerate. Then, when the road is clear again, push the pedal back down and the car smoothly accelerates back to cruising speed at whatever rate you choose. If you do need to go faster, there's always the override switch under the gas pedal if you push it in hard all the way.

On classic cruise control, you're either constantly toggling the speed up and down with the lever, or switching it off and then back on again. The limiter is much more natural, no need to touch any switches or levers. As long as the road is clear, you just keep your foot resting on the accelerator which is not fatiguing since you don't have to modulate it. I can drive hundreds of km without having to touch any levers or switches, just lifting my foot every now and then.

More importantly I have found that, when using classic cruise control, you often tend to leave it on even though there are subtle reasons for slowing down. The psychological threshold for actually turning the system off or using the brakes is too high, so you often tend to keep going at the set speed rather than slowing down a little when other cars are doing something funny. On the limiter, I often find I have already instinctively lifted my foot without even realising it.

Cruise control is really the wrong way around. The car keeps a minimum speed, allowing you to go faster but not slower unless you turn it off?! I much prefer the other way around, a car that slows down if you let go of everything and won't go faster unless you override it. In Belgium, we even have signs telling people to turn off cruise control, for example when approaching road works, for precisely that reason.

Yet another advantage of the limiter is when traffic ahead of you slows down and then very gradually accelerates again to higher speeds than you intended to drive. With cruise control, you usually turn it off for traffic and then sort of blindly go with the flow on a mental autopilot. This way you may end up speeding more than you intended. The limiter will just let the car ahead pull away from you as soon as you reach your normal cruising speed, since you never had to turn off the limiter.

By the way, speed limiters, speed limit databases and speed sign recognition is hardly a new thing, many brands already have it. It may be new for Ford, but not for other brands. Some even allow you to set a certain margin above the limit, allowing you to go faster but not too much.

Re:Good points, bad points

[buck-yar]

True, every instant looking at the speedometer is time not looking at the road. Speed limits should be eliminated. If someone can't determine a safe speed to drive at, they shouldn't be driving.

When I see a cop has someone pulled over on a 2 lane road, cars coming into my lane to pass the hazard (which is illegal) is more dangerous than whatever speed the driver was pulled over for. Heck IMO bicycles on a public road is far more dangerous than speeding. I don't know how many times I felt like a car was playing chicken with me, coming at me headon in my lane to pass a bicycle. Yet riding a bicycle on the road is legal.

Re:Good points, bad points

[buck-yar]

How far does a car travel in a fraction of a second? Quite far depending on speed.

You sound like a dangerous driver, with wandering attention. How many accidents have you been in?

Re:Good points, bad points

[houghi]

It heavily depends on how familiar you are with the area. When I drive in a new country like e.g. Spain where every 300 meters there can be a new speed limit, i almost spend more time looking if I do not speed compared to paying attention on the road.

And speed goed from 90 to 40 to 70 to 30 to 80 to 60 to 90 to ... (That is KMH)

Also in different countreis there might be different rues for speed in cities and the beginning and not always indicated by a speed limit sign (or the end of it)

In Belgium the speed can differ a LOT as well on the same road and not always clearly indicated.

So having something that does this actively if I so do desirewould be great.

Re:Good points, bad points

[Drethon]

So we need to arm police cars with guided missile launchers? Would cut down on police pursuits...

Re:Good points, bad points

[f3rret]

So we need to arm police cars with guided missile launchers? Would cut down on police pursuits...

Yeah, a Javelin missile, or hell, even an AT-4 would stop a high speed chase pretty quickly.
I mean, you might kill a few civvies now and then, but hey, collateral damage yo,

Re:Good points, bad points

[f3rret]

I dont have a speed limiter and have no trouble keeping my speed in check. As such, I've never understood this excuse.

Always thought it was more of a comfort thing, to have the limiter in I mean. Like, you set your limiter to whatever you want, then just slam your foot to the floor and newer go faster than whatever speed you set the limiter to.
I (sometimes) prefer this over cruise control, because you can always lift if you need to go slower, you can do it with cruise control, I know, but doing it with your foot just feels more responsive.

Of course, this does not touch on the fact that at least here (Europe) cars over 3500KG tend to be limited to 90 km/h, so many cars over that limit (or close to it) will have limiters too.

Re:Good points, bad points

[Anonymous Coward]

North America rarely, if ever, has "zones". The closest you'd find are suburb areas, where speed limits tend to be the same. The thing is, most people only need to drive in a suburb for 2 or 3 minutes to get to a city street. The speed differences can be vast. For example, where I am, the residential speed is 50 km/h, with a 40 km/h "school" stretch a minute later. 2 minutes after that, the speed is 60 km/h. 1 minute after that you're on the highway, 90 km/h. Or you could have driven another minute where the road ups to 70 km/h, and one more minute and it's at 80 km/h.

So what do you set the maximum speed to? 90 km/h seems the obvious answer, but that doesn't help you at all in the residential areas. Or you could fiddle with it while driving, but chances are that's illegal (or quickly going to be) because much of North America has very heavy handed distracted driving rules (which nobody follows, but many get tickets for, welcome to here!)

Reading signs is useless too, because residential streets here have no signs at all (50 km/h default on unmarked roads). The 60 km/h stretch has a sign halfway down it, and the 90 km/h stretch has signs every 4 or 5 km. None of those roads have signs anywhere near the intersections/on-ramps, either, and that's a common case.

Roads here have speed limits that are set far lower than what one can safely drive during good conditions, but rather are set based on what level of damage occurs at those speeds and if it is likely to kill someone based on the use-case of the road. During this winter only on a couple of days did I notice anyone driving significantly lower than those limits. Having been on European roads, I completely agree, your speed limits are set at the edge of what can be driven by a reasonable driver during good weather. Which likely explains why Europeans figure Americans are shit drivers, not just because they don't drive stick, but also because Americans are very much used to driving 5-10 mph over the limit in good weather and that's tolerated by the local police because they know the speed limit on the road was set by committee instead of science.

Re:Good points, bad points

[Em Adespoton]

Nobody said anything about explosive payload... just put a small EMP device in the head -- enough to take out the car and a few other devices nearby.

I think taxpayers would balk at footing the bill -- but it would be more effective than DHS giving out armored troop carriers and RPGs.

Re:Good points, bad points

[Reziac]

There are roads in California where the speed limit is different on opposite sides of the street, I shit you not. So on the same street, westbound the speed limit might be 40mph while eastbound it's 25mph. When I asked the highway department about this, I was told it's due to the street being on the boundary of different 'zones'.

Re:Good points, bad points

[Reziac]

Or someone will figure they can tromp the pedal ALL the time because the car will take care of it... then when they get to a higher speed zone, the car will speed up inappropriately and run someone else off the road, or slide off the road because 45mph was okay on ice but 65mph is not. Or it will slow when doing so is dangerous (frex, when that truck behind you can't slow down that fast), but the sign said to. Situational awareness is not just the speed limit. It's a continuous series of judgment calls based on the whole damn road and everyone on it.

Re:Good points, bad points

[Cederic]

I bought a new car in December and found out I was doing 10-15mph faster almost everywhere without a lot of conscious checking and attention.

Didn't feel any faster, but it was.

Acclimatised now, but there was definitely a period in which my honed instincts were horribly wrong.

Re:Good points, bad points

[Anonymous Coward]

judging speeds on tree lined roads vs highways is NOT hard, it is just experience. limiters are not necessary, but having speed warnings which many cars already have built in anyway can help if you are too inexperienced to maintain consistent speeds.

Re:Good points, bad points

[ebvwfbw]

It'd be ok if they would raise the speed limits to what they should be. In the states it's intentionally to slow. Allows them to write tickets.

For those that want to do the speed limit, get the hell out of the left lane! Let me pass right by you.

Yes, I speed. A lot. 55 MPH speed limit on the way to work and I'm not happy unless I'm at least at 70. That's what the road was built for when it was built in the 1960s.

Re:Good points, bad points

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet riding a bicycle on the road is legal.

Only if there is no bike path.

But the signs..

[OFnow]

Once in a while a sign gets overpainted a little by someone: 35 changed to 85. What does the vehicle do then?

Re:But the signs..

[viperidaenz]

Makes sure you don't drive faster than 85. It doesn't add more fuel to the engine to make you go faster.

Re:But the signs..

[Obfuscant]

And it is likely that such a sign is on a highway where the speed was 55 but drops for a mile or less for a speed trap. What good is making sure that the car doesn't go faster than 85 when it is already 20 over the real speed limit?

Re:But the signs..

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck, your car without the speed limiter doesn't do shit about it either. May as well stop fucking driving!
 
Jesus fuck, do you asshats ever stop going out of your way to make up fantastic scenarios that any with an IQ over room temperature can understand why it's so fucking stupid?
 
Seriously people, it gets old.

Re:But the signs..

[ShanghaiBill]

What good is making sure that the car doesn't go faster than 85 when it is already 20 over the real speed limit?

GP's point is that this system sets a maximum speed, not a minimum, not an average. So it is not going to go 85, or even 55, unless you push the accelerator and make it happen.

Re:But the signs..

[AK Marc]

The limit is essentially 85 until corrected. So it doesn't matter what the car does, the effect is legal.

Re:But the signs..

[Obfuscant]

GP's point is that this system sets a maximum speed, not a minimum, not an average. So it is not going to go 85, or even 55, unless you push the accelerator and make it happen.

And MY point is that you may likely run into such a repainted sign while you are already going 55 and your car, which you are relying on to deal with speed limit changes and is being advertised as having a feature that "Prevents You From Accidentally Speeding" (as the title says), doesn't. And it doesn't do it at exactly the time when it would most protect you from a speed trap.

The answer that it won't make you speed up to 85 is irrelevant, because it was supposed to slow you down to 35 and it failed.

Now, you could blame the victim here and say he should have been paying attention and slowed down manually, but it has long been a problem that the creation of automated systems also creates a reliance on those systems. Studies of people who get anti-lock brakes who now rely on the brakes to keep them out of trouble, and uncounted stories of pilots who fly into stuff when their automated systems fail and they either didn't notice or didn't do the right thing to correct the problem.

Fake road signs...

[Anonymous Coward]

How much havok will a 10 mph sign cause on the highway?

Re:Fake road signs...

[viperidaenz]

Will make a bunch of people push the off button, or push their foot down on the accelerator to override the system?

Re:Fake road signs...

[BlueKitties]

How much havoc will a bunch of nails in the road cause? People have plenty of ways to do bad things with relative ease.

Re:Fake road signs...

[plover]

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.

Re:Fake road signs...

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Fake road signs...

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Fake road signs...

[BradleyUffner]

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).

what I need

[l0n3s0m3phr34k]

is a system I can set the minimum / maximum speed too...put the minimum at 70 and max around 85...

Cruise Control 2.0?

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Cruise Control 2.0?

[viperidaenz]

You can already get radar cruise control to keep a set following distance behind the car in front of you. It's been around for at least a decade. It's an option on my 10 year old Honda, along with "lane keep assist" to warn if you deviate out of your lane.

Re:Cruise Control 2.0?

[plover]

The system would be really awesome if could also maintain the proper distance from the car ahead of you.

Ford has had that for years now. It's called 'Adaptive Cruise Control', and uses radar to maintain a preset minimum following distance.

I have it on my 2011 Ford, and while it's nice, it can only be set to following distance, not time. I want to set it for a two second gap, but my choices are 22, 44, or 66 yards. It's too close for high speeds, but too long for low speeds.

Re:Cruise Control 2.0?

[paul.hatchman]

That's a shame. In the Audis they let you set the distance in seconds and it will automatically increase the distance automatically during wet weather.

Re:Cruise Control 2.0?

[Anonymous Coward]

This has actually been in cars since day one.

IT'S CALLED PAY ATTENTION TO THE ROAD AND DRIVE YOUR DAMN CAR.

If people cannot be bothered to pay attention to speeds and distances or feel they need assistance then they shouldn't be driving period. You are in charge of about a ton of moving metal take some responsibility.

Cruise control?

[DogDude]

I have cruise control, thanks. Somebody who can't pay attention to the street signs shouldn't be driving.

Re:Cruise control?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've used speed limiters extensively - there is a key difference in behaviour - you stop applying gas and cruise keeps on going, whereas with limiters, you slow down and back off - the same as if you did in any other car...so whilst you can do anything 'up to' you are still firmly in control (and you can always kick-down to over-ride in an emergency, whereas cruise actually takes a little control away. I'd argue cruise is potentially more dangerous. I think the speed limiter in my old car could be set real low (like 15/20 mph) whereas cruise couldn't be used below 50mph.

Re:Cruise control?

[Sowelu]

People who can't maintain safe following distances shouldn't be driving--but we have tech that can react very quickly to the guy ahead of you braking, in case you don't. People who don't check for children children behind their rear tires before they back out of the driveway shouldn't be driving--but we have rear-view cameras. People who can't stay in their lane shouldn't be driving, but we have lane assist...etc...etc.

Re:Cruise control?

[Moof123]

Pretty soon folks will get used to tuning out while driving (more than they already dangerously do), and when there is a crash it will be reasonable to argue that the automation was to blame.

We are rapidly turning drivers into only being partially in command. Some of the recent plane crashes caused by pilots with atrophied skills being faced with bad conditions and an autopilot that throws its hands up should be cautionary tales against this semi-automation.

Re:Cruise control?

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Somebody who can't pay attention to the street signs shouldn't be driving.

No, they shouldn't, but some of them are going to anyway. Since your loved ones will therefore be just as injured/dead if they are the unlucky ones who get hit by a bad driver who was going too fast, dismissing technology that might help those bad drivers to be better, safer drivers seems uncalled for.

Re:Cruise control?

[ShanghaiBill]

Somebody who can't pay attention to the street signs shouldn't be driving.

Somebody who can't drive without crashing shouldn't be driving either, so we shouldn't have seat belts.

Re:Cruise control?

[afidel]

whereas cruise couldn't be used below 50mph.

What? I've owned or driven dozens and dozens of cars and I've never encountered a higher low end limit than 25mph for cruise control, many work at 15 or 20 mph.

Re:Cruise control?

[LordKronos]

I have cruise control, thanks. Somebody who can't pay attention to the street signs shouldn't be driving.

Anyone who thinks cruise control is the solution to prevent speeding in non-highway situations (where the speed limit is 35-45mph, and there are traffic lights every half mile) shouldn't be driving.

Re:Cruise control?

[AK Marc]

Solenoid driven systems on GM cars from the '80s wouldn't engage under about 35 mph (could be higher or lower, based on the car, it was a mechanical system, not electronic). Modern purely-electronic systems will usually engage at any speed, though some will have a minimum speed. I haven't checked my 2010+ vehicles for cruise performance. It's a non-issue.

Re:Cruise control?

[Anonymous Coward]

I for one sincerely hope the extent of my control over a vehicle in 30 years will be "Computer, set a course for ${location}. Maximum legal speed. Engage!"

Re:Cruise control?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the speed limiter in my old car could be set real low (like 15/20 mph) whereas cruise couldn't be used below 50mph.

I've very often used cruise control on 30km/h roads without any problem, in many different cars.

Re:Cruise control?

[Drethon]

15 years driving and I usually use the cruise control at any speed when I have more than a minute of going the same speed. One ticket for missing a stop sign when I wasn't using the cruise control. YMMV.

Re:Cruise control?

[dasunt]

We've already tuned out. Try riding a bicycle or motorcycle - as a non-typical vehicle on the road, more drivers won't notice you and you'll have more close calls.

We just aren't wired to be diligent over the many hours we drive in our lifetime. We get used to things. We run on our own autopilot already. And that can end up being deadly.

Re:Cruise control?

[Anonymous Coward]

We are rapidly turning drivers into only being partially in command. Some of the recent plane crashes caused by pilots with atrophied skills being faced with bad conditions and an autopilot that throws its hands up should be cautionary tales against this semi-automation.

That's okay because we're already drivers that are partially aware. Most people in rush hour traffic are on auto-pilot. That's why you have people driving at 40 mph in a 55mph zone with no cars in front of them. They're just matching the speed of the guy next to them because their too busy texting on their phone.

Re:Cruise control?

[StikyPad]

Pretty soon folks will get used to tuning out while driving

And I'm all for it. Bring on the self-driving cars already. I love driving -- on empty roads -- but the daily commute or errand run begs for automation.

Anyway, who obeys the speed limit? Faster traffic means less traffic, which benefits everyone.

Re:Cruise control?

[Anonymous Coward]

Make it So!

Re:Cruise control?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the same argument you can make against ABS, or satellite navigation, or fuel injection, or automatic transmission, or - heck, flashing turn indicators.

Re:Cruise control?

[dmatos]

Our 2007 manual Civic won't engage cruise control unless the car is in 4th or 5th. In 4th, you can't drive much slower than about 50kph/30mph, and then only if there's no uphills.

Re:Cruise control?

[Anonymous Coward]

WHAT THE FRACK IS LANE ASSIST

i mean, because i am literate i can figure it out.

BUT WHAT THE FUCK ARE PEOPLE ACTUALLY BRAIN-DEAD BEHIND THE WHEEL?

i don't have a license. the most driving ive ever done is in my native geographical area of New Zealand. i drove from Blenheim to Christchurch in a manual. fun times.

the owner of the car with his learners license was actually quite scary to drive with, i dunno how i managed to fall asleep on the back seat on the way up. that guy loved center lines.

It will probably work too well

[bjdevil66]

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.

Re:It will probably work too well

[Fire_Wraith]

What's worse is that this doesn't take into account the fact that OTHER drivers are likely not obeying the speed limits. Depending on the road, that can be anywhere from 5-10 mph over the limit.

You know what's been proven to be more dangerous, in terms of causing more accidents, than exceeding the speed limit? Relative Velocity - Too big of a difference in speed compared to the other cars on the road. Someone doing 40mph when everyone else is doing 50mph is actually a bigger danger, even if they're the ones breaking the law.

If anything though, we need to better adjust the speed limits of various roads as technology advances. It's probably a lot safer on any given road, at a given speed, than it was 50 years ago, but how many have had their speed limits increased? Furthermore, our ability to strictly govern vehicle speed has also increased. Shouldn't that get taken into account too?

So by all means, strictly limit speeding, but we'd better also take into account the speeds that are actually traveled on the appropriate roads.

Re:It will probably work too well

[jandersen]

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.

It doesn't help either, that most speedometers are deliberately set to show a speed 5 - 10% too high; if you compare your GPS speed with the meter speed, you'll probably see the difference. In my car, I can drive 55 mph before my GPS shows 50, and given that GPS relies on accurate timing to calculate the current position, it GPS speed must the the correct one.

Similar to Mobileye technology

[zerofoo]

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?

I can see this working!

[dohzer]

Because most people who speed do it "accidentally".

Re:I can see this working!

[Anonymous Coward]

Because most people who speed do it "accidentally".

I don't know about most people, but my exwife is a horrible driver and her highway speed varies by +-10 miles per hour. Yes, a 20 MPH range. She also ignore signs almost entirely and is often surprised to discover her lane is ending if she's driving some place new.

Re:I can see this working!

[arth1]

I don't know about most people, but my exwife is a horrible driver and her highway speed varies by +-10 miles per hour. Yes, a 20 MPH range.

She sounds like a good driver. Your speed should vary depending on the road, traffic, visibility and other factors. It's the idiots who drive the same exact speed based on what the speed limit is that are dangerous fools.

Re:I can see this working!

[JimMcc]

I don't know about most, but I'm sure many do. I know I do. My normal vehicle is my work E250. Occasionally I drive my wife's Subaru and frequently notice that I'm driving 10 or 15mph over the limit. While the Subaru can certainly handle corners and stop a heck of a lot quicker than the van, it doesn't make up for the one constant, human reaction time. We live in a rural area with narrow roads and a lot of twists and blind driveway entrances. Being able to easily keep one's speed reasonable would be a handy feature.

Re:I can see this working!

[Moof123]

Tell me what the real speed limit is and I will follow it. Our highway speeds are set too low for the roads and the current car quality, so most folks drive 10 over in light traffic. Most of the times cops won't ticket there (unless they feel like it, equal protection under the law my ass), and many cops will angrily blow past traffic only going 10 over.

Try driving at the speed limit on I5 and you will be more likely to cause an accident than just going with the flow. Heck even Google wants to set their self driving cars to break the speed limit to be safer.

Re:I can see this working!

[Anonymous Coward]

My guess is that you rarely drive the posted speed limit, the exception being if there is a law enforcement vehicle present? People who react so vehemently to slower drivers, in my experience, love to drive fast.

Re:I can see this working!

[AaronW]

In my current car it can be difficult to tell what your speed is unless you look at the speedometer frequently. There is no engine noise to go by. Newer models of my car read the speed limit signs and give a warning if it is exceeded by a certain amount and the adaptive cruise control already takes into account the speed limit (though it allows you to exceed it as well). The new model already reads speed limit signs. If a car is very smooth and quiet it can be quite easy to speed without realizing it.

Re:I can see this working!

[Anonymous Coward]

The ones who get tickets do. They zone out and don't watch traffic, enforcement, or anything else. If you are speeding on purpose, and get caught, you are an idiot, and should NOT be speeding. I once watched a cop tailgate a guy for 5 miles before he lit him up. I am sure that driver was lectured on not paying attention. I was going the same speed he was, until I saw the cop, and dropped back. It's not hard if you are paying attention and have a good radar locator.

Re: I can see this working!

[DigiShaman]

Depending on whom is spreading their legs, and where.

Re:I can see this working!

[Anonymous Coward]

Not your parent, but EVERYONE and I mean EVERYONE in my area speeds. Going the speed limit on the highway here will only get you rear-ended.

A big part of that is the government a) wants to write tickets on demand and have artificially low speed limits and b) Police like having probable cause to stop nearly everyone.

In end effect, I hope there aren't more sanctimonious people like you who seems to come out of a 1950s Government programs. "Gee, Mister, you speed? Golly gee willickers, won't you think of the children next time you're on your death machine smoking the demon weed?"

Re:I can see this working!

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess you've never tried to go the speed limit for an entire trip then.... ;)

Re:I can see this working!

[houghi]

I often do. Especially in areas where I do not know the road and a previous sign had a higher speed and I missed the lower speed.

This combined with a rental car where the enginesound is different.

I DO have a GPS that indicates what the speed is and I do try to pay attention to everything, but sometimes I do miss a sign in areas unknown to me and either speed or drive way to slow.

Re:I can see this working!

[Drethon]

Where I used to live was forced by the state to up the speed limits because they were far lower than the state mandated "75% of the speed all cars are traveling on this road". Then I moved to a smaller country city nearby and they have speed limits slower than where I used to live before they raised the limits. Never seen anyone pulled over on the "strictly enforced" speed limits thought.

Re:I can see this working!

[Anonymous Coward]

Because most people who speed do it "safely".

FTFY. (Sarcasm definitely intended, because there are an awful lot of accidents, considering that every driver claims to be good enough that they can safely speed. I'm sure the guy who weaves in and out of traffic so he can be two cars ahead of me at the next stop light is the next Mario Andretti.)

One other thought

[bjdevil66]

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.

Fun with your Injket

[iamacat]

1. Print out some 25mph speed signs
2. Post on a freeway
3. ???
4. LOL!

Re:Fun with your Injket

[ShanghaiBill]

1. Print out some 25mph speed signs
2. Post on a freeway
3. Cause an accident
4. Go to prison

The accidents would be caused by panicking humans. This system would be unlikely cause any accidents, since it doesn't apply the brakes. It would just reduce the fuel, and gradually reduce the speed. If you are willing to risk prison to cause accidents, it would be easier, and less risky, to just drop rocks into traffic from an overpass.

Re:Fun with your Injket

[hcs_$reboot]

1. Print out some 40kph speed signs 2. Post on a freeway 3. Drivers do the conversion 4. Americans adopt the metric system (at last)

Re:Fun with your Injket

[Anonymous Coward]

Wouldn't faze me at all. My speedometer marks both.

Re:Fun with your Injket

[Anonymous Coward]

You people are overthinking this.

1. Print one 25 MPH speed sign.
2. Affix to rear of car.

Re:Fun with your Injket

[Anonymous Coward]

What difference does the new technology make? Do you think that smart people should ignore badly made traffic signs?
You'd be facing the charges anyway.

Re:Fun with your Injket

[Anonymous Coward]

Better:

Attach the sign to the back of your car.. What could go wrong?

Re:Fun with your Injket

[just another AC]

or make them motion-sick:

Alternate 15 and 70 signs every few hundred metres

Re:Fun with your Injket

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you can have even more fun if your 25mph sign is all black in visible light, but a proper 25mph sign in near infrared.

Re:Fun with your Injket

[Anonymous Coward]

Way more fun to also print some 120MPH speed signs and alternate.

I would prefer to know where the cops are hiding

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Would it be illegal...

[Anonymous Coward]

... to have a 15 mph speed limit sign painted on the side of your van?

Re:Would it be illegal...

[Anonymous Coward]

If something is heading toward the side of my van I want it to be going much, much less than 15mph.

Re:Would it be illegal...

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it wouldn't be illegal, but you'd be liable if it causes an accident. (Which it won't with this system, because it only cuts fuel, making the car slow down very gradually.)
Of course, it might make some people quite angry and cause them to swerve in front of you before adjusting to the 15mph "speed limit".

What I'd really like

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:What I'd really like

[sexconker]

The USA had "unlimited roads" up until a few decades ago when then morons ruined it.
Now we have to cater to the fucking idiots who don't know how to drive yet are clogging up the roads.

Re:What I'd really like

[armanox]

In some states you can be ticketed for going too slow in the left lane (this started being enforced due to issues with emergency workers and roadside assitance workers not being able to respond in a timely fashion)

Your Honor, may i present evidence to the contrary

[turkeydance]

As you can see, the defendant's Speed Limiter was set much too high for this jurisdiction....

I'm going to...

[thechemic]

I'm going to mount a 25mph speed light sign on the back of my vehicle. Nobody will be able to pass me!!!

Why not link this to cruise control

[jonwil]

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.

Re:Why not link this to cruise control

[JustNiz]

>> Adaptive cruise control will drive at whatever speed it needs to drive at based on the distance to the cars in front and behind.

Not quite at least on my car (2008 Jag). Adaptive cruise has a max speed setting and a min distance setting. If the car in front suddenly speeds up my car will only speed up to the cruise speed you have already set. It helps to think of adaptive cruise more like an automatic slow up/brake than an automatic speed up/keep-up.

hill billy cops will try to get it banned

[Anonymous Coward]

those little podunk villes make half their budget on harassing speeders...

Re:hill billy cops will try to get it banned

[jsepeta]

half? i've been shaken down by small-town cops for "$100 or your license"
I guarantee that sometimes that money goes straight into the officer's pocket.

Most people speed

[Anonymous Coward]

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?

The definition of irony:

[thechemic]

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"

Re:The definition of irony:

[Bing Tsher E]

Often you can go further on a tank of gas if you drive slower.

And.....

[Anonymous Coward]

How long before "voluntarily" becomes required by law.

I'm fine with

[glenebob]

preventing accidental speeding, just as long as it leaves me alone when I'm speeding deliberately.

Re:I'm fine with

[Anonymous Coward]

Precisely. Like when the speed limit is incorrectly set too low, to farm cash from the unwary. My township recently raised all the limits about 5mph because the limits were so low the court wouldn't honor them. So I was speeding for like 15 years, and the cops never came to court, and now I am legal, because they finally fixed the limit. Just because the city paints a number on a sign and posts it next to the road DOE NOT make it the speed limit. At least not in the U.S.

Re:I'm fine with

[tlhIngan]

preventing accidental speeding, just as long as it leaves me alone when I'm speeding deliberately.

Well, it does just that since you can override it in the most obvious way possible - give it more gas. So if you need to overtake and speed to do it, you'd probably floor the accelerator which disables the system to quickly pass.

Speed traps are always interesting - I've seen a case where we spotted a speed trap, slowed down, and the guy behind us got annoyed, changed lanes and floored it right in front of the cops. Who proceeded to pull him over.

Re:I'm fine with

[dmatos]

RTFSummary. It's a voluntary activation by the driver. If you want to speed deliberately, just don't turn it on.

Opt-in, just the way we want it.

What happens when...

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:What happens when...

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you really so completely fucking dumb that you couldn't be assed to even read the summary before you drooled this made-up bullshit on your keyboard? Deliberately stepping on the gas overrides speed limiters.

Some days it seems like half the posters here would double their brainpower by adding a single neuron. How you have enough intelligence to even turn on a computer seems like a minor miracle.

Re:What happens when...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's that big button on the front, right? I still don't know how to shut it off though, I keep pressing the small off button but if keeps restarting, so I just pull the plug out of the wall.

Re:What happens when...

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, so you stomp it far enough to disable the speed limiter and end up spinning out into the school bus in the lane next to you. What smart ass response you got for that one? Drift cornering takes the right touch to keep it in an apex curve.

Re:What happens when...

[paul.hatchman]

Perhaps that any modern car already has stability control to stop the car from drifting around a corner? If you turn off the stability control, no doubt you'll turn off the limiter as well. So you can still Tokyo Drift your way of as many cliffs as you like.

I don't much care for the auto-detection part

[Anonymous Coward]

... 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.

great idea! NOT

[Xicor]

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.

Should be mandatory

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, there's is absolutely no reason to go above the speed limit.

Re:Should be mandatory

[hcs_$reboot]

you never pass another car?

Re:Should be mandatory

[armanox]

not_sure_if_serious.jpg....

Re:Should be mandatory

[hcs_$reboot]

Oh, this one.

Re:Should be mandatory

[jsepeta]

the law says you're not allowed to speed up to pass another car.

but sometimes the safest thing to do is to speed up to avoid other drivers.

Re:Should be mandatory

[hcs_$reboot]

Even when the guy you happen to pass is a dumbazz and accelerates right when you're on the other side of the road?

Will be perfect for Europe

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

A question:

[hyades1]

Does it come pre-hacked, or does each individual police force in your area have to rape it separately?

Sounds familiar....

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Very BAD idea

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Very BAD idea

[Wild_dog!]

This would be catastrophic in many cases. I think the lawsuits would pile up quickly when the number of head on collisions rises due to the car speed being capped and not able to gain enough speed to get around someone.
All it would take is a few vanloads of soccer moms getting nailed for the the public outcry to be substantial.

Re:Very BAD idea

[Anonymous Coward]

a few soccer moms getting nailed
 
Ummmm...what was your point again?

Re:Very BAD idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you actually watch the video? If you press the accelerator pedal heavily (such as when overtaking), the system switches off.

Speed of traffic?

[forevermore]

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).

Re:Speed of traffic?

[linuxrocks123]

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.

Yeah I don't think so. Otherwise, there would be no way to drive on that road at all without breaking the law. I think that would violate due process. Also common sense.

Your driving instructor isn't wrong about safety, though.

How about in emergency?

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's say you were driving and suddenly a car travelling suddenly bang on the side rail and started flipping, and you tried to speed your car up to get your car away from that 'flipping car' and during that emergency that stupid motherfucking 'safety device' started to warn you about speeding, and so on ...

This kind of 'safety device' can actually lead the driver into certain death!

Re:How about in emergency?

[Anonymous Coward]

The summary says it is overridden by "firmly" pressing down on the accelerator!
Exclamation Points!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1eleventy!!!!!!!!!!!!

Good idea

[Anonymous Coward]

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!

Cosmic speed limit

[rossdee]

"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

Re:Cosmic speed limit

[Cro Magnon]

Some of the people on the road seem to be trying to exceed that one too!

Speedtraps

[Anonymous Coward]

This tech could lead to a decline in revenues for local governments. Yeah, I'm bitter. Thank you Utah!

Re:I would prefer to know where the cops are hidin

[Anonymous Coward]

The insecure wannabe tyrants supporting the left would love that.

How about technology to block texting while moving

[Wild_dog!]

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.

I'll pass.

[Kernel Kurtz]

No pun intended.

Re:I'll pass.

[hcs_$reboot]

I'll pass.

If the system let you

Old is new again

[networkzombie]

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.

Re:Old is new again

[hcs_$reboot]

I had a 1972 Buick with an adjustable indicator needle on the speedometer. I always wondered why this feature wasn't standard in all cars

Maybe because nowadays most cars have a speed-limiter (cannot go fast than the given speed limit) and a auto-speed (keep going at the same speed unless the breaks (...) are used).

Re:Old is new again

[Malc]

Having owned or driven a few German cars, and I can tell you that speed limiters are no good if you don't live in Germany. My VW for instance was governed to 220 kph (the rating of the stock tyres) and had tyre pressure instructions inside the rim of the car door for speeds above/below 170 kph - I lived in Toronto at the time, where the speed limit on the fastest roads is 100 kph!

BTW, it seems fairly common in some cars, e.g. Audis, to have a speed warning buzzer. Maybe that's because they can go so damn fast without your realising.

Doubt it cuts fuel

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Don't Make Me Break Out the Spray Paint

[Maltheus]

It ain't that hard to turn 30 into 80.

Subtitles

[Curate]

Glad they put subtitles into this video for those of us who only understand English.

Overcomplicated

[Tablizer]

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.

"Optional" for now.

[Anonymous Coward]

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 something like this; it's not perfect.

[ErikTheRed]

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.

Safety Speed

[jonesy16]

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.

Re:Safety Speed

[Joe_Dragon]

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

[Joe_Dragon]

keep this shit off the il tollways as no one does the 55 on them. Unless you want trucks on your ass.

Thank Mulally, already available in US.as EcoBoost

[sethstorm]

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.

Reading roadside numbers

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's hope you don't drive past an ad for 1 000 000 years B C

Keep Right Except to Pass?

[Anonymous Coward]

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?

where did you learn physics?

[Chirs]

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)

Or an improper distance

[John.Banister]

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.

Uniformity might be nice, too

[John.Banister]

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.

Old tech

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

What is bad about it being mandatory?

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:What is bad about it being mandatory?

[Cederic]

The terrible statistics show that people can't be trusted to drive correctly and safely.

That's strange. The statistics suggest that deaths are in the range of 6 car occupants dying per billion miles driven in the UK. At 60mph that means you'll average 200 years driving before you die.

I'd say that's pretty fucking extraordinarily safe, and if you want to prove otherwise I can only challenge you to you living for 200 years doing any other activity.

Re:Thank Mulally, already available in US.as EcoBo

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

I've never understood that claim.

[Anonymous Coward]

If it's an emergency and you're not an emergency vehicle,then you should not, when it's dangerous, BE SPEEDING UP. GET IT?!?!

Slow down if it's an emergency. If the emergency becomes catastrophe, you'll be going slower and the energy drops by twice the fraction your speed drops, meaning you're much safer for each mile an hour slower you're going.

Speed up instead and you lose more traction, have more momentum, more energy, less control and less time to respond to the emergency.

But it's always brought out at every speed limit good idea: What if it's an emergency?

WELL SLOW THE FUCK DOWN AND YOU WON'T CAUSE THE EMERGENCY.

Re:I've never understood that claim.

[RavenLrD20k]

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.

Re:I've never understood that claim.

[Howitzer86]

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.

Re:I've never understood that claim.

[Anonymous Coward]

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...

Re:I've never understood that claim.

[RavenLrD20k]

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.

Re:I've never understood that claim.

[KozmoStevnNaut]

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.

Re:I've never understood that claim.

[KozmoStevnNaut]

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.

Re:I've never understood that claim.

[RavenLrD20k]

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).

Re:I've never understood that claim.

[KozmoStevnNaut]

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.

Not all speed limits are signposted

[POPE Mad Mitch]

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.

No, that's Environmentalists Gone Wild.

[sethstorm]

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.

Re:No, that's Environmentalists Gone Wild.

[Anonymous Coward]

The consensus from the rest of the world is that American cars are terrible. I've never driven one, but it is received wisdom that parts such as the suspension, diff, etc are years behind the rest of the world.

Having said that, I love the sound of a lazy American V8. I've got a British V8 in my car and I'd much rather it had that rumble.

Running a V8 in the UK costs a fortune ( currently £1.10/litre, which is about $6.24/US-Gallon ).

Re:No, that's Environmentalists Gone Wild.

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Basically all cars FCA sells outside of North America are Fiat designs. I can't remember the last time a saw a Chrysler in Europe, but it is a long time ago.

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.

I agree about the faked audio, but then, I don't think it is very common. Except for niche markets, most people want their cars to be as silent as possible. I don't agree about turbochargers, however. They increase power and (when used properly) efficience in a very real way. There are good reasons why the vast majority of cars have them nowadays.

The environmental laws over there are to blame.

Maybe, but it also has to do with taste, preferences and practicalities. American pickup trucks and SUVs are too large to be useful in most of the old world.

Re:No, that's Environmentalists Gone Wild.

[Ash-Fox]

The folks at Chrysler-Fiat would like to have a word with you

I want you to know, that as an European, I have never heard of them.

Soon this will become mandatory in the USA

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

get all updates

[Anonymous Coward]

worldcup updates
national awards
match previews

But how will we keep killing 40,000 people

[Anonymous Coward]

... each year with our cars if we can't speed?

Re:But how will we keep killing 40,000 people

[Anonymous Coward]

Speeding is not required (or even very effective) to cause accidents. It often makes the consequences of the accident worse, but it is rarely the main cause.

Re:Safety Speed

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Safety Speed

[PPalmgren]

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 did it.. sort of?

[Reisrdok]

Nissan has had for a while traffic sign recognition and speed limiter. I quess they don't talk to each other?

Re:Safety Speed

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't want to drive then live somewhere where you can take the damn bus.

Re:Safety Speed

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Safety Speed

[Yunzil]

Or you could just get the hell out of the way.

Re:Safety Speed

[jonesy16]

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.

Re:Safety Speed

[neminem]

> "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.

Technically, it will deliver less air...

[AcquaCow]

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

You're on a bike. Safety is not primary concern.

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:You're on a bike. Safety is not primary concern

[Anonymous Coward]

Troll-tard.

terrible

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

The municipalities will have ford kill that option

[lsatenstein]

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.

my ford is all too American

[wijnands]

Funny that. I really dislike my Ford because it's loaded with disclaimers and mandatory safety bullshit from the American market.

All well and good until...

[BobSteinVisiBone]

...some wag posts a sign somewhere: SPEED LIMIT -670,616,630 and then we're all screwed.

Poor california

[Keith111]

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.