High Speed Driver's License

[DGS49]

I do drive the speed limit. Haven't had a speeding ticket in ages (5 years or so).

The greatest benefit of the higher speeds would be daytrips, inter-city. Factoring in wait times and airport bullshit, Pittsburgh to Philly or DC would be as quick in a car as it is in a plane.

 

[Pogo]

I do drive the speed limit. Haven't had a speeding ticket in ages (5 years or so).

The greatest benefit of the higher speeds would be daytrips, inter-city. Factoring in wait times and airport bullshit, Pittsburgh to Philly or DC would be as quick in a car as it is in a plane.

That's true, roughly 300 miles. That's about my distance to Nashville - when a client wants to fly me there I tell 'em, just pay me what you would have paid the airline, and I'll drive. That way my trip is more than paid for (and I pocket the difference) plus I have the flexibility on the other end. And I get there in the same amount of time anyway. Win-win.

Air travellers sometimes forget that there's a lot more to the trip than the plane ride itself. I'll always drive if it's possible.

 

[Pogo]

Many modern cars have rather extreme overdrive ratios in top gear. With enhanced aerodynamics I think that wear & tear and efficiency penalty would be tolerable.

Aerodynamics can't be "enhanced" beyond the laws of physics. There's a point of diminishing and reversing returns, once you factor in how much more fuel you're using -- even aside from the wear and tear, mileage plummets at speeds much over what turns out to be a freeway speed (or slightly less). So I set my goal in terms of not hours and minutes but in mpg. What time I get there is -- whatever time I get there.

The other benefit is that aggressive driving requires constant push not only from the engine but from the driver's psyche. You literally wear yourself out. Something like a long distance runner who jumps out to the lead but then finds he's getting exhausted and can't keep up the pace. For me long distance driving is zen meditation. It's where I do my best pondering and creative thinking. And when I get to the other end it's mildly disappointing that it's over, but I'm not worn out physically from death-gripping my steering wheel and craning my neck to see how to pass the next object simply because it's there. At some stage one has to realize that's not the point, and it costs way too much in terms of stress.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Too many idiots on the road to raise the speed limits.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Why in the world would you want to do that to your car?

I can't understand this mentality of driving as if it's the most horrible act in the world that one can't wait to end. I never drive for speed, ever. I drive for efficiency. And I hear the nimrods pushing their rides to do things like pass me going uphill, and I hear their engine screaming with the stress. Then I get to my destination after say 750 miles and I find I'm not even tired because I haven't put the same stress on death-gripping my steering wheel and putting all my efforts into slaloming around people like me.

Then they're at the mechanic wondering why their engine is so worn out after 80,000 miles -- and blaming the car.

That shit will kill you. Get off the highway, shunpike, and take time to smell the damn flowers. There's a lot more to life than trying to see how soon you can get out of the car. You'll be a lot richer for it, and you'll have something more significant to remember than the fact that this time you got there 13 minutes sooner.

Won't hurt a car in the slightest. Cops and cabbies drive like that...and 300,000+ miles on their vehicles are NORMAL. A modern car will run 90-100MPH all day without breaking a sweat. (Hell, my Magnum would switch to 4-cylinder mode even at that speed.)

 

[Pogo]

Why in the world would you want to do that to your car?

I can't understand this mentality of driving as if it's the most horrible act in the world that one can't wait to end. I never drive for speed, ever. I drive for efficiency. And I hear the nimrods pushing their rides to do things like pass me going uphill, and I hear their engine screaming with the stress. Then I get to my destination after say 750 miles and I find I'm not even tired because I haven't put the same stress on death-gripping my steering wheel and putting all my efforts into slaloming around people like me.

Then they're at the mechanic wondering why their engine is so worn out after 80,000 miles -- and blaming the car.

That shit will kill you. Get off the highway, shunpike, and take time to smell the damn flowers. There's a lot more to life than trying to see how soon you can get out of the car. You'll be a lot richer for it, and you'll have something more significant to remember than the fact that this time you got there 13 minutes sooner.

Won't hurt a car in the slightest. Cops and cabbies drive like that...and 300,000+ miles on their vehicles are NORMAL. A modern car will run 90-100MPH all day without breaking a sweat. (Hell, my Magnum would switch to 4-cylinder mode even at that speed.)

Cops and cabbies have full-time mechanics replacing and renewing everything too.
And police cars are specifically built for that shit.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Many modern cars have rather extreme overdrive ratios in top gear. With enhanced aerodynamics I think that wear & tear and efficiency penalty would be tolerable.

Aerodynamics can't be "enhanced" beyond the laws of physics. There's a point of diminishing and reversing returns, once you factor in how much more fuel you're using -- even aside from the wear and tear, mileage plummets at speeds much over what turns out to be a freeway speed (or slightly less). So I set my goal in terms of not hours and minutes but in mpg. What time I get there is -- whatever time I get there.

Incorrect. Many modern cars have double (or even TRIPLE) overdrives. They get better mileage at a higher speed than you'd expect. My wife's friend has a Z28...and high gear is worthless below 65MPH. (In high gear, 70MPH is <2000RPM.) Heck, I drove a 40,000lb highway coach...it got the same mileage (calculated to 0.1MPG) at 55 and 65MPH. It had an Allison B600 transmission, and wasn't in 6th gear until 62MPH.

The other benefit is that aggressive driving requires constant push not only from the engine but from the driver's psyche. You literally wear yourself out. Something like a long distance runner who jumps out to the lead but then finds he's getting exhausted and can't keep up the pace. For me long distance driving is zen meditation. It's where I do my best pondering and creative thinking. And when I get to the other end it's mildly disappointing that it's over, but I'm not worn out physically from death-gripping my steering wheel and craning my neck to see how to pass the next object simply because it's there. At some stage one has to realize that's not the point, and it costs way too much in terms of stress.

No, not really. 75MPH or faster on a lightly-traveled highway is not stressful at all.

 

[westwall]

As I drove the thousand-plus miles from my vacation in southern Florida to home in Pennsylvania I pondered how much gooder it would be if I could only drive my car a bit faster. I mean, think about it. My car can easily go over 100mph; the tires can easily handle it; I am a skilled and experienced driver with a spotless driving record...why can't I drive faster?

Here is what I propose:

Create a multi-state super-driver's license that authorizes daytime speeds up to 100mph on interstate highways. To get this license, one would need,

• Proof of enhanced insurance (say, $1,000,000 CSL liability),
• Minimum 25 years old; maximum 70,
• An enhanced safety inspection for your car,
• pass a written and on-road driver's test,
• minimum two years clean driving record.

If any of those goes away (any moving violation, traffic accident, new car, etc), the license is either revoked or temporarily suspended pending a new inspection, or whatever. A high-speed accident where the Super Driver is at fault, would result in a permanent revocation of the Super license.

Special "Road Rules" would be published for high-speed driving. Some kind of an obvious sign would be necessary to alert police that this car is being driven by a Super Driver (maybe a green light on the rear deck or something). Fraudulent representation of a super license would be a serious violation - on top of any speeding violation that results in being pulled over.

Of course, a STATE would have to take the initiative to create these licenses and other states would have to voluntarily sign on (just like with E-Z Pass). Insurance companies would adjust their rates for Super Drivers, and might want to be notified in advance of interstate driving plans, but it would be a quantifiable risk involving higher rates. Fair to everyone.

One could argue that the higher-speed cars would be a danger to everyone else on the road, but anyone who has driven on the Autostrada or Autobahn knows that it is a manageable problem. In fact, it forces other drivers to stay alert. Besides, if you have a Super license, you are going to be very protective of it, and confine your high-speed driving to places where it is relatively safe.

Why not?

I have no problem with the basic idea but at those speeds you need additional skills that you don't learn through experience. Successful graduation from a racing school would be an essential element of a scheme such as this.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Why in the world would you want to do that to your car?

I can't understand this mentality of driving as if it's the most horrible act in the world that one can't wait to end. I never drive for speed, ever. I drive for efficiency. And I hear the nimrods pushing their rides to do things like pass me going uphill, and I hear their engine screaming with the stress. Then I get to my destination after say 750 miles and I find I'm not even tired because I haven't put the same stress on death-gripping my steering wheel and putting all my efforts into slaloming around people like me.

Then they're at the mechanic wondering why their engine is so worn out after 80,000 miles -- and blaming the car.

That shit will kill you. Get off the highway, shunpike, and take time to smell the damn flowers. There's a lot more to life than trying to see how soon you can get out of the car. You'll be a lot richer for it, and you'll have something more significant to remember than the fact that this time you got there 13 minutes sooner.

Won't hurt a car in the slightest. Cops and cabbies drive like that...and 300,000+ miles on their vehicles are NORMAL. A modern car will run 90-100MPH all day without breaking a sweat. (Hell, my Magnum would switch to 4-cylinder mode even at that speed.)

Cops and cabbies have full-time mechanics replacing and renewing everything too.
And police cars are specifically built for that shit.

No. I did a run from Boston to Albany & back...4 people in the car (a Lincoln Town Car Executive), trunk packed with gear, I ran between 80 and 85 most of the way...never missed a beat, even though it was ~95 degrees. When I left the car had just turned 580,000 miles...engine never apart, even had the original alternator and A/C compressor. It was retired about 2 years later...the internally-untouched engine ran perfectly with 640,000 miles. Again: this was and is NORMAL.

 

[westwall]

As I drove the thousand-plus miles from my vacation in southern Florida to home in Pennsylvania I pondered how much gooder it would be if I could only drive my car a bit faster. I mean, think about it. My car can easily go over 100mph; the tires can easily handle it; I am a skilled and experienced driver with a spotless driving record...why can't I drive faster?

Here is what I propose:

Create a multi-state super-driver's license that authorizes daytime speeds up to 100mph on interstate highways. To get this license, one would need,

• Proof of enhanced insurance (say, $1,000,000 CSL liability),
• Minimum 25 years old; maximum 70,
• An enhanced safety inspection for your car,
• pass a written and on-road driver's test,
• minimum two years clean driving record.

If any of those goes away (any moving violation, traffic accident, new car, etc), the license is either revoked or temporarily suspended pending a new inspection, or whatever. A high-speed accident where the Super Driver is at fault, would result in a permanent revocation of the Super license.

Special "Road Rules" would be published for high-speed driving. Some kind of an obvious sign would be necessary to alert police that this car is being driven by a Super Driver (maybe a green light on the rear deck or something). Fraudulent representation of a super license would be a serious violation - on top of any speeding violation that results in being pulled over.

Of course, a STATE would have to take the initiative to create these licenses and other states would have to voluntarily sign on (just like with E-Z Pass). Insurance companies would adjust their rates for Super Drivers, and might want to be notified in advance of interstate driving plans, but it would be a quantifiable risk involving higher rates. Fair to everyone.

One could argue that the higher-speed cars would be a danger to everyone else on the road, but anyone who has driven on the Autostrada or Autobahn knows that it is a manageable problem. In fact, it forces other drivers to stay alert. Besides, if you have a Super license, you are going to be very protective of it, and confine your high-speed driving to places where it is relatively safe.

Why not?

There are three factors in the safe operating speed. The vehicle, the driver and the road. Very few interstates in this country are built to safely operate any vehicle more than 10% above the posted speed limit. In order to meet this idea, we would have to have new roads built that would handle the speed. We hardly repair the roads, let alone build a whole new system.

Interstates can handle speeds of over 150 mph pretty easily when maintained properly. There are very few cars that can handle that though. There are even fewer people who can operate at those speeds.
Most people have never been over 100 mph in their lives. My wife had never been that fast till she met me. I have a car that can easily do 200 mph on any decent roadway but I rarely get to go that fast due to other vehicles.

When traveling at those speeds the other drivers simply don't know how to react to your approach and pass. When I am on Hwy 50 between Fallon and Austin, at around 6 in the morning is the only time I can push it to that speed because there is simply no one there.

 

[Pogo]

Many modern cars have rather extreme overdrive ratios in top gear. With enhanced aerodynamics I think that wear & tear and efficiency penalty would be tolerable.

Aerodynamics can't be "enhanced" beyond the laws of physics. There's a point of diminishing and reversing returns, once you factor in how much more fuel you're using -- even aside from the wear and tear, mileage plummets at speeds much over what turns out to be a freeway speed (or slightly less). So I set my goal in terms of not hours and minutes but in mpg. What time I get there is -- whatever time I get there.

Incorrect. Many modern cars have double (or even TRIPLE) overdrives. They get better mileage at a higher speed than you'd expect. My wife's friend has a Z28...and high gear is worthless below 65MPH. (In high gear, 70MPH is <2000RPM.) Heck, I drove a 40,000lb highway coach...it got the same mileage (calculated to 0.1MPG) at 55 and 65MPH. It had an Allison B600 transmission, and wasn't in 6th gear until 62MPH.

It ain't the drive train --- it's the wind resistance.

 

[Pogo]

Why in the world would you want to do that to your car?

I can't understand this mentality of driving as if it's the most horrible act in the world that one can't wait to end. I never drive for speed, ever. I drive for efficiency. And I hear the nimrods pushing their rides to do things like pass me going uphill, and I hear their engine screaming with the stress. Then I get to my destination after say 750 miles and I find I'm not even tired because I haven't put the same stress on death-gripping my steering wheel and putting all my efforts into slaloming around people like me.

Then they're at the mechanic wondering why their engine is so worn out after 80,000 miles -- and blaming the car.

That shit will kill you. Get off the highway, shunpike, and take time to smell the damn flowers. There's a lot more to life than trying to see how soon you can get out of the car. You'll be a lot richer for it, and you'll have something more significant to remember than the fact that this time you got there 13 minutes sooner.

Won't hurt a car in the slightest. Cops and cabbies drive like that...and 300,000+ miles on their vehicles are NORMAL. A modern car will run 90-100MPH all day without breaking a sweat. (Hell, my Magnum would switch to 4-cylinder mode even at that speed.)

Cops and cabbies have full-time mechanics replacing and renewing everything too.
And police cars are specifically built for that shit.

No. I did a run from Boston to Albany & back...4 people in the car (a Lincoln Town Car Executive), trunk packed with gear, I ran between 80 and 85 most of the way...never missed a beat, even though it was ~95 degrees. When I left the car had just turned 580,000 miles...engine never apart, even had the original alternator and A/C compressor. It was retired about 2 years later...the internally-untouched engine ran perfectly with 640,000 miles. Again: this was and is NORMAL.

Boston to Albany is almost a commute.
My trips are usually around 750 miles at a time. That's what I mean by long distance -- the point where you're nearing the limits of human endurance.

 

[westwall]

Many modern cars have rather extreme overdrive ratios in top gear. With enhanced aerodynamics I think that wear & tear and efficiency penalty would be tolerable.

Aerodynamics can't be "enhanced" beyond the laws of physics. There's a point of diminishing and reversing returns, once you factor in how much more fuel you're using -- even aside from the wear and tear, mileage plummets at speeds much over what turns out to be a freeway speed (or slightly less). So I set my goal in terms of not hours and minutes but in mpg. What time I get there is -- whatever time I get there.

Incorrect. Many modern cars have double (or even TRIPLE) overdrives. They get better mileage at a higher speed than you'd expect. My wife's friend has a Z28...and high gear is worthless below 65MPH. (In high gear, 70MPH is <2000RPM.) Heck, I drove a 40,000lb highway coach...it got the same mileage (calculated to 0.1MPG) at 55 and 65MPH. It had an Allison B600 transmission, and wasn't in 6th gear until 62MPH.

It ain't the drive train --- it's the wind resistance.

Most cars that are built for long distance travel at high speeds (BMW's, Merc's etc.) have very good aero designed into the cars. They get good mileage even at high speed because they are built to do it.

 

[Pogo]

Many modern cars have rather extreme overdrive ratios in top gear. With enhanced aerodynamics I think that wear & tear and efficiency penalty would be tolerable.

Aerodynamics can't be "enhanced" beyond the laws of physics. There's a point of diminishing and reversing returns, once you factor in how much more fuel you're using -- even aside from the wear and tear, mileage plummets at speeds much over what turns out to be a freeway speed (or slightly less). So I set my goal in terms of not hours and minutes but in mpg. What time I get there is -- whatever time I get there.

Incorrect. Many modern cars have double (or even TRIPLE) overdrives. They get better mileage at a higher speed than you'd expect. My wife's friend has a Z28...and high gear is worthless below 65MPH. (In high gear, 70MPH is <2000RPM.) Heck, I drove a 40,000lb highway coach...it got the same mileage (calculated to 0.1MPG) at 55 and 65MPH. It had an Allison B600 transmission, and wasn't in 6th gear until 62MPH.

It ain't the drive train --- it's the wind resistance.

Most cars that are built for long distance travel at high speeds (BMW's, Merc's etc.) have very good aero designed into the cars. They get good mileage even at high speed because they are built to do it.

Sure, and it's improved over the years, I get that. But the laws of physics haven't changed; at a certain point you're putting more energy proportionally into fighting wind resistance than you were at a lower speed. So you many get "good" mileage but "good" compared to what? What you would have gotten ten years ago? It's still less efficient at say, 90 than at 60. That doesn't change.

I loved the way my old Saturn was designed, aerodynamically efficient. And light too (fiberglas). But I could easily see a difference between say 65 and 75.

 

[westwall]

Many modern cars have rather extreme overdrive ratios in top gear. With enhanced aerodynamics I think that wear & tear and efficiency penalty would be tolerable.

Aerodynamics can't be "enhanced" beyond the laws of physics. There's a point of diminishing and reversing returns, once you factor in how much more fuel you're using -- even aside from the wear and tear, mileage plummets at speeds much over what turns out to be a freeway speed (or slightly less). So I set my goal in terms of not hours and minutes but in mpg. What time I get there is -- whatever time I get there.

Incorrect. Many modern cars have double (or even TRIPLE) overdrives. They get better mileage at a higher speed than you'd expect. My wife's friend has a Z28...and high gear is worthless below 65MPH. (In high gear, 70MPH is <2000RPM.) Heck, I drove a 40,000lb highway coach...it got the same mileage (calculated to 0.1MPG) at 55 and 65MPH. It had an Allison B600 transmission, and wasn't in 6th gear until 62MPH.

It ain't the drive train --- it's the wind resistance.

Most cars that are built for long distance travel at high speeds (BMW's, Merc's etc.) have very good aero designed into the cars. They get good mileage even at high speed because they are built to do it.

Sure, and it's improved over the years, I get that. But the laws of physics haven't changed; at a certain point you're putting more energy proportionally into fighting wind resistance than you were at a lower speed. So you many get "good" mileage but "good" compared to what? What you would have gotten ten years ago? It's still less efficient at say, 90 than at 60. That doesn't change.

That only happens at speeds over 100 in the new cars. My Gt40 really doesn't care until I hit 160 mph (it's an exceptionally slippery car), then my mileage starts to drop pretty quickly, but it's a near 60 year old car! The AMG's do lose mileage very fast though. At 200 you get about 30 minutes between fill ups, so yes, you get to go super fast...but you have to refuel every 100 miles!

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

what AMG are you driving @ 200 MPH?

Oh and Pogo, what you're saying doesn't necessarily hold true with modern cars which have automatic cylinder deactivation, electrically controlled aerodynamic aids, and super over drive transmissions.

It is generally true that the faster you travel the more power and thus the more fuel you need to overcome wind resistance, but when the car can electronically adjust itself to lower its coefficient of drag at speed, as well as briefly and intermittently shut down half of it' cylinders , those will combat the laws of physics then you add in a super high geared 8 speed auto transmissions and such.

I mean 22 MPG out of a 700+ HP car is phenomenal

 

[Pogo]

what AMG are you driving @ 200 MPH?

Oh and Pogo, what you're saying doesn't necessarily hold true with modern cars which have automatic cylinder deactivation, electrically controlled aerodynamic aids, and super over drive transmissions.

It is generally true that the faster you travel the more power and thus the more fuel you need to overcome wind resistance, but when the car can electronically adjust itself to lower its coefficient of drag at speed, as well as briefly and intermittently shut down half of it' cylinders , those will combat the laws of physics then you add in a super high geared 8 speed auto transmissions and such.

I mean 22 MPG out of a 700+ HP car is phenomenal

Maybe, but (a) that's about 600 hp than necessary, and (b) if my car ever returned 22mpg I'd have to have it towed to the mechanic to find the fuel leak.

 

[westwall]

what AMG are you driving @ 200 MPH?

Oh and Pogo, what you're saying doesn't necessarily hold true with modern cars which have automatic cylinder deactivation, electrically controlled aerodynamic aids, and super over drive transmissions.

It is generally true that the faster you travel the more power and thus the more fuel you need to overcome wind resistance, but when the car can electronically adjust itself to lower its coefficient of drag at speed, as well as briefly and intermittently shut down half of it' cylinders , those will combat the laws of physics then you add in a super high geared 8 speed auto transmissions and such.

I mean 22 MPG out of a 700+ HP car is phenomenal

Maybe, but (a) that's about 600 hp than necessary, and (b) if my car ever returned 22mpg I'd have to have it towed to the mechanic to find the fuel leak.

Who says? Just because you like to mosey along doesn't mean others do. Why do you feel you have the right to dictate what other people like?

 

[Pogo]

what AMG are you driving @ 200 MPH?

Oh and Pogo, what you're saying doesn't necessarily hold true with modern cars which have automatic cylinder deactivation, electrically controlled aerodynamic aids, and super over drive transmissions.

It is generally true that the faster you travel the more power and thus the more fuel you need to overcome wind resistance, but when the car can electronically adjust itself to lower its coefficient of drag at speed, as well as briefly and intermittently shut down half of it' cylinders , those will combat the laws of physics then you add in a super high geared 8 speed auto transmissions and such.

I mean 22 MPG out of a 700+ HP car is phenomenal

Maybe, but (a) that's about 600 hp than necessary, and (b) if my car ever returned 22mpg I'd have to have it towed to the mechanic to find the fuel leak.

Who says? Just because you like to mosey along doesn't mean others do. Why do you feel you have the right to dictate what other people like?

Beats me, you tell me. Might wanna start with figuring out where I ""dictated what other people like".

 

[westwall]

what AMG are you driving @ 200 MPH?

Oh and Pogo, what you're saying doesn't necessarily hold true with modern cars which have automatic cylinder deactivation, electrically controlled aerodynamic aids, and super over drive transmissions.

It is generally true that the faster you travel the more power and thus the more fuel you need to overcome wind resistance, but when the car can electronically adjust itself to lower its coefficient of drag at speed, as well as briefly and intermittently shut down half of it' cylinders , those will combat the laws of physics then you add in a super high geared 8 speed auto transmissions and such.

I mean 22 MPG out of a 700+ HP car is phenomenal

Maybe, but (a) that's about 600 hp than necessary, and (b) if my car ever returned 22mpg I'd have to have it towed to the mechanic to find the fuel leak.

Who says? Just because you like to mosey along doesn't mean others do. Why do you feel you have the right to dictate what other people like?

Beats me, you tell me. Might wanna start with figuring out where I ""dictated what other people like".

"600 hp more than it needs", seems pretty opinionated to me. I like to drive fast. I am very safe when I do it. I also have no problem with those who like to mosey along so long as they don't gate keep ( a common problem in California, not so much here in Nevada) because they think I shouldn't be allowed to drive as fast as I like so long as I'm safe doing it.