What would happen?

[FROSTY]

Dunno how many hre realise but a lot of jap four wheel vehicles if not all are speed restricted to 180km/h give or take 10km/h.
So why doesnt the gubbinment insist the speed restricters be altered to a max of 140km/h?
Wonder what would happen

[disturbed]

it would save alot of lives for sure but restricters are easily disconected. It is a good thought though,

[Mully]

Shhhhhhhhhh!!!!

Don't give the bastards ideas.

[Finn]

The more you try to stop humans from killing themselves, the more they will figure out ways to beat the system.

[FROSTY]

it would save alot of lives for sure but restricters are easily disconected. It is a good thought though,
Not as easy as ya think. a lot of shit is hard wired into the puters nowadays.

[Mully]

Not as easy as ya think. a lot of shit is hard wired into the puters nowadays.

This is true - but $10 says a hacker will have the system reprogrammed in 5 minutes flat.

Plus, it would take time to filter down. It's not the new cars that are killing people left, right and centre. It's the old dungers. If it becomes compulsory for all NEW cars, it'd take forever to take over the whole vehicle fleet.

I'd prefer better driver training (have you seen Germany's, holy moly) and restrictions for cagers on the vehicles they can drive before they are fully licenced.

[FJRider]

The more you try to stop humans from killing themselves, the more they will figure out ways to beat the system.

Perhaps to reduce the burdon on ACC, we should let them kill themselves... ???

[FROSTY]

This is true - but $10 says a hacker will have the system reprogrammed in 5 minutes flat.

Plus, it would take time to filter down. It's not the new cars that are killing people left, right and centre. It's the old dungers. If it becomes compulsory for all NEW cars, it'd take forever to take over the whole vehicle fleet.

I'd prefer better driver training (have you seen Germany's, holy moly) and restrictions for cagers on the vehicles they can drive before they are fully licenced.
If it was introduced TODAY in 10 years time most of the kiwi fleet would have it

[Finn]

Perhaps to reduce the burdon on ACC, we should let them kill themselves... ???

ACC is a burden. Let's get rid of them.

[Ixion]

The logistics are insurmountable

NZ is not a big enough market for Japan to cater to our whims. So we would not get new vehicles with "our" choice of restriction as OEM. There's never going to be a "New Zealand specific" model .

The gubbermint COULD mandate after market restrictors, like those fitted to some truck fleets. But an aftermarket restrictor is always going to be easy to disable . The ones in the trucks aren't because the companies that fit them of their own volition are obviously not going to disable them. And although the drivers hate the they don't hate them enough to risk their jobs. Boi-Racer, anther story. He'd have it disabled in an afternoon

And even if you managed to get them fitted to all new cars, what about all the used imports? They're not going to have them.

Not to mention that a LOT of the fleet is more than 10 years old. Go look on Tardme for vehicles older than 1999 . There's a lot , aren't there?

The real risk would come if a big country , like the UK or USA (dunno if Oz would be big enough, they're not THAT big on a world scale), demanded it. A country big enough for the Japs to say "Yes BigCustomer-San, we do". Then our gubbermint could jump on the band-wagon. Even if Japan complies, you then have to deal with Europe, USA, Taiwan, Korea, Russia. How long d' y' reckon before you can get all that lot singing from the same song sheet ? Especially if one of them sees a competitive advantage to supplying vehicles which aren't restricted.

And really, how many fatalities occur at over 140kph ? Bugger all I suspect. And how many of those would not occur at 140kph ?

[stify]

a few of the new euro based fords already have limiters in the pcm that can be set by dealerships...funny as fuck when ya reset the bosses car on a friday arvo ;)

[Mully]

If it was introduced TODAY in 10 years time most of the kiwi fleet would have it

Yeah, but then the hand-wringers would be all akimbo because it's not happening now.

And then, if it's 140, why not 130? Oh people are still dying, better make it 120, or 110.

Then it becomes "have a man waving a red flag walking in front of the car".

Although that would help deal with unemployment.

And the gummint could mandate for compulsory restricters (to be checked at the WOF check) but it'd be like those people who run "track only" mufflers on their bikes and swap them over to the originals for WOFs.

The law only applies to you if you want it to.

[FROSTY]

a few of the new euro based fords already have limiters in the pcm that can be set by dealerships...funny as fuck when ya reset the bosses car on a friday arvo ;)
I think it was convo like that that reminded me

[NZsarge]

How ever would the Prime minister (read Helen Clark) get anywhere on time if there were speed restrictors on their limo's... <_<

[LBD]

Perhaps to reduce the burdon on ACC, we should let them kill themselves... ???

Bit like all the fuss with cigerette smoking....let em smoke, let em die young.... less burdan on the tax payer with pensions...

[jaymzw]

Bit like all the fuss with cigerette smoking....let em smoke, let em die young.... less burdan on the tax payer with pensions...

Yeah okay, we'll just pay for them while they are going to the doctor, then when they cant work, then when they need operations and are staying in our hospitals.

Smokings fine...

The gubbermint takes their share so who gives a fuck.

I still think a cage restrictor would work to some degree

[tigertim20]

I agree with the sentiment, but the reality is, they wont do it, because somewill will mass produce a unit for a hundred bucks or so, then repco and supercheap will be selling it everyone!!, where theres a market, someone will produce.

[tigertim20]

wow, look at my grammar and spelling eh? should say "some one will" lol at me!

[Ixion]

Y..

I still think a cage restrictor would work to some degree

It would work, but only for those folk who don't need it to work.

Mabel would not object - she would never get near 140 anyway. But Mabel at 140 isn't the demographic that needs sorting.

[LBD]

Yeah okay, we'll just pay for them while they are going to the doctor, then when they cant work, then when they need operations and are staying in our hospitals.


You know you have a good point there, never thought of it from that perspective;)

[Dave Lobster]

Yeah okay, we'll just pay for them while they are going to the doctor, then when they cant work, then when they need operations and are staying in our hospitals.

Smokings fine...


How much tax is there on each box of fags? I'm curious to know..

I'm pretty sure that smokers will have paid for their hospital (etc) treatment five times over by the time they need it. If they government didn't get the tax from cigarettes, they'd be taking it from everyone else.

And, not many smokers get old enough to claim a state pension. Saving again..

Frankly, I think smoking should be encouraged.


Back on topic though, isn't it something like 6% of crashes where speed is a factor, the speed is over the speed limit? And of those, how many are above the 100km/h limit? A handful?

The government has FAR more important things to be getting on with than legislating for such nonsense as speed restrictors in cars.

[Mully]

How much tax is there on each box of fags? I'm curious to know..

Easy enough to work out - what's the difference between the price at Duty Free shops and the local supermarket??



Back on topic though, isn't it something like 6% of crashes where speed is a factor, the speed is over the speed limit? And of those, how many are above the 100km/h limit? A handful?


Interesting point. If you add up the cause of accidents, you get over 100%. This is because someone can be drunk, no seatbelt and speeding and crash and die, and the accident stat is credited to Drink Driving AND restraints AND Speeding.

Primary causes aren't trumpeted as much. Simply because speeding, by itself, doesn't kill that many people (which makes it harder for the powers that be to impose draconian speed enforcement). It needs to be combined with bad driving/unsafe vehicle, etc.

[CookMySock]

gee that would spawn off a whole aftermarket business. Great for the economy!

Steve

[Dave Lobster]

Primary causes aren't trumpeted as much. Simply because speeding, by itself, doesn't kill that many people (which makes it harder for the powers that be to impose draconian speed enforcement). It needs to be combined with bad driving/unsafe vehicle, etc.

They're a lot more effort for someone to be fleeced for though, aren't they? Alleged speeding is far easier to catch someone and relieve them of cash for. There's money in speeding..

[Mully]

They're a lot more effort for someone to be fleeced for though, aren't they? Alleged speeding is far easier to catch someone and relieve them of cash for. There's money in speeding..

Absolutely.

As far as I know, there isn't a traffic law called "being a fucktard who needs a clip round the ear"

Like the bus "driver" this afternoon who beeped at me on the north-western because I dared to filter through 10km/h traffic.

[Virago]

Dunno how many hre realise but a lot of jap four wheel vehicles if not all are speed restricted to 180km/h give or take 10km/h.
So why doesnt the gubbinment insist the speed restricters be altered to a max of 140km/h?
Wonder what would happen

Such draconian speed restriction would also have to apply to two-wheeled vehicles. Or is that "different"?

[Dave Lobster]

Why not just restrict uninsured vehicles to 50km/h?

It'd target the people that drive like knobs.. leaving the rest of us to drive round at 181km/h to our little hearts' content.