[010101]

Originally Posted by ukthunderace

And here, if you are frustrated, you can not even flip someone off as you go by. If they get your license plate, they can bring you into court and charge you. You end up paying a couple of hundred Euro.

How is that even possible? I know this is a law, but unless a police officer sees it isn't it just your word against theirs? I don't see how someone could be found guilty of something like that based on someone else accusing them of it unless it was on camera or a third party saw it.

[ukthunderace]

I know...it seems crazy yes? But that is the way of things here. We are now not even allowed to flash our lights at someone to tell them to get their slow asses out of the way.

[010101]

Originally Posted by ukthunderace

I know...it seems crazy yes? But that is the way of things here. We are now not even allowed to flash our lights at someone to tell them to get their slow asses out of the way.

But what I'm saying is if you said you didn't do it and they said you did do it how does their word in court hold more weight than yours? What happens if you tell the judge they flipped you off too? Do you both have to pay fines? Haha yeah that is crazy. I use my horn, high beams and finger all the time. That would be a hard habit to break.

[ukthunderace]

Originally Posted by 010101

But what I'm saying is if you said you didn't do it and they said you did do it how does their word in court hold more weight than yours? What happens if you tell the judge they flipped you off too? Do you both have to pay fines? Haha yeah that is crazy. I use my horn, high beams and finger all the time. That would be a hard habit to break.

I suppose the judges think that no one would go through the trouble of taking someone to court unless it was true.

[010101]

Originally Posted by ukthunderace

I suppose the judges think that no one would go through the trouble of taking someone to court unless it was true.

lol.. well here's what you do next time someone crowds the fast lane that you would like to flip off but can't. Write down their plate number and report them for flipping you off

[Dante]

Originally Posted by funkahdafi

I can see one positive thing about the speed limit though: Less agression on the Autobahn = less fatal accidents.

Totally with you there. I always enjoy the relaxed driving on Austrian highways (130kph limit). They have less traffic in general though.

Originally Posted by ukthunderace

In the past couple of years I have seen a realy decline in driving. People in the slow lane put their indicator on and change lanes without looking into the fast lane. This is all the time. When they get in the fast lane, they continue to go 100kph and hold up traffic. Then, if there is anything in the slow lane within the next half mile, they will stay in the fast lane until they finally overtake that vehicle. Sometimes I just overtake them in the right lane, but that is illegal here, so not very often...only when really really frustrated.
And here, if you are frustrated, you can not even flip someone off as you go by. If they get your license plate, they can bring you into court and charge you. You end up paying a couple of hundred Euro.

It's even worse: More and more people pull out of the right lane without even flashing! Germans have become real lazy asses! I also overtake on the right when I'm frustrated. There is no other way sometimes.

Originally Posted by ukthunderace

I know...it seems crazy yes? But that is the way of things here. We are now not even allowed to flash our lights at someone to tell them to get their slow asses out of the way.

But you may use your left indicator!

Originally Posted by 010101

But what I'm saying is if you said you didn't do it and they said you did do it how does their word in court hold more weight than yours? What happens if you tell the judge they flipped you off too? Do you both have to pay fines? Haha yeah that is crazy. I use my horn, high beams and finger all the time. That would be a hard habit to break.

If you and the opponent are alone, than it's word against word. But if there are witnesses, you are in trouble. The government recently tightened measures for this.

[010101]

Do German BMWs and Mercs have the same speed limiters in Germany that they have here? I know some of them don't (M's), but what about a run of the mill e90?

[Dante]

Originally Posted by 010101

Do German BMWs and Mercs have the same speed limiters in Germany that they have here? I know some of them don't (M's), but what about a run of the mill e90?

All german car manufacturers (exept Porsche) made a voluntary agreement to not exeed 250 kmh (155mph).
That applies worldwide. Even ///M cars fall under that restriction.

[010101]

Originally Posted by Dante

All german car manufacturers (exept Porsche) made a voluntary agreement to not exeed 250 kmh (155mph).
That applies worldwide. Even ///M cars fall under that restriction.

Oh... for some reason I thought I read that a German M5 wasn't limited. So even the top AMGs have the limiter? That sucks. Good for Porsche. Did they just decide that they weren't going to do it and that was the end of it? This sort of reminds me of how Japanese Manufacturers limit their horse power. At least they did until recently.

PS Do you know when this agreement was made?

[Dante]

Originally Posted by 010101

Oh... for some reason I thought I read that a German M5 wasn't limited. So even the top AMGs have the limiter? That sucks. Good for Porsche. Did they just decide that they weren't going to do it and that was the end of it? This sort of reminds me of how Japanese Manufacturers limit their horse power. At least they did until recently.

PS Do you know when this agreement was made?

Porsche exclusively is building true sports cars (minus the cayenne maybe), I think a 250kmh limit would not be appropriate. Imagine a 911 turbo with 480hp 'crashing' into a limiter at 250kmh in 4th gear...

Sorry, I don't know when this agreement was made.

[010101]

Originally Posted by Dante

Porsche exclusively is building true sports cars (minus the cayenne maybe), I think a 250kmh limit would not be appropriate. Imagine a 911 turbo with 480hp 'crashing' into a limiter at 250kmh in 4th gear...

Sorry, I don't know when this agreement was made.

It seems as though a 500 hp M6 would have the same problem. I guess that's probably a big selling point for Porsches over M's in Germany since you can actually drive cars over 155 mph there. Here in America I don't think anyone cares about the limiter since we rarely get to drive faster then 155 on public roads, and when we do it can mean big fines and jail time.

[Dante]

Originally Posted by 010101

It seems as though a 500 hp M6 would have the same problem. I guess that's probably a big selling point for Porsches over M's in Germany since you can actually drive cars over 155 mph there. Here in America I don't think anyone cares about the limiter since we rarely get to drive faster then 155 on public roads, and when we do it can mean big fines and jail time.

Agreed on the M5/6.

But I guess that's only a plus for Porsche when you intend to go to race tracks regularily. Also, you are able to remove the limiter legally in Germany since this is a voluntary agreement. But traffic is pretty dense in Germany, going over 250 for more then seconds is impossible during daytime or at least extremely dangerous.

Hence all those existing videos are taken by night.

[010101]

Originally Posted by Dante

But traffic is pretty dense in Germany, going over 250 for more then seconds is impossible during daytime or at least extremely dangerous.

Hence all those existing videos are taken by night.

I noticed that. I saw a show on the autobahn and Ruf was testing a car in the dead of night at 211MPH. It seems like this would be driving way past the limits of the headlights. I guess they routinely do this though, so it must not be an issue.

[bmwexecutive]

If a speed limit is imposed on the Autobahn all it's going to do is make German's drive faster.

[funkahdafi]

the M cars are factory limited, but you can go to a BMW driver's training and get it removed, even in Germany!

[NFS]

Originally Posted by bimmerFUD

Not true. It goes like the square of the speed (v * v, not exp(v)). That's a HUGE difference when v is big...try putting exp(100) in your calculator.

It is true. If air resistance if proportional to the square of velocity then air resistance increases exponentially:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponential_growth

[Dante]

Originally Posted by needforspeed

It is true. If air resistance if proportional to the square of velocity then air resistance increases exponentially:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponential_growth

Once again, needforspeed has got the better arguments!

[NFS]

Originally Posted by Dante

All german car manufacturers (exept Porsche) made a voluntary agreement to not exeed 250 kmh (155mph).
That applies worldwide. Even ///M cars fall under that restriction.

Ironically this 'gentlemans agreement' was established to keep the autobahns unlimited:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...9023920AAuRFI2

Porsche never adopted it and BMW / Merc / Audi are now moving away from it.

http://www.channel4.com/4car/news/ne...32&ref=archive

[bimmerFUD]

Originally Posted by needforspeed

It is true. If air resistance if proportional to the square of velocity then air resistance increases exponentially:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponential_growth

Instead of just finding the link, you need to actually read it:

"Polynomials grow subexponentially.."

x * x is polynomial. But I'm sure you knew this

[NFS]

Originally Posted by bimmerFUD

Instead of just finding the link, you need to actually read it:

"Polynomials grow subexponentially.."

x * x is polynomial. But I'm sure you knew this

I did read the link.

I also read this one just now:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponent

If we say:

Air friction = velocity to the power of '2' (i.e. velocity squared)

Then in this case 2 is the 'exponent'.

Most people would be satisfied that something which increase to the power of 'x' is increasing exponentially. For example in this article it is stated that drag increases exponentially with speed:

http://www.theengineer.co.uk/liChann...erent+line.htm

Now I understand that 'x to the power of 2' is a polynomial function, but '2 to the power of x' is an exponential function.

So I guess you would accept that "drag increases polynomially with velocity?"

Of perhaps that "drag increases sub-exponentially with velocity"

The problem with these statements is that no-one will understand them.

In a non-mathmatical sense, people understand exponential growth as something which increases more and more quickly over time. This statement would apply to exponential and polynomial growths.

This thread is about the question of speed and carbon emissions. The point is that as speed increases air friction increases in a non-linear way. The faster you go the GREATER the increase in friction for every additional mph of speed.

This is why gearing alone cannot make 155mph as fuel efficient as 80mph.

[Lost Cosmonaut]

To the Germans: My understanding from talking to other Germans I know is that those crappy aggressive drivers on the Autobahn who do stupid stuff are generally eastern european drivers and tourists. Is that right? Or is it changing and more Germans are doing it too?

- LC

[bimmerFUD]

Originally Posted by needforspeed

I did read the link.
Air friction = velocity to the power of '2' (i.e. velocity squared)

Then in this case 2 is the 'exponent'.

Correct. And if instead v is the exponent, then then the drag would increase exponentially. The distinction makes an orders-of-magnitude difference.

Most people would be satisfied that something which increase to the power of 'x' is increasing exponentially. For example in this article it is stated that drag increases exponentially with speed:

http://www.theengineer.co.uk/liChann...erent+line.htm

They're wrong. I thought only Americans believed everything they read on the internet

Now I understand that 'x to the power of 2' is a polynomial function, but '2 to the power of x' is an exponential function.

Correct!

So I guess you would accept that "drag increases polynomially with velocity?"

In this case, the word is "quadratically."

The point is that as speed increases air friction increases in a non-linear way. The faster you go the GREATER the increase in friction for every additional mph of speed.

For someone who cannot distinguish between quadratic and exponential behavior, it's much better to simply say "if you double the speed, then there's four times the air resistance."

But saying "exponential" behavior in this case is simply wrong and just because some layman uses it, doesn't make it correct.

The distinction is not just semantics. Roughly, to a good engineer (not one who writes internet articles), exponential behavior is nearly impossible to overcome, whereas with quadratic behavior, you have some hope.

This is why gearing alone cannot make 155mph as fuel efficient as 80mph.

That's not necessarily true. Just accounting for air resistance (no other mechanical losses), taller gearing can definitely overcome increased drag. Now if it the air resistance truly did grown exponentially, I'd be more inclined to agree with you

But with taller gearing, coupled with a decrease in the drag *coefficient* (the factor in front of v * v), it is feasible to make 155mph as fuel efficient as 80mph. Even without the gearing change, you just need a decrease in drag coefficient (and/or cross-sectional area) of 1/4. Not easy, but I can give examples if you're not already bored out of your mind with my diatribe