Ferrari pulled over for driving 137 mph

Why is that ?

 

Lame. The chef who prepares your dinner is at risk of cutting himself with knives.

 

A lot depends on context as well. Some roads are completely empty and there are no intersections (i.e. dessert road) and terminal vision is the horizon. While not full proof, going fast in this environment is much different than a freeway or other populated area. That said, what is a 'safe' speed is a very relative notion once you've decided to go beyond the flow of normal traffic. So that's why you have folks that argue speed limit should always be the ultimate arbiter - which cmon, we must all admit is not what most of these cars are designed for.

That said, the track is still the best place to exercise your speed demons.

 

137 mph? That’s nothing, that’s the speed they do at Autobhan during rush hour traffic

 

Sorry, been away for a few days. And, there's a whole lot to unpack in this (and the subsequent posts by many others), so I doubt I'll even try to get into it all. However, the very first rule of driving is that the person behind the wheel is the person best-suited to assessing the risks and determining what a safe rate of speed is. With all due respect, it is not some traffic engineer sitting in a cubicle miles away plugging things into a computer formula, a LEO, or even a judge. Giving me a jury of my peers would mean every one of them has a racing license and years of experience at speed. Then, let's talk.

The holier-than-thou, tragedy comments are, of course, predictable. And, to the extent that there are injuries sustained due to incidents involving high rates of speed, those are certainly lamentable. And, I do concur that IF an incident occurs at speed, the likelihood of a fatality may increase. But, each and every day, avoidable deaths occur. From all sorts of "safe" things. We simply cannot avoid it. No matter how much regulation we pile on. That's not to say I feel it should be a free-for-all, however. I think you do need to establish rules for the common good and enforce them. But, for 1) qualified drivers, 2) in capable cars, and 3) on adequate roads, I don't see why we cannot permit high(er) rates of speed very safely. The Autobahn model works. Well, it worked. Now, not so much due to encroaching boundaries. But, the premise still does.

For the most part, speed limits are hold-overs from a very different time. A time when cars were far less safe. Tires, suspensions and brakes (along with engines and possibly also road-building methods and stationary safety devices) have made big strides since the 55 mph limit was created. To be fair, it was really created to reduce fuel consumption (and not even for safety purposes). However, fatalities went down, right? So, then, slower is safer. Is it? Maybe. Or, maybe not. I find the inattentive soccer Mom hogging the left lane to be just as dangerous as the over-confident 16-yo in a hopped up Subaru swerving in and out of traffic. Maybe more so.

Anyway, this argument will go on and on. Nebraska's position ought to be adopted across the land. Will there be fatalities involving high rates of speed? Yes. Will there be more of them? I don't know. However, presuming that someone is being reckless because they're driving fast is just unthinking. From a Court's point of view, it's clean and easy. They don't have to evaluate any factors. However, it's also unreasonable, IMO. I think a judge should be more capable of making a determination of who's qualified (and who's not) and what conduct constitutes recklessness (and what doesn't). Notwithstanding the drivel produced by well-intentioned, but mostly un-serious, legislative bodies.

CW

 

Completely agree! One thing though is German drivers are generally much better (just my opinion) Left lane discipline is real!

 

Just so you know, your opinion is ridiculous. I don’t care if you are a physician, that does not make you better than me or anyone else here, and it certainly doesn’t mean you are the ****ing guru of driving to whom we should all bow our heads in deference. I will continue to drive how I like and feel comfortable, I will continue to be safe whether at 50% or 200% of the speed limit. I’m more than capable of looking after myself, and anticipating what idiots are on the roads are going to do, and still drive quickly.

On another note, that night in Vegas, I was doing the job of telling people who was dead, and who wasn’t, and comforting people you had either lost or suspected they had lost someone. Yep, it was ****ing horrible, and I don’t ever want to have to do it again, but I will not live my life worrying about it happening again, and I APPLAUD the rights of responsible car owners to drive, and gun owners to own guns. Neither is a killing machine unless it’s owner or driver decides to make it happen.

Hopefully you’ll never see me on the road somewhere, but then again, if I do the Bullrun or Gumball again and it comes through your town, be sure to let me know and I’ll give you a wave

 

Great post, and I certainly sympathize with many of your points. I think a confluence of factors make our roads less safe then say Europe (i.e. Germany, Italy, etc)

Just take basic left lane etiquette for example. I would argue at least here in California 1/3 of folks don't know how the left lane is supposed to work (outside full traffic conditions)

DUI is still a huge problem, as well as pedestrian and bike behavior. Combine that with very easy requirements to get a license and a higher percentage of new immigrants from places with anarchy style of traffic/driving, it combines to form a much more dangerous environment.

Left lane ettiquute is the one single thing that makes 'fast' driving not only possible, but safer and efficient.

I've given up on expecting that to change in the near future.

 

I agree that American left-lane discipline is, well, undisciplined. Horribly so. And, certainly, heavy traffic is not a good place to decide to uncork anything. Conditions matter.

Interestingly, VA recently adopted a left-lane law. You cannot obstruct traffic. I don't know whether this is making any sort of a difference (my own anecdotal evidence would suggest not), but I'd be curious as to how many citations have been issued for violations.

And, I would not be recommending unlimited speeds on local streets within densely-populated areas. However, I can say that traffic on I-95 from DC on South moves at a high rate of speed. I've witnessed traffic easily approaching 90mph. Without so much as a hiccup. And, then, being PASSED. The only dangerous situations tend to occur when the first car in line sees a LEO in the median...

CW

 

300+ not unusual there. **** even my friends wife drove their FF at 330+ there

 

137 lol. Those are rookie numbers

 

I respect your post, but I think we are talking two different things here - you are talking about the speed limit itself but I am talking about having the dangerous mentality of "doing whatever I want" on a public road that involve others. Doing whatever I want with a car at speeds in complete disregard of speed limit and others is simply irresponsible and dangerous. Driving is not a right. We need license to drive. This license can be taken away when we do not follow laws and rules and that means driving is only a privilege. And privilege will only be given when one meets the requirements.

Yes, speed limit exists for a reason and certain roads should definitely have much higher limits. I agree with you that sometimes the slow limits were coming down from the old ages. If the whole world is driving at 80 mph, but someone is driving at 55 mph because of the limit sign says so, then the person driving it slow is likely causing the accident himself.

But that is not what I have been talking about. Again, I am condemning the "I don't give it a damn to anything else" mentality here . Innocent bystanders may have to pay the price for the mistakes of the other individuals who hold this kind of mentality. We have enough of "I don't give it a damn to anything else" mentality here in this continent and we all have seen the pain and everlasting intangible price paid in these televised tragedies.

I am not holier-than-thou. I just wanted to remind everyone that we have beautiful cars and beautiful families. Let's keep them the way they are, and certainly not destroying others. And yes, as physicians, we will all appreciate less opportunities of delivering death news to broken families involved in car accidents.

 

While I wasn't specifically addressing your posts, I'm happy to look back at them and do so. But, when it comes to speed, someone is always happy to get on a soapbox and tell us all what we shouldn't be doing. Is it being prudent or chicken little? It's useful to remember that when anything fun dies. It all started with someone complaining about it. Driving an Enzo at 35mph in a line of minivans isn't my idea of fun. Maybe it's yours.

And, while I'm not trying to be smarmy, if a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound? Someone driving fast on an empty, wide road with limited access would seem to me to be not much of a problem for anyone. Especially if they're qualified. As an aside, we send out LEOs to participate in an arbitrary, revenue generation opportunity. Is that really the best use of their time, in contrast to the serious crimes that LEOs could be off enforcing? Not only that, it arguably creates an "us" v. "them" paradigm, which, I don't think is helpful, either.

Anyway, I can't speak to what someone else "feels" about their driving or their attitude. I understand that if I'm hustling it, I'm elevating my risk. I evaluate it. But, it's not binary: I also have a brake pedal and can adjust, as necessary. I don't suck windshields out of other cars. There will always be unforeseeable risk, though. And, if that's the factor that we have to adjust for, then we just can't have driving, can we? Or eating? Or anything? Because, everything has some level of risk. Stuff can fall out of the sky and kill you while you are sleeping in your safe zone. However, we've opted for a system of grinding speeds down to pure boredom in this Country. Awesomeness abounds everywhere...

CW

 

Great great post.
We could outlaw cars entirely and that would reduce traffic risks further.
Its also true that even though speed limits have risen traffic deaths have still declined, cars are safer.
The latest increase in traffic deaths is attributed entirely to cellphone use while driving. I would posit that with a 100mph speed limit no one would even try texting while driving, they would be engaged in the driving process. Its also a puty youre likely to get nailed speeding at 80 mph on deserted road at night than followign the flow of traffic at 85. The who traffic citation thing is a racket.

Its also true that the minivan mom in an old mini van with bald tires and shot shocks is incrediably dangerous. infact there are an obscene number of cars "drifiting" down the road that woudl in any other country be consididered unroadworthy, amd I'm beibg generous. Dont even get me started on toyota, subaru and expolrer drivers with lexus thrown in who simply hog the left lane impending the flow of traffic, with cars following too close resulting in an inattaebtive rear end somewhere down the line.

So yes if you drop a gear or two when the road opens up and run your well maintained super car up to 140 its frankly no biggie.

I will say having lived in a country wehere speeds between 100-130 were routine, the car and level of focus is on a different level, in that enmviroment your mind and those of other drivers are also calibrated to different closing rates.
Frankly 70% of USA drivers totaly suck even at the speed limit.

As to those who advocate track only, pretty much every street car is too heavy and too soft on track. Im not sure what a modern ferrari is for, I guess the fact that the ac works and with a Auto transmssion its not more challenging to drive to the golf club than a hyundai speaks volumes about purpose. the speed in a modern ferrari is a theoretical speed, implied potetial, the cars calling card, at least in most places.

in any event I totaly agree, 140 on an open stretch is nothing in a modern.

My experience in countries where you can drive fast indiactes that over 150 or so the ball game changes rapidly regardless of traffic, simply because ground is being covered so rapidly. The difference between 150 and 165 feels less than the next 5 mph to 170, and above 170 youre really cooking and have to look really far down the road where youll be pretty soon. Imo even on light trafficed roads 150 is pretty much the safe limit.

 

Of course, everyone is the best judge of their own capabilities. But then the unknows get introduced - road conditions, other drivers, etc. there is no way to control those things. Whether 55 or 75 or even a higher mph is correct in one’s judgement, speed limits were designed to keep traffic flow safe for all drivers under most driving conditions and patterns on a track, that is the true test of the driver’s capabilities (whether perceived or in fact real) in a safe environment not invoking anyone else.

 

I agree where he is coming from. I drive below the speed limit in my neighborhood...... I may go a bit over on empty stretches of road ..... if you can see for miles and there is no one else around, what is the difference between that and a racetrack? I too have spent a lot of time riding at the track..... an empty road is often safer than a track with others on it. One really needs to gauge where and when to speed. In many cases going the speed limit can be very dangerous.... other times it is perfectly safe.

Then there is the argument of how the speed limits have been calculated. Was it an Engineering study to make roads safer..... in many of those studies the speed limit was increased. 100km/h speed limit on a tiny twisty road in New Zealand can be difficult to reach..... while the same speed limit on an empty interstate is too slow to be reasonable.

To say speeding is blanketly dangerous.... is incorrect.

 

as i have often said, i am so glad i lived in europe in the last of the glory years and was able to drive gt's across europe as they were intended to be driven - as a substitute for planes.
nothing like driving on a beautiful french autoroute with virtually nobody on it, at high triple digits, with the goal of arriving on time at a nice venue for dinner.

sadly those days will never return.

btw, this is part of the reason i do not desire any of the newer missiles out there. not only can you never reach their potential on the street, but you dont even have any fun loping around at 25% of their potential. might as well have a vintage car that is slower but more engaging and interesting.

 

I’ve heard that a lot... And I understand where it comes from. But,

Personally if I’m going to drive on a track I don’t want to be in a street car. I want to be in a car with a cage and a fire suppression system. And I want to be wearing a helmet and safety gear. So I can focus and try to go fast. Totally a different environment and not one I want to be in a street car.

To each his own.

 

If you read my other answers you’d know. Since you asked I’ll spell it out a little more for you.

The point was that being a physician has nothing you do with anything being discussed. The mention of it is an attempt to add the appearance of authority and gravitas where there is none. Thanks for asking though.

 

It actually does have a lot to do with what we are saying here. Our occupations and clinical experiences dealing with the injuries of car accidents due to speeding add validity to the perspective we try to bring your attention to.

We are telling you something you simply don't know until it is too late for you, because if you did, you would not be able to type out these responses on internet.

Well just do not drag other unknowing parties into your choice in life, because that is the price you can never pay as it is someone else's life.

Ciao.

 

Clearly you are unwilling to read what’s been written. Perhaps you might consider going back and reading the responses. Yes, I have watched people die. In cars. I have a shoulder that doesn’t work, a knee that will never work right, and my hips are 30 years older than the rest of me among many other crash injuries.

And no, your educational background and profession isn’t relevant no matter how much you may wish it to be. If you wish to assail another persons logic perhaps you should brush up a bit.

 

Left-lane discipline applies to most, if not all central European countries; France, ITA, CH, etc.

 

Germany - yes, France - yes, Italy - mostly yes..... CH..... not really yes. I found Switzerland to be similar to some parts of Canada.... some peeps loved the passing lane...... passing slowly. Spent a summer in Basel and been through CH a number of times.

There is a marked difference between France and Germany and the rest of Europe.

 

Most of Canada has seemed better about that than here in Texas. Here in the cities it’s awful. In the countryside it’s also awful.

 

The worse is when I politely signal right to pass a left lane hog, and then they Speed Up! Like it's a race!

You wanna go slower? Many lanes to choose from on the RIGHT!!

Best analogy I came up with is this. Say you are on the sidewalk going for a liesurely stroll, would you ever go out of your way to block a jogger behind you?