^^^i don't know where he lives, but depending on where that is there's nothing wrong with topping 100 on a daily basis.

9/14/2010 9:18:12 PM

until he clips a deer and takes out a minivan full of kids...

9/14/2010 9:18:37 PM

9/14/2010 9:27:02 PM

yeah, where it is, what he's driving, and if he knows what he's doing

9/14/2010 9:43:11 PM

So how's that radar detector search coming along...

9/14/2010 9:52:36 PM

come on people. fast drivers don't cause accidents. slow drivers do. speed up!

9/14/2010 11:50:14 PM

If you are routinely passing other drivers at 100+, there is no justification you can give. You belong behind bars. Hopefully his speeding is on unoccupied stretches of road, where he'll be the only casulty.

Now back to the radar discussion.

9/15/2010 9:10:32 AM

the man has an M5, driving 100+ is kinda a requirement when you own such car.

9/15/2010 9:49:33 AM

Hey, have you guys heard how driving fast is dangerous? I've heard that whenever you top 100 mph your chance of being in a fatal wreck goes up by like 1,000,000. Also, whenever you top 100 a baby kitten dies.

9/15/2010 2:11:03 PM

Carzin you are a tard. Seriously.

Like I said earlier you have to be smart about it when and where you speed. Of course I don’t drive 110mph when there is traffic or if there is a lot of traffic in middle lane that can potentially switch to left lane. I don’t weave in and out of traffic. I certainly don’t drive 40 over in school zones.
Also, I am willing to bet you are far less safe (for you and surrounding) going 20 over in civic or me going 40 over in M3/M5.

9/16/2010 12:07:43 PM

you guys make it seem that if you know what you're doing you won't get in an accident, you do realize how foolish that mentality is right?

i think about the only possible time in which it would be remotely safe would be on a flat straight well used long interstate with no traffic in the daytime. there is no other road that could be perfectly safe. driving on any road going 100+ is dangerous: nighttime you have limited visibility, wildlife, debris on the road you can't see, seeing around corners or over hills, cyclists on the side of the road, high-speed blowouts, it's just dumb to think that you are in complete control of the conditions. i know you all think you're invincible and are the best drivers on the roads, but our roads aren't made for safety of travelling at such high speeds, and accidents happen. it's a known fact the faster you go the more likely the accident will be more severe, and it goes up exponentially. and what's the benefit? a rush? you get to the destination 10 minutes earlier? it's just not a very mature decision.

if you know all these reasons and are still speeding at 100+ that doesn't make you cool, it just takes you from ignorant to wreckless & immature.

if you want to speed, go to a track. if you're late, you should have left earlier. if there's an emergency, call 911.

all that to say, even if you are attempting to stay within the speed limits, there's a chance the speed limit can change rapidly and/or you find yourself speeding due to the flow of traffic and in those scenarios radar detectors are helpful as to help you check your speed when being tracked.

I drive an A4 and if I got a radar detector, I'd get the ADR V1 just for that sweet DIS integration

[Edited on September 16, 2010 at 12:39 PM. Reason : .]

9/16/2010 12:29:19 PM

Quote :

"Also, I am willing to bet you are far less safe (for you and surrounding) going 20 over in civic or me going 40 over in M3/M5."

I dont drive a Civic. Nice try!

It'll catch up with you, eventually.

I love hearing people who think that because they have some amateur track experience think they can speed with impunity. Eventually you'll hit a nail at high speed, or a tire retread, or some deer will come out of no where, and it will end your fun. Or you'll get caught, thrown in jail, and get charged for something serious that will affect your ability to gain good employment. Not sure how its worth it... You should save it for the track.

I'm far from innocent. I speed routinely on the highway, but the delta between my car and the other cars is almost always 10 MPH or less. In the city, I generally do not speed at all (simply not worth it). But I remember the days I would go over 125 on the highway and think how lucky I was not to get in trouble, and am glad I wised up on my own accord. I also used to own a radar detector. I dont anymore.


I see the same arrogance with motorcycle drivers that think they'll never get hurt... Seems like everyone I know that has one for any length of time ends up turning it over, injuring themself, or worse.

[Edited on September 16, 2010 at 12:48 PM. Reason : .]

9/16/2010 12:38:43 PM

a nail is extremely unlikely to cause a "blowout". in fact, a "blowout" just isn't very likely, period. I've hit a bolt (at least 1/4") in diameter...it broke the steel belts in one of my tires, but even it didn't cause any sort of catastrophic failure. I even managed to drive home just fine (probably 5-8 miles or so).

I do agree that you shouldn't be flying by traffic at significantly greater speed. if there aren't other cars around, and you know what you're doing, and you're in the right sort of car, I don't see a thing in the world wrong with driving at triple-digit speeds. 100 mph on the highway in a high-performance sports car is extremly ho-hum.

9/16/2010 1:19:30 PM

there are lots of other factors... think if a tire is under-inflated, over-inflated, over-loaded, damaged before incident where speed makes it fail, etc. i've seen lots of tires with blisters and people just don't notice.

[Edited on September 16, 2010 at 1:54 PM. Reason : /]

9/16/2010 1:54:07 PM

Quote :

"a nail is extremely unlikely to cause a "blowout". "

at 100mph?

youre a fucking idiot if you think that. there is no reason brag about driving fast on open roads. its fucking stupid.

9/16/2010 2:14:10 PM

take it to the salt flats

9/16/2010 5:03:55 PM

I have a v1 and rarely speed. Its rarely even hooked up. If i could go back in time i wouldnt buy anything different though.

9/16/2010 5:38:10 PM

this thread again?

9/16/2010 5:50:55 PM

9/16/2010 7:32:13 PM

Quote :

"I dont drive a Civic. Nice try!"

First off, I never said that's what you are driving. I was giving an example of an average vehicle. Second, a 200k+ mile Z3 is safe as South African street walker. Me going 100 in M5 is as safe as you going 55 on I-40 in your little vert.

Quote :

" Eventually you'll hit a nail at high speed, or a tire retread, or some deer will come out of no where, and it will end your fun."

Right. Because that never happens going 75mph
For all we know you can get rear ended by F-350 dually tomorrow while going 25 in 35mph. People that drive a motorcycle are statistically way more likely to get killed going speed limit than me going 100+ on empty highway. Ask BigBlueRam. Are you going to give them a lesson too? Maybe we shouldn't eat filet mignon that isn't free range? ..Or eat tuna because of mercury?

Quote :

"I see the same arrogance with motorcycle drivers that think they'll never get hurt... Seems like everyone I know that has one for any length of time ends up turning it over, injuring themself, or worse."

Dude, people want to live. They are aware of the risks and they are willing to take them. Who are you to tell them what risks they should and shouldn't take?
I do agree that retards who weave in and out of traffic should be thrown in jail, but I never said that's what I do or stand for.

[Edited on September 16, 2010 at 11:03 PM. Reason : l]

9/16/2010 11:00:19 PM

there's so much fail in your logic.

9/16/2010 11:52:19 PM

I'd imagine most automotive minded people arguing their point (in this thread) keep a pretty close eye on the condition of their tires (heck, probably their whole car) so I don't think that's a worry when you're cruising 100 mph on a mostly empty interstate (for the ppl involved in this argument). On some interstate sections there's nothing wrong with speeding (this is speaking as if the speed limits were much higher or unlimited). I could probably drive 110-115 the entire way down I-40 to Wilmington on an average day and not blink an eye. That road's so empty that a 70mph limit is low balling it. Of course it's there for the lowest common denominator moron driving a clapped out shit box.

And while I do take my car to the track and explore the limits there, I refrain from doing such on public roads. I'm well aware of the difference between a controlled and uncontrolled environment.

9/17/2010 12:23:30 AM

^^

Quote :

"driving on any road going 100+ is dangerous: nighttime you have limited visibility, wildlife, debris on the road you can't see, seeing around corners or over hills, cyclists on the side of the road, high-speed blowouts, it's just dumb to think that you are in complete control of the conditions"

those same risks are in effect when you are going 70-75mph and obeying the law. whether you drive under, at or over the speed limit you are never in complete control. i never said nighttime conditions and hills are conditions to drive in triple speeds, but nice use of strawman nonetheless.

autobahn has lower fatality rate than US highways and certainly proves the fact that if you have educated drivers who know when and where to drive at triple speeds, the risks are negligible, or in this case even lower.

9/17/2010 7:06:44 AM

Quote :

"those same risks are in effect when you are going 70-75mph and obeying the law."

2008 BMW M3:
Braking, 60-0 mph 105 ft
Braking, 100-0 mph 309 ft
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sports/112_0805_bmw_m3_lexus_is_f_mercedes_c63_amg_comparison/specifications.html

Braking 100-0 takes nearly three times as much distance as 60-0.

If I remember correctly, as speed goes up, the force involved in a collision goes up exponentially. For example, the force at 70 MPH was much greater than at 55 MPH despite it only being a 15 MPH difference. Maybe some of the engineering/math folks can chime in. I suspect the extra 204 feet it takes to brake from 100-0 is a pretty good indicator of that force.

I'm not taking a side here because I don't automatically assume speeding is dangerous, but it's foolish to take the very real threats for granted.

[Edited on September 17, 2010 at 9:10 AM. Reason : l]

9/17/2010 9:10:25 AM

9/17/2010 9:27:39 AM

M3 takes longer to stop from 100 than from 60? No way!

I think I have pretty good idea when and under what conditions to speed. I am willing to take the risks and consequences that come with it. I appreciate moral/ethics lessons from select few.

Have a nice day!

9/17/2010 10:43:53 AM

Driving doesn't just affect yourself. I know it's nice to think that if you speed - that the only person at risk is yourself - but that's not true, you are putting yourself at risk AS WELL AS the general public that share those roads. There are laws for vehicular assault even if it's negligent. Accidents happen, I'm just saying. Drive safe. Cheers.

[Edited on September 17, 2010 at 10:55 AM. Reason : .]

9/17/2010 10:54:31 AM

Also, because it takes 30% longer to stop 60-0 in a Civic than in the M3, if driving one, you should probably reduce your speed accordingly. You know, just to be safe.

9/17/2010 12:14:24 PM

Quote :

"I think I have pretty good idea when and under what conditions to speed. I am willing to take the risks and consequences that come with it."

As long as that doesn't involve stuff like going 92 in a 55 with any chance of other traffic around I have absolutely no problem with people taking their own risks; that is their business. Everyone enjoys different stuff. Even though I get no enjoyment out of simply being in a car that is going fast, I can understand that others do.

However, if you take it to a public road with any possible chance of public traffic around you, I couldn't care less how good of a driver you think you are or what kind of risks/consequences you are willing to take because that means just about squat at that point.

[Edited on September 17, 2010 at 12:54 PM. Reason : ]

9/17/2010 12:51:39 PM

Quote :

"M3 takes longer to stop from 100 than from 60? No way!"

Did you even look at the numbers? It takes nearly three times as long. It's not like it takes 40% longer. Way to ignore the evidence.

Quote :

"Also, because it takes 30% longer to stop 60-0 in a Civic than in the M3, if driving one, you should probably reduce your speed accordingly. You know, just to be safe."

2008 Honda Civic:
60 - 0 (ft): 128
http://www.edmunds.com/honda/civic/2008/testdrive.html

22% longer.
Yet, braking distance only comes into play when a person actually hits the brakes. I'd argue that reaction time is as big of a factor (if not bigger) in avoiding collisions as the performance metrics of the car. When you're going 50+% faster than a typical driver the amount of time you have to react is cut significantly. Add to that the fact that it takes nearly three times as long to stop and things can turn shitty very fast.

I'm not going to lie and say I never do triple digit speeds, but I think this 1in10^9 guy sounds a little too nonchalant about it.

Quote :

"Second, a 200k+ mile Z3 is safe as South African street walker. Me going 100 in M5 is as safe as you going 55 on I-40 in your little vert."

I remember you posting in the garage that your precious M5 has around 200k miles as well.
message_topic.aspx?topic=599934&page=1#14220584

9/17/2010 1:25:57 PM

I've had a Valentine 1 detector for four years and it's been great. IT's definitely saved me out of several tickets. I only trust it on highways, interstates and country roads. Anywhere that's open basically. However, the detector will work sometimes when a cop is hidden. The detector will pick up radar beams as they bounce off cars in front of you. They are also useful for picking up cops that are hidden at the bottom of hills when you are coming over the top. After a while you will get used to having the device beep at you and learn what the beeps mean. If you travel certain routes enough, you will also learn where automatic doors and such set it off and when it's an actual cop. I've never used any other brand so I can't really compare, but the V1 has been everything I've needed.

9/17/2010 9:40:45 PM

I'd like to clarify my view on detectors. I don't currently own when and thus while traveling on interstate roads usually drive 10-14 over the speed limit. I'd like to get a Valentine 1 but it's not first on the list of items I want to buy right now so it will have to wait. However, if I did own one I don't see myself driving much faster than I already do. On some interstates (specifically empty ones with good sight lines) I could see myself traveling another 5-10 mph over the limit. But again it would depend on a lot of factors.

9/17/2010 10:30:23 PM

^ yea, I travel 15-20 over on the interstate but I slow down in likely cop areas even with my detector. You still need to use common help, but they give you a great advantage.

9/17/2010 10:38:33 PM