Generally I think this might be a good thing, but I’m not 100% and would need to see how this works in practice.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-32049350

Hidden a little within is a feature to recognize cyclists ahead.

Whats the collective think?

It has a manual over ride – huzzah. I wonder if the manual over ride could be disabled for teenagers?

I think I would support it if the Government also reviewed speed limits to go with current technology in cars rather than 1930’s car tech.

I think I would support it if the Government also reviewed speed limits to go with current technology in cars rather than 1930’s car tech.

The most dangerous bit of the car hasn’t really been updated since it was invented. It’s still the bit between the seat and the steering wheel that poses most of the risk and danger.

I don’t think this is the answer to greater safety.

The sort of person who’ll buy this feature, is probably the sort of person who puts about 3% of their mental ability into actual driving and freed from the need to manage their own speed they’ll put in even less. The sort of person who actually takes care of how they drive won’t need it, and the sort of person who thinks they’re special and can drive faster than the limits because… they’re especially good at driving because they watch Fifth Gear or something will never buy it.

IMO for greater safety we need less driver aids, not more.

Never understood why cars couldn’t be speed limited in the same way as trucks. Not much use on anything less than a motorway but still helpful.
In theory I like the idea of road by road car speed restrictions but like other things like this it allows the driver to concentrate even less which can lead to more accidents. The other problem is it’s electronic and no car has 100% reliable electrics or hack proof to bypass the default settings.

I think I would support it if the Government also reviewed speed limits to go with current technology in cars rather than 1930’s car tech.

Problem with that is, our reaction times and ability to see round corners haven’t changed in the intervening period, and the roads are much much busier. In the 60’s we had drum brakes and no speed limit on motorways, we now have disk brakes, ABS and variable liimits that can restrict it to 30 or less when it’s busy.

“I suppose there will have to be a point in time when we accept that computer-generated accidents and even potentially fatalities are part and parcel of the greater good. We’ll never get faultless technology.”

This is the problem, who do you blame if a car with colssion avoidance crashes?

Bikes are limited. Its at 186mph mind lol

A friend who works in research-y stuff has said that studies are showing that overall stopping times are actually increasing. Modern cars protect us from the outside world so much that we switch off our brains and it takes us longer to react to an emergency situation up ahead, that delay outweighs the improvements in brakes and tyres.

Often see light vans which have stickers telling us they are limited to a particular speed.
Mate of mine bought a Transporter a year or so back which wouldn’t do over 68mph.

A simple case of altering the ECU with a laptop via the OBD port.

Can’t see any reason why any fly by wire car couldn’t be restricted, but then if it were law, I’m sure plenty folk with the right programme on their laptop, would de restrict them for a tenner.

ti_pin_man – Member

I think I would support it if the Government also reviewed speed limits to go with current technology in cars rather than 1930’s car tech.

ie, most drivers are now too busy with facebook to give the road ahead any more than the occasional, cursory glance…

i’ve added a bit, but yes, i agree.

Its an old hat way to achieve a speed limit, many of the cars I have through work tell me the speed limit on the road and also have speed limiters but there not connected.

They will be soon, it’ll be optional to begin with but eventually mandatory.

The car is becoming connected, the wizard is dead and the kids can come out again.

Car coming!!

edit: Theres also no reason enforcement couldn’t be managed remotely with car movements tracked and the car disabled if needed. (this already happens to some US lease cars if you don’t pay the rental).

who do you blame if a car with colssion avoidance crashes?

It’d be very depressing if inability to answer that question stopped us from making massive leaps forward in road safety.

Much of the discussion of driverless cars gets fixated on the question of what happens if they crash, as if crashing isn’t something that happens already. I think it’s safe to say that by the time driverless cars make it onto our roads, they’ll be much less likely to crash than the average human driver. We need to get over who is to blame when they do crash and embrace the fact that they’ll kill far fewer people.