With all due respect, I think
your bias is showing. You also continue to ignore the statistics that support my initial point, "all things being equal, as speed limits increase, so will fatality rates. However, the IIHS has consistently exaggerated the relationship." This would seem to be important information since the basis for this thread is a misleading IIHS press release.
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
I do agree that powerful cars can be more dangerous in unskilled hands. They can also save lives, especially since the automakers usually couple more horsepower with better handling packages. In my opinion, it's the other extreme that is really dangerous, the little econoboxes that can't get out of their own way, obstruct traffic, and crumble like tin foil if they hit a hard bump. Cars like that should be restricted to local commuting only; keep them off the freeways and interstates.
My first car was a 320i. It handled like a dream . . . when it wasn't in the shop. But the notion that powerful cars
may save lives has negligible merit compared to better designed cars (collision safety equipment and handling WITHOUT increased whp).
That is a statement of opinion. It is also largely a red herring. There is little correlation between horsepower and speeding. Most modern cars can reach speeds of more than 100 mph. Cars with more horsepower can just get there faster.
More to the point, most modern cars, even economy models, can exceed highway speed limits by 10 to 20 miles per hour. This is the level of "speeding" relevant to fatality statistics. The number of people travelling in excess of 100 mph is small enough to have no statistical significance in this context.
Finally, I already said powerful cars can be safer because "automakers usually couple more horsepower
with better handling packages." While it might be wonderful for automakers to use your idea and put performance handling packages on all cars, the simple fact is that they don't. For most marques, if you want the best handling and braking, you need to buy the whole high-performance package.
My first new car was an Acura Integra GSR. It can be driven like an econobox (low emissions/good gas mileage) yet the 8000rpm redline is for more than show. The majority of pony cars from American automakers were good for nothing but going real fast in a straight line. Those vehicles are not safe.
Absolutely, I agree 100%.
Fortunately, domestic automakers are producing safer small cars . . . prodded of course by the government AND the excellent small import vehicles. You expose your bias in your statements. Anybody that knows $0.015 about autos knows there are plenty of small, highly maneuverable AND safe vehicles available.
I agree most modern economy cars are at least adequate. The most dangerous were some of the older econoboxes like the Chevy Chevette, Chrylser K Cars, and the Renault Le Car. Worthless garbage.
In typical (law abiding traffic), the people that cannot get out of the way are Ford Excursion drivers trying to find somewhere to park their barge at the mall.
Quite true, but irrelevant to the topic at hand.
No one should minimize the responsibility people have to drive their vehicles appropriately but in much the same manner that we've admonished liquor and cigarette manufacturers for glorifying dangerous behavior . . .
I agree the automakers are on a high-performance kick right now. I agree that powerful cars can be more dangerous in unskilled hands. I disagree that higher speed limits significantly increase fatalities and I offered statistics that support my beliefs. You have ignored these statistics, relying instead on your gut feeling that speeding must be really dangerous.
[. . . car links clipped . . .] Do I want to deny HEMI-power to Americans . . . of course not. Would I like to see draconian penalties for anyone that violates the posted speed limit by more than 10mph . . . absolutely! Considering I would be in line for one of those penalties it would certainly change my rate of travel. Despite a spotless driving record my behavior must be regulated b/c it's the only way to regulate the behavior of the idiots as well. As a generalization, speed thrills and kills . . . it sells due to the former and sux due to the latter. In any case, irresponsible speed must be regulated by hook (law) or crook (IIHS).
It already is, both by hook and by crook. So what's the problem?
By the way, if you really want to improve highway safety, lobby for a law preventing use of cell phones while driving. It seems almost every time I see someone driving carelessly, the driver has a cell phone pressed to his or her ear.
The other thing I would do is start enforcing the "slower traffic keep right" law. It seems like people have completely lost the concept of lane discipline. They plant their slow butts in the left lane, usually more or less alongside another slowpoke, and create a rolling road hazard that snarls traffic and endangers all the drivers behind them. Every once in a while, someone may manage to break through, usually by dangerously tailgating and/or cutting off one of the drivers involved. It's rude, it's dangerous, and it is against the law in many (most?) states.