[SteveinArizona]

Without expressing a view either way, why will Volvo make and sell vehicles with 400 HP if they limit the speed to 112 mph? Shouldn't they stop selling the hybrid supercharged versions?

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by SteveinArizona

Without expressing a view either way, why will Volvo make and sell vehicles with 400 HP if they limit the speed to 112 mph? Shouldn't they stop selling the hybrid supercharged versions?

You ask this question on a car forum?
Are you under the impression that horsepower is only needed for a high top speed?
You haven't heard anything about this thing called 'acceleration'?

[detroitm2]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

You ask this question on a car forum?
Are you under the impression that horsepower is only needed for a high top speed?
You haven't heard anything about this thing called 'acceleration'?

To be fair, the kind of people who buy higher performance vehicles will likely be turned off by such a low imposed limit (even if they never hit it)

[Shiza]

Originally Posted by detroitm2

To be fair, the kind of people who buy higher performance vehicles will likely be turned off by such a low imposed limit (even if they never hit it)

A little coding can solve that though

I'm sure a lot of us here have a tune/coding done to remove the limiter

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by detroitm2

To be fair, the kind of people who buy higher performance vehicles will likely be turned off by such a low imposed limit (even if they never hit it)

I'd rather have decent acceleration than a limiter you're never going to hit....
But that's probably the difference between a sane buyer and a braggin' buyer.
Hence my previous post about Volvo making foremost sensible cars.

[ecaedus]

if this means insurance can reduce my premium then yes i support it.

[allinon72]

Originally Posted by ecaedus

if this means insurance can reduce my premium then yes i support it.

There are devices offered by most insurance companies that plug into your OBD port and track your every move. Would you also be ok with that, if the only thing that matters to you is lower premiums?

[detroitm2]

Originally Posted by ecaedus

if this means insurance can reduce my premium then yes i support it.

I love to hear people in cities complain about insurance rates.

Its truly ridiculous here, and most other cities do not even come close.

But, I do echo your sentiment about it. Something needs to be done.

[ecaedus]

Originally Posted by allinon72

There are devices offered by most insurance companies that plug into your OBD port and track your every move. Would you also be ok with that, if the only thing that matters to you is lower premiums?

actually i would tbh, that block of glass and aluminum in my pocket right now does the same thing and i don't even get any savings at all. NSA should reimburse me for this crap damn it.

[Darth One]

Originally Posted by allinon72

For those saying "no one needs to go over 112mph", you're missing the point. It's a slippery slope to completely locked down cars that are GPS limited to the speed limit, etc. There's no reason for an automaker to do this, it doesn't benefit them in any way other than another 5 second safety tagline.

At least in the US, people don't want to be restricted.

Yups, this is one of those gun control or tax increase-type situations where the proposals start out reasonable/within your comfort zone, but you always have to think about the slippery slope. as someone already mentioned, what if it was limited to 90?

with that said, Volvo is doing this of their own accord. i'm not worried until governments try to pick this up, or some kind of political pressure gets exerted on all automakers.

[ecaedus]

Originally Posted by detroitm2

I love to hear people in cities complain about insurance rates.

Its truly ridiculous here, and most other cities do not even come close.

But, I do echo your sentiment about it. Something needs to be done.

it's because of the sheer number of uninsured motorists in socal, insurance companies got to make money somehow...it's like a twisted version of communism

[Run Silent]

Originally Posted by allinon72

For those saying "no one needs to go over 112mph", you're missing the point. It's a slippery slope to completely locked down cars that are GPS limited to the speed limit, etc. There's no reason for an automaker to do this, it doesn't benefit them in any way other than another 5 second safety tagline.

At least in the US, people don't want to be restricted.

Originally Posted by Darth One

Yups, this is one of those gun control or tax increase-type situations where the proposals start out reasonable/within your comfort zone, but you always have to think about the slippery slope. as someone already mentioned, what if it was limited to 90?

with that said, Volvo is doing this of their own accord. i'm not worried until governments try to pick this up, or some kind of political pressure gets exerted on all automakers.

Well, let's see here:

1) No one is mandating this, it is a choice made by a single car maker. So slippery slope argument doesn't apply.

2) You say it doesn't benefit them in any way, but it does. It gets people talking and it does align with their marketing strategy of safety.

3) The slippery slope argument always seemed a bit invalid to me, and I am a pretty anti-government guy. The slippery slope seems somewhat nonsensical, because it can be applied to everything and most comparisons fail to prove its validity.

Why make a speed limit 70mph? Sooner or later, we will all be driving 10mph on the highways.

Why make murder illegal? Sooner or later, it will be illegal to rudely speak to someone.

Why make F1 cars on public streets illegal? Sooner or later, it will be illegal to drive a Mercedes on the street.

None of these arguments make any sense and are ridiculous.

[CosmosMpower]

112? sometimes I hit that on the on ramp before even merging onto the freeway.

[Humdizzle]

lame

but the aftermarket will always find a way around these things. I was so mad after buying my f30 335 only to realize it had a 130 governer.

[Darth One]

Originally Posted by Run Silent

Well, let's see here:

1) No one is mandating this, it is a choice made by a single car maker. So slippery slope argument doesn't apply.

2) You say it doesn't benefit them in any way, but it does. It gets people talking and it does align with their marketing strategy of safety.

3) The slippery slope argument always seemed a bit invalid to me, and I am a pretty anti-government guy. The slippery slope seems somewhat nonsensical, because it can be applied to everything and most comparisons fail to prove its validity.

Why make a speed limit 70mph? Sooner or later, we will all be driving 10mph on the highways.

Why make murder illegal? Sooner or later, it will be illegal to rudely speak to someone.

Why make F1 cars on public streets illegal? Sooner or later, it will be illegal to drive a Mercedes on the street.

None of these arguments make any sense and are ridiculous.

now, perhaps it would behoove you to read the second paragraph of my post?

i wrote an acknowledgement that this is a voluntary action by one company, and we don't really have anything to fear right now. was just humoring the discussion point and thinking theoretically. the slippery slope (again, theoretically) is whether we as a society are ok with imposing monitoring and controls in an area where there currently is none (i.e. complete freedom).

[Unknown_Car]

Originally Posted by Run Silent

For the vast bulk of people - I don't see this being an issue or something even worth mentioning.

Let's face it, there is no reason to be going over 80-90mph on any road, ever, with exception of some in Germany, if you are driving a typical family sedan or SUV - the kind of cars that Volvo produces.

I don't even really have an issue with something like this on sport[y] sedans and coupes like the BMW non-M models, either. That is a pretty reasonable speed limit and no one on public roads is ever going to need to exceed it.

This doesn't even help, most accidents don't happen because people drive 60+MPH over the limit.

[Unknown_Car]

Originally Posted by CosmosMpower

112? sometimes I hit that on the on ramp before even merging onto the freeway.

Haha exactly.

[Run Silent]

Originally Posted by Roma_335i

This doesn't even help, most accidents don't happen because people drive 60+MPH over the limit.

Ah, but you would be wrong, sir.

You are correct with respect to the fact that most accidents happen at slower speeds, but higher speeds are the number one cause of fatalities in accidents and that is what Volvo is pro porting to want to reduce - not accidents, but fatal accidents.

Reducing speeds at which accidents occur is one of the primary ways to reduce fatalities in MVA's.

[eatsleepboost]

Originally Posted by Shiza

A little coding can solve that though

I'm sure a lot of us here have a tune/coding done to remove the limiter

+1. My Evo had a speed limiter. Coded that out myself even though I had yet to hit it.

[Matt 335is]

This does not get a rise out of me at all. Would not care if all car manufactures implemented this.

[overlook637]

Originally Posted by allinon72

For those saying "no one needs to go over 112mph", you're missing the point. It's a slippery slope to completely locked down cars that are GPS limited to the speed limit, etc. There's no reason for an automaker to do this, it doesn't benefit them in any way other than another 5 second safety tagline.

At least in the US, people don't want to be restricted.

There was no reason or little reason for car makers to initially offer: seatbelts, front airbags, ABS, shoulder seat belts, back up cameras. Early on it was optional on most cars, then standard on some, for others it took the govt mandate to force them.

I could see a company doing the math and catering to a customer base. Safety is a big aspect for some companies. Resale value and insurance costs are all in someways effected by speeding /crashes.

[overlook637]

Most all cars are ECU speed limited. They just don't highlight it.

Many new cars have teenager mode. The parents can set the max speed on the car. and/or send a alert to the parents when speeds are exceeding.

Like it or not but the days of speeding are coming to a end. Either the government or private markets will adjust. I can easily see car insurance companies offering prices that push people into operating cars with safety limits OR pay huge premium costs. Think drunk driver insurance rates. Or health care insurance have different pricing, as they do for smokers.