If you said that clearly first and foremost, you wouldn't have found so many people disagreeing with you.

I for one completely agree with these two statements.

If I was a politician, everyone would need to: 1) succesfully pass exams for regular driving classes, defensive driving classes, and advanced driving techniques, theoretical and on-road exams with a minimal mark of 90% 2) Be subjected to a global on-road revision exam covering all of the driving aspects in #1. 3) When involved in an accident , responsible or not, have one's driving license suspended until they have performed and succesfully passed those on-road exams.

It would be political suicide, but the best insurance our society could contract against incompetent and irresponsible drivers. On the other hand, more speeding could be safely allowed when accompanied with enhanced infrastructure.

If I was a cop, right now I wouldn't be along a speedway with the radar in my hands, but driving along with the traffic. I swear there are so much more dangerous common sense traffic violations one cop could fill out all of his daily quota of fines without any of them being speeding. Many people blatantly pass on solid lines or omit stops, you name it, because they know the cops are mostly on the radar and not among the traffic.


That being said, I find it very difficult to do some high speeding, because the traffic density or conditions simply don't allow for it.

 

You accuse those who observe society's rules and respect the existence of others as sheep, but how is it any different if you can be so easily coerced by anybody else's agendas and propaganda??

 

I'm pretty much with you, sauceman. I actually would completely disagree with the two of PJS' paragraphs that you highlighted either, if they were his only comments without all the other crap that throw any guise of responsibility and credibility he might have out the window. Ideally, everybody should be able to drive at the level that they are capable of. For some that's slower than the posted speed limits, and for some that's faster. But that level needs to be dictated by the environment they are driving in, and that environment unfortunately includes those who drive slow.

 

Hmmm, where to start.
I'll once again ask you to refrain from putting words in my mouth - I've never once said I was "superior" nor mentioned anything about "driving whilst drunk".
Experience accounts for a lot of what I can talk about - not pseudo-science/maths in a contextless situation.
Given I have driven in the US (Boston/Mass area) some time ago, then, unless driving standards have taken a real nosedive in the time passed, I'd be fairly comfortable about driving 'there', and quicker than the posted limit if safe to do so.
Maybe I'm just a better judge of the road conditions than some of you - I don't know, but I'm not the only person in the world "superior" enough to travel quickly when judged to do so, and arrive at my destination in one piece, as well as those (all things being equal) that travelled the same roads more sedately.
So I guess those of us who travel quicker than the rest of the populous could be considered superior (your words, not mine) as we get to where we need to be on time or save time to spend it with our families when the day's jobs are done.

In reference to your facetiousness about being 95, with 68 years of experience - the laws of nature tend to come into play. By that stage, my reaction times, thought processing times, eyesight, etc, will be the deciding factor in how safely I can drive - assuming I'm even in good enough health and mobile enough to still drive. But someone as smart as you would know that! (See, I can play the immature facetiousness game too!)

So, instead of following the herd, why not lead it by pushing for better education and standards of driving and road designs - then everyone wins rather than the lowest common denominator.

Lastly, I fail to see anything in what I've said that equates to "using your mastery of the language as your high card" and "devoted scholar (whatever that means?) and anarchist". As for "suspicions and rants against all things societal and civilized" - so the various wars fought for democracy and freedom (something your country takes a very strong view on) count for nothing?
Hmmm.....how strange?
FWIW, I pride myself on proper communication and grammar, is that so wrong? It proves nothing, as I've nothing to prove by it other than due diligence, and I don't hold myself above anyone else because of it.

Interesting how a discussion on speeding involves slandering and character assassination. I'll try and see the correlation between the two, but it may take me a while, you know, being that I'm an old fart.....sorry, old superior driving fart!

This will be my last post on this thread - pity as I thought there might be some intelligent discussion rather than petty, immature bickering, with nothing constructive to say.
All the best, and drive safely no matter what the speed.

 

Agendas? Propoganda? Coerced?
It was your own country's state of Montana that proved people can drive safely without speed limits - in fact, more safely than when dictated to by government. What does that say then?
The governments are the ones with agendas - control and micro-mangement of its citizen's lives, and those who commit the most heinous of crimes and go over the speed limit get punished with a fine. More soft money for old rope, but we don't complain.
If they thought for one moment going faster than a prescribed limit, they'd enforce the law more rigourously and remove you from the road altogether as punishment, but since they don't, as you'll not be generating any income for them, they don't.
To me that shows exactly how much they view speeding as a major issue needing tackled - not at all. It's merely another revenue generation scheme spun to make it look like they are actually doing something.

As for SafeSpeed - nothing more than someone who cares enough about driving to want to see (and help others see) through all the political spin.

As for respecting others' right to existence - I think I know what you're trying to imply, but you failed to convey it accurately. Driving quicker than someone else is in no way, shape, or form, to deny then of their right to exist. You obviously believe the hype that "Speed Kills" as a blanket statement rather than in a proper context - namely that inappropriate speed at an inappropriate time is the correct phrase.
Who deems inappropriate speed? Some politicians who get driven to and from their appointments or the driver of the vehicle assessing the conditions at the time?

 

All you'll have done is target those legally driving. What about those who have no licence nor insurance?
I too believe a refresher course every 3-5 years should be mandatory, but how do you implement it. Businesses would have to make allowances for the time off, plus what happens if the employee (good at their job, etc) fails? You've deprived them of their income, and possibly the company of a good employee.
Standards need to be instilled from the get go with greater insurance discounts for advanced driving certification. Maybe the fact insurance companies don't discount much for advanced driving certification shows they don't believe it offers any tangible benefit to them. Premiums are what they are to make the profits them make, after payouts.

 

Wow...just wow...I hope some of you are never on the road around me. Tumby, stay in Canuckistan, you ignorant twit. And PJS, for your sake, I hope you don't hit a patch of oil or something similar when you're traveling 100+ mph because based on what you've written so far, I'm fairly certain it would end poorly.

 

I think the punk who forced me off the road and caused me to slam into a concrete pillar thinks just like yall.

 

Speed doesn't kill; It's the INAPPROPRIATE speed that kills??? Oh shit, that is genius. Alcohol doesn't kill; it is INAPPROPRIATE amount of alcohol that lead to alcohol poisoning. Cancer doesn't kill (after all, cancer is just abnormal proliferation of some cells in our own body); it is the failure of the other healthy cells that kills.

For someone who put down government regulation and rules, you sure sound like a politician who is playing with words and pushing some sort of personal agenda. Either that or you have gotten one too many traffic ticket and are paying too much for auto insurance. I am against the "big brother" type of government; I think GWB wire-tapping phones is 100% wrong. But there is people cannot even follow something as simple as the speed limit. And you want trust these people to decided what is the appropriate speed? I mean, after all, these are the type of people thinks "speed doesn't kill". Would you rather to have a 10-year-old throw a baseball at your face or some MLB professional pitcher to throw it?

Don't like to live in a society where laws is enforced? Try to relocate yourself to Iraq, or get yourself into prisons. Either way will make the roads at north America a little bit safer.

 

 

Didn't most accident happen within 25 miles from people's home because people are very confident and familar with those roads and condition? The condition of the equipment also play a role in how safe can the vechicle be operated under certain speed. If the OP was using oem tires while running at the speed he claimed, he has reached the upper limit of those tires to be safe.

One can argue that he has control over many things and has good judement to deal with whatever situations. However, other drivers on the same road driving around you may not have the same skills or ability to handle a sudden change of situation. Your quick reaction and ability to get yourself out of trouble can trigger undesireable reactions from other drivers.

That was an accident by my house not too long ago when one driver made a quick move and another car near him did his own quick reaction and ended up in a ditch on the side of the road. The car then caught on fire and the driver escaped. There was a female passenger trapped in the car and burnt to death while others watched because it was too dangerous to approach the burning car to save her. Of course, this will never happen to you.

Most lessons can be taught and some must be learned. Unfortunately/fortunately, some will live or die with those lessons.

 

Just a fucking looser

 

I don't understand what you want to tell me..... I am being wrong for being a safe driver and to speak out for those who against drangerous driving?? Yea sure..... this makes tons of scense to me

 

CGTSX2004.............. Now I know why you act defensive on me.... the above statement I post was for PJS.

I just wanna against his previous post that said ppl like we shall not make no comment to whoever need for speed because we don't know the road conditions.

I just the to tell that fucking looser I know that fucking road well better than him and I wanna tell those who are endangering our life to just stay off the road

I hit the wrong quote.... MY BAD MY BAD

 

I drove on the 401(main highway in Toronto), in busy traffic, in the rain, doing 120 kph(20 kph over the limit), while taking on the cell phone, and after a 12 hour shift. I think a lot of people have done it, and thousands of people are doing it everyday. I am not saying driving at 240 kph is right. If you are doing it, you are endangering other people's lives. But what I did was wrong too...if not worst. Yes but why are so many people doing it? I am sure if my car or other cars skidded on the wet pavement it would cause an accident and someone would get hurt or maybe killed. I think some of us here have used the cell phones while driving, or have driven while you were so tire to the point where you almost fell asleep, or driven over the speed limit on city streets and on the highway. I was doing all of that in busy traffic on wet pavement. I can't give a number but I think the chance of getting into an accident in that condition is pretty high. I think what IranBT have done is less acceptable in our society. If I posted what I have done, all I get would probably be something like.....Yeah, so.

 

Ok folks, I like this thread, it's a discussion I think we should have as a society, because we clearly have issues with the way traffic works in NA.

But please keep the tone down and remain respectful or I will just close the thread.

 

Whether you agree or disagree with the topic at hand, it's blatantly inappropriate for a moderator to make personal attacks.

 

If it weren't for the damn blind spots in the TSX, maybe some of you would actually be able to see a maniac coming and get out of harm's way. Instead you're stuck with worry about someone coming up and slamming into you by surprise.

 

dammit what's with all these super-long-winded posts

 

 

Hahaha

 

Backseat moderating, are you? Once you've contributed to AZ as much as CGTSX2004 has, you'll be entitled to reprimanding him. Why don't you think about it for 48 hours?

 

Who the fuck are you to make the rules, n00b.

 

lol

 

BTW, if you guys want to know what happenned to IranBT, you might like to check out another of his late classics: https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...513#post620513

 

Some of the comments in this thread are just plain inappropriate
both from a TOS perspective and just plain civility (regardless of moderator/non-moderator status) These may even encroach libel.

Furthermore, the condescending attitude from 'long-timers' towards members with a low number of posts seems to be increasing. When things get to this level here at AZine, I question participating in this forum at all. This negative tone also doesn't help grow this community -which is why I am here.
-ed

 

This being said, let's get back on topic, and stick with it or this thread gets closed.

 

Ah...in that case, do accept my apologies for the harsh words. A bit of misunderstanding on both our parts.

 

wow... another created by IranBT..
he's banned now right? sauceman just found out that IranBT = Jasuklee.

 

it's been so long, i've forgotten why this thread was even started?

 

There probably not one of us wanted to try to find the top end on this car. Fortunately this person lived to tell about it and it sounds like he doesn't plan to repeat the stunt. Working in a Level 1 trauma center I see on a daily basis what minor errors in judgement that ends up with major ramification. Not only the person involved in the accident have life threatening injuries but the impact on the victims family is even greater. I think of this when tempted to do do something risky on the road which seems to help keep my foot out of the carb. My 2 cents for what its worth.

 

IranBT is banned. We've all put in our . Lets leave that behind us.


So, what do you guys think the 06 TSX can do on the top end?

 

240?

Who cares...lock this crap and lets move on...

 

good one.

 

so driving fast is bad mmkay?

 

I missed all the fun

 

and here we go yet again

 

Though I'd never be ballsy enough to try, I have little doubt the 2006 could exceed 140 mph. It might be a struggle to hit 150 though.

 

We have a "Top Speed" thread where eveybody behaved. Lets see if we can discuss the top speed of the 06 without flames and without somebody trying to prove it on public roads.

 

Since I don't want to push the TSX up to the limit in real life, can't we solve this using equations and stuff?

From what I understand, the speed of the car is proportional to the speed of the engine, right? So theorically, wouldn't the top speed just be a proportion of the RPMs at 6th gear (5th for AT) when the engine redlines? That's assuming you have a near infinitely long stretch of downhill straight road with little or no wind resistance.

Or am I incorrect with the way that I think engine speed/car speeds work? I'm curious to find the top speed of the TSX given the most advantageous environments where time isn't a factor.

So sue me if I'm a math/physics person; at least I'm safe.