High Speed Driver's License

[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".

"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.

The simple fact is 700 hp -- which is what the poster's example stated -- is numerically about exactly 600 more than my ride needs (or has) to move at highway speeds. That's simple science. Any more would be wasted -- the proverbial "more than a handful".

You drive however you want. I don't post about how you drive. I wouldn't know anything about that. I post about my own experiences. They're quite sufficient.

Weird post. Paranoia strikes deep.

Back to STTAB's post -- I fail to see how having an 8-speed (or 2-speed or 123 speed) transmission is relevant to wind resistance in top gear. At that point you're no longer shifting. And for that matter, drag coefficient is dependent on surface area; I don't think you're going to change that d/c in motion unless you've got either an active body shop running alongside you or some kind of shape shifting technology.

 

[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

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.

The simple fact is 700 hp -- which is what the poster's example stated -- is numerically about exactly 600 more than my ride needs (or has) to move at highway speeds. That's simple science. Any more would be wasted -- the proverbial "more than a handful".

You drive however you want. I don't post about how you drive. I wouldn't know anything about that. I post about my own experiences. They're quite sufficient.

Weird post. Paranoia strikes deep.

Back to STTAB's post -- I fail to see how having an 8-speed (or 2-speed or 123 speed) transmission is relevant to wind resistance in top gear. At that point you're no longer shifting. And for that matter, drag coefficient is dependent on surface area; I don't think you're going to change that d/c in motion unless you've got either an active body shop running alongside you or some kind of shape shifting technology.

Here you go Pogo

BBC - Autos - Active aerodynamics a slippery obsession

 

[DGS49]

(1) Aerodynamic drag increases with the square of velocity, so the drag is 4x as much at 120 as at 60. Gas mileage DECREASES as your speed increases over the optimum (40-50mph in most cars), regardless of gearing or anything else. High speed driving will reduce fuel economy. Period.

(2) The permission to drive up to 100mph with my Hyper-License is just that: permission. You could drive at 80, 60, 99, or 75, depending on road conditions, terrain, traffic, or your own comfort level. In most cases, the car itself will tell you when it's "happy" by noise, vibration, etc. Most good Euro cars are quite comfortable at 80-90mph and will go faster easily as you might like.

(3) Remember that this mode of driving has been normal FOR YEARS in Europe, and the problems associated with high-speed drivers on the same road as people going 100kph have been minimal - nowhere near as striking as people driving while intoxicated. This is not some new, untested concept. It simply hasn't been tried in the U.S.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

(1) Aerodynamic drag increases with the square of velocity, so the drag is 4x as much at 120 as at 60. Gas mileage DECREASES as your speed increases over the optimum (40-50mph in most cars), regardless of gearing or anything else. High speed driving will reduce fuel economy. Period.

(2) The permission to drive up to 100mph with my Hyper-License is just that: permission. You could drive at 80, 60, 99, or 75, depending on road conditions, terrain, traffic, or your own comfort level. In most cases, the car itself will tell you when it's "happy" by noise, vibration, etc. Most good Euro cars are quite comfortable at 80-90mph and will go faster easily as you might like.

(3) Remember that this mode of driving has been normal FOR YEARS in Europe, and the problems associated with high-speed drivers on the same road as people going 100kph have been minimal - nowhere near as striking as people driving while intoxicated. This is not some new, untested concept. It simply hasn't been tried in the U.S.

Again though, the problem is the average American moron.

Have you driven on the Autobahn? I have, over there, people don't hog the left lane refusing to get over the way they do here, as an example. There would be LOT more accidents here.

 

[westwall]

(1) Aerodynamic drag increases with the square of velocity, so the drag is 4x as much at 120 as at 60. Gas mileage DECREASES as your speed increases over the optimum (40-50mph in most cars), regardless of gearing or anything else. High speed driving will reduce fuel economy. Period.

(2) The permission to drive up to 100mph with my Hyper-License is just that: permission. You could drive at 80, 60, 99, or 75, depending on road conditions, terrain, traffic, or your own comfort level. In most cases, the car itself will tell you when it's "happy" by noise, vibration, etc. Most good Euro cars are quite comfortable at 80-90mph and will go faster easily as you might like.

(3) Remember that this mode of driving has been normal FOR YEARS in Europe, and the problems associated with high-speed drivers on the same road as people going 100kph have been minimal - nowhere near as striking as people driving while intoxicated. This is not some new, untested concept. It simply hasn't been tried in the U.S.

Again though, the problem is the average American moron.

Have you driven on the Autobahn? I have, over there, people don't hog the left lane refusing to get over the way they do here, as an example. There would be LOT more accidents here.

The rules of the road are far different in Germany than here too. If you are going too slow, and a car hits you from behind, YOU ARE AT FAULT!

 

[Jarlaxle]

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.

What in the world are you babbling about now? 750 miles is hardly the "limits of human endurance".

 

[Jarlaxle]

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.

The simple fact is 700 hp -- which is what the poster's example stated -- is numerically about exactly 600 more than my ride needs (or has) to move at highway speeds. That's simple science. Any more would be wasted -- the proverbial "more than a handful".

You drive however you want. I don't post about how you drive. I wouldn't know anything about that. I post about my own experiences. They're quite sufficient.

Weird post. Paranoia strikes deep.

Back to STTAB's post -- I fail to see how having an 8-speed (or 2-speed or 123 speed) transmission is relevant to wind resistance in top gear. At that point you're no longer shifting. And for that matter, drag coefficient is dependent on surface area; I don't think you're going to change that d/c in motion unless you've got either an active body shop running alongside you or some kind of shape shifting technology.

Then you are deliberately missing the point. It's simple: the double and triple-overdrive transmissions mean the engine can run more efficiently.

Active aero is nothing new. Porsche and Land Rover have used it for decades. Even some Ram pickups now use it.

 

[westwall]

(1) Aerodynamic drag increases with the square of velocity, so the drag is 4x as much at 120 as at 60. Gas mileage DECREASES as your speed increases over the optimum (40-50mph in most cars), regardless of gearing or anything else. High speed driving will reduce fuel economy. Period.

(2) The permission to drive up to 100mph with my Hyper-License is just that: permission. You could drive at 80, 60, 99, or 75, depending on road conditions, terrain, traffic, or your own comfort level. In most cases, the car itself will tell you when it's "happy" by noise, vibration, etc. Most good Euro cars are quite comfortable at 80-90mph and will go faster easily as you might like.

(3) Remember that this mode of driving has been normal FOR YEARS in Europe, and the problems associated with high-speed drivers on the same road as people going 100kph have been minimal - nowhere near as striking as people driving while intoxicated. This is not some new, untested concept. It simply hasn't been tried in the U.S.

Yes, it does. However reducing the cars drag coefficient likewise reduces the aerodynamic drag, thus allowing you to drive faster with little to no reduction in mileage. This is all dependent on rolling friction and other factors, but a small DC results in better mileage and faster speeds as well.

 

[Pogo]

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.

What in the world are you babbling about now? 750 miles is hardly the "limits of human endurance".

It is in one diurnal period. Close to it anyway -- I've done a thousand and I can't recommend it.
But Boston to Albany -- that's barely a warmup.

 

[Jarlaxle]

What in the WORLD are you babbling about? Seriously...are you baked? I can clear 1000 miles in a day easily if I have to. I did Carlisle to St. Cloud, FL in a day a few years ago.

 

[Pogo]

What in the WORLD are you babbling about? Seriously...are you baked? I can clear 1000 miles in a day easily if I have to. I did Carlisle to St. Cloud, FL in a day a few years ago.

Then you're a lunatic.
Already knew that though.

So you're telling me you can "'clear' (but not 'drive') 1000 miles in a day easily" --- yet you don't think you can make a simple half-mile trail hike?

 

[Jarlaxle]

With 2 bad knees, a bad back, and a bad hip...no, not easily, and not without risk of injury.

Have to say...I loved the 70MPH speed limits after Virginia!

 

[Pogo]

With 2 bad knees, a bad back, and a bad hip...no, not easily, and not without risk of injury.

Have to say...I loved the 70MPH speed limits after Virginia!

Speed limits north of VA are kinda primitive, but VA will give you 70.

I tell ya what, if you let me know when you're coming and I'm home at the time I'll meet you there and help you up.

It's only 20 miles away for me, I can make that trip in....... oh..... two hours?

 

[westwall]

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.

What in the world are you babbling about now? 750 miles is hardly the "limits of human endurance".

It is in one diurnal period. Close to it anyway -- I've done a thousand and I can't recommend it.
But Boston to Albany -- that's barely a warmup.

Furthest in a single day is 1883. Normal long drive distance is 800 to 1000 depending on weather and road conditions.

 

[ChrisL]

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?

Because every douchebag thinks they're great drivers.

 

[ChrisL]

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.

You'd need something else that would probably be more of a challenge -- a nation of drivers who understand what "passing lane" means. As it is now I think you have to go to Europe for that.

The Autobahn? I've read that it is must more difficult to obtain a drivers license in Germany. Therefore, you have fewer and better drivers on the road. Now, here in America, we give out drivers licenses to 16 year old kids and foreigners who can't drive to save their lives!

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

(1) Aerodynamic drag increases with the square of velocity, so the drag is 4x as much at 120 as at 60. Gas mileage DECREASES as your speed increases over the optimum (40-50mph in most cars), regardless of gearing or anything else. High speed driving will reduce fuel economy. Period.

(2) The permission to drive up to 100mph with my Hyper-License is just that: permission. You could drive at 80, 60, 99, or 75, depending on road conditions, terrain, traffic, or your own comfort level. In most cases, the car itself will tell you when it's "happy" by noise, vibration, etc. Most good Euro cars are quite comfortable at 80-90mph and will go faster easily as you might like.

(3) Remember that this mode of driving has been normal FOR YEARS in Europe, and the problems associated with high-speed drivers on the same road as people going 100kph have been minimal - nowhere near as striking as people driving while intoxicated. This is not some new, untested concept. It simply hasn't been tried in the U.S.

Again though, the problem is the average American moron.

Have you driven on the Autobahn? I have, over there, people don't hog the left lane refusing to get over the way they do here, as an example. There would be LOT more accidents here.

The rules of the road are far different in Germany than here too. If you are going too slow, and a car hits you from behind, YOU ARE AT FAULT!

yep, over here you can be doing 70 MPH in the left lane and some dolt could pull into the left lane ahead of you and do 40 mph and if you hit him, it's YOUR fault.

And you on the interstates and such there are signs posted slower traffic MUST keep right, but I have NEVER heard of anyone being ticketed for such.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

jarlaxle, you are full of shit. you don't make 1000 mile trips in one day on a regular basis.

When I was younger some buddies and I drove from Springfield, MO to Las Vegas in one day. That's 1400 miles. It took an entire day, as in we left at like 3 am and arrived at like 2 am the next day, we took shifts driving and averaged 80 mph with several breaks in between.

at 100 mph it would take you 10 hours to travel 1000 miles , with no stops. Virtually impossible for one person to do.

 

[Pogo]

jarlaxle, you are full of shit. you don't make 1000 mile trips in one day on a regular basis.

When I was younger some buddies and I drove from Springfield, MO to Las Vegas in one day. That's 1400 miles. It took an entire day, as in we left at like 3 am and arrived at like 2 am the next day, we took shifts driving and averaged 80 mph with several breaks in between.

at 100 mph it would take you 10 hours to travel 1000 miles , with no stops. Virtually impossible for one person to do.

I think we devolved into "I have a bigger dick" posts a while back. Westwall's absurdity in post 54 for example, would have to average over 78mph even if one allowed all 24 hours.

I'm starting to figure out that Westwall must have a very dry sense of humor. But it's hard to pick up on a message board.

Oh by the way just to contribute, the furthest I ever did in once day was Tierra del Fuego to Lapland. I took the Behring Straight Bridge before they tore it down. It was something like eleventy thousand miles. I did it in 20 minutes, but to be fair that doesn't include time zone changes.

 

[westwall]

jarlaxle, you are full of shit. you don't make 1000 mile trips in one day on a regular basis.

When I was younger some buddies and I drove from Springfield, MO to Las Vegas in one day. That's 1400 miles. It took an entire day, as in we left at like 3 am and arrived at like 2 am the next day, we took shifts driving and averaged 80 mph with several breaks in between.

at 100 mph it would take you 10 hours to travel 1000 miles , with no stops. Virtually impossible for one person to do.

I think we devolved into "I have a bigger dick" posts a while back. Westwall's absurdity in post 54 for example, would have to average over 78mph even if one allowed all 24 hours.

I'm starting to figure out that Westwall must have a very dry sense of humor. But it's hard to pick up on a message board.

Oh by the way just to contribute, the furthest I ever did in once day was Tierra del Fuego to Lapland. I took the Behring Straight Bridge before they tore it down. It was something like eleventy thousand miles. I did it in 20 minutes, but to be fair that doesn't include time zone changes.

I averaged 85 mph taking only time to refuel and I stopped and ate one time. The drive was from Santa Barbara to Kansas City via 101 to I 40 to Hwy 54 in Tucumcari to I 35 in Wichita to I 70 to the Linda Hall library where I had a delivery to make. I did it in a 1972 Plymouth Fury II. The fact that I did it in my youth certainly helped. The fact that you have never seemed to do anything extreme in your life just says you live life slowly and carefully. I didn't when I was younger. I am now starting to slow down due to age, but I still drive fast, and fly faster!