Legal Street Racing?

[Joey D]

On a 55mph road, in dry and daylight conditions I will go no more then an indicated 60mph (I think my speedometer is a bit off) or if the flow of traffic is slower I will go whatever speed there is. I stay in the right lane and only go into the left if I have to over take someone.

During the night I will go the indicated speed limit, sometimes slower depending on if there is glare. I try to avoid a lot of night driving due to my glasses since they make it a little bit harder, therefore not as safe to myself or other drivers. Plus there are a lot of deer in Michigan.

During poor weather I go with whatever is safe, I would rather be a few minutes late then have a banged up car.

The highway is a bit different but this is Michigan and really only Michiganders understand this. You just drive with the flow of traffic and the law enforcement will only get you if you are going faster or weaving through traffic. I've been told this same thing by more then one officer, although I'm willing to bet it's not the same for all of them. I've been in areas where everyone is doing 65mph and I've been in areas where everyone is doing 90mph. And I always drive in the right lanes until I have to overtake someone (typically a tractor trailer).

When no one is around I keep the car around 75mph but sometimes will go above 80mph on small downgrades.

Now I do not think speed is automatically bad or dangerous, especially on a 6 lane highway. It's more of the going overly fast on a twisty road is where I have the issue. On corners I will slow down, typically by downshifting to save on the brakes, and take it at whatever speed is safe.

Back in my more youthful days I would speed in excess and it only took one slightly close call to make me realise that I was being foolish and I could do some real damage if I didn't shape up on the road. Now I just take it easy because for one, I love my car and I don't want to put unneeded risk on it. The road isn't a race track and if I want to go have some fun I'll just go to an auto cross, which is something I will be doing when the weather gets warmer...I own a Mini after all.

 

[///M-Spec]

^ Okay. So you, like 85% of drivers out there, basically drive about the same speed as everyone else. So do I.

So why don't you drive, say 50 in a 55? It is safer isn't it? If something completely beyond your control occurs, the difference between 60 and 50 mph would translate into (depending on your vehicle braking performance and your reaction speed) quite a few car lengths. It could mean the difference between rear ending someone and stopping just in time, wouldn't it?


M

 

[Famine]

^ Okay. So you, like 85% of drivers out there, basically drive about the same speed as everyone else. So do I.

So why don't you drive, say 50 in a 55? It is safer isn't it? If something completely beyond your control occurs, the difference between 60 and 50 mph would translate into (depending on your vehicle braking performance and your reaction speed) quite a few car lengths. It could mean the difference between rear ending someone and stopping just in time, wouldn't it?

M

If two identical cars travelling at 50mph (A) and 60mph (B) apply the brakes at the same instant with the same force on the same surface, when car A has stopped, car B is still travelling at 30mph.

Fun fact.

 

[///M-Spec]

Fun fact.

Another fun fact: According to the February 2002 issue of Road and Track, the difference between a Mini Cooper braking from 80 mph and a Cooper from 60 mph is 110 feet.

60 mph: 143 ft
80 mph: 253 ft

Link: http://www.roadandtrack.com/reviews/roadtests/pdf/2002_02_mini_cooper.pdf

110 feet is roughly the length of 5 (and a half) Maybach 57s, parked end to end.


M

 

[Joey D]

^ Okay. So you, like 85% of drivers out there, basically drive about the same speed as everyone else. So do I.

So why don't you drive, say 50 in a 55? It is safer isn't it? If something completely beyond your control occurs, the difference between 60 and 50 mph would translate into (depending on your vehicle braking performance and your reaction speed) quite a few car lengths. It could mean the difference between rear ending someone and stopping just in time, wouldn't it?


M

I find people who driver under the flow of traffic to be more dangerous and unsafe then those going slightly faster. This is because you will get someone who gets angry and whips around them, most of the time cutting someone off which may cause an accident. I've seen more then once and I'm sure many others have as well.

Roads have speed limits for a reason and whether or not we agree with them or not the safest thing to do is have everyone on that road traveling at a similar speed with the proper distance between each car.

And if you are traveling faster, you should leave more car lengths between you and the vehicle in front of you, something I try to maintain as best as I can. Everyone could be doing 100mph and with the proper distance between vehicles there wouldn't be an issue.

 

[///M-Spec]

^ But what if a falling tree came down in front of you? Or a drunk falls off an overpass? Or... (sorry to throw this right back at you), but what if you hit a pothole and blow a tire or snap a control arm?

You agree that all else being equal, 50 is safer than 60, right? I mean, we're talking a few Maybach lengths here.


M

 

[Joey D]

Of course there will always be things that you can not control, which is why I am against spirited driving. There is always some risk in driving and I see no need to increase that risk by even a small fraction.

And I didn't say 50 is safer then 60, 60 is perfectly safe as long as you leave yourself plenty of stopping room. This is assuming we are on a road that permits these speeds since they typically do not have severe corners or narrow passageways.

 

[Famine]

That reduces the traffic capacity of the road though - causing traffic jams.

At 100mph you should trail at least 300 feet from the car in front in dry, clear conditions (about 2 seconds' worth). On a three-lane wide, bidirectional freeway, that's a capacity of 53 cars per mile (ignoring fractions of cars - centring each car on the 300th foot).

At 55mph you should leave at least 80 feet (again, about 2 seconds' worth). That's a capacity on the same road of 198 cars per mile - nearly 4 times as many cars...

Of course there will always be things that you can not control, which is why I am against spirited driving. There is always some risk in driving and I see no need to increase that risk by even a small fraction.

Except that part of spirited driving is not exceeding the safe limit. In many ways someone engaged in the practice of spirited driving is actually a safer driver than the average "normal" driver, because they are more aware of, and constantly assessing and reassessing, potential hazards and driving accordingly - rather than trudging along with the rest of them, too fast, too close and too unaware.

 

[Dave A]

I honestly can't understand how people are having a hard time understanding what Famine is saying. He hasn't contradicted himself once and it's pretty plain English.

To some a spirited drive might include speeding, but spirited driving is not speeding nor is Famine saying spirited driving that does involve it is good. A spirited drive can be enjoyed keeping perfectly within safe and legal limits and as long as your within both then you are not posing any risk to yourself or other road users beyond what you would other wise. Ofcourse some idiot might still end up crashing into you, but that might happen any day. If you're concentrating and keeping within your safe limits, your cars safe limits and the legal limits you will not have an accident that is caused by your driving that wouldn't or couldn't have happened otherwise such as another road user hitting you becasue they exceeded thier safe limits.

 

[Joey D]

Except that part of spirited driving is not exceeding the safe limit. In many ways someone engaged in the practice of spirited driving is actually a safer driver than the average "normal" driver, because they are more aware of, and constantly assessing and reassessing, potential hazards and driving accordingly - rather than trudging along with the rest of them, too fast, too close and too unaware.

You might not exceed the limit while engaged in spirited driving but what about those who do. Just because one or two people understand the concept that does not mean anyone else is, the safest thing to do is just not have anyone do it. I don't want someone to end up hitting me head on because they felt like cornering a bit peppery.

Also if you are driving normal you should be quite aware of what is around you, if you aren't, then you aren't driving normal. When I'm out for a drive I am very aware of everything around me, checking for the motorist flying up on the outside lane, looking for the idiotic biker in the road, watching for emergency vehicles, etc.

I honestly can't understand how people are having a hard time understanding what Famine is saying. He hasn't contradicted himself once and it's pretty plain English.

Because we don't agree with what he is saying 💡?

 

[Dave A]

Because we don't agree with what he is saying 💡?

Agreement doesn't come into it, Famine isn't saying somrthing that is an opinion except on one or two smaller details. The fact of what he is saying is that you don't have to be driving dangerousely to bedriving spiritedly, no more so than drivin gregularly. Any accident caused by you under both driving mentalities is caused by you exceeding safe limits be it the cars or yours. As long as you are driving within your limts, the cars limits adn the legal limits there is absolutely nothing wrong with a spirited drive nor will you be any more likely to cause an accident than you would if you were driving regularly. That's not opinion based.

The bits that are opinion based are things like are you driving fast if you arn't exceeding safe or legal limit speeds or not. That can be a matter of opinion, I'd say you are not driving fast if you are within the safe speed, other might say the legal speed, others might say neither are right. But the fact of what Famine is saying is that if you are within all your safe limits then you are driving as safe as you can be within the same reason that having a 5mph limit on all roads because it's safer than 30 is not reasonable.

 

[Famine]

Just because one or two people understand the concept that does not mean anyone else is

If someone's concept of driving spiritedly does not involve them driving safely then they are not meeting the brief. They are, on the other hand, driving fast which is, as I've stressed from the start, a wholly different thing.

the safest thing to do is just not have anyone do it.

But if I'm both safe and legal, how do you propose to stop me?

Many people do not understand the concept of safe driving of any kind - would the safest thing to do be just not have anyone do it?

Also if you are driving normal you should be quite aware of what is around you, if you aren't, then you aren't driving normal. When I'm out for a drive I am very aware of everything around me, checking for the motorist flying up on the outside lane, looking for the idiotic biker in the road, watching for emergency vehicles, etc.

Interesting that you pick two examples of people driving normally who aren't aware of everything that is around them...


I quite like the third example - emergency vehicles which are, in the UK, driven by people specifically taught how to drive above the legal limit (which no longer applies to them) but within a safe limit...

 

[Joey D]

Actually it is an opinion, some feel that spirited driving is acceptable on the road while others do not. I feel there is everything wrong with anything other then normal driving on the road and that is my opinion. Some obviously feel that it is ok, which is their opinion. The only one to determine whether or not we are right or wrong is the law enforcement if they pull you over for driving like such.

Also I feel you are only with in the safe limits when you are driving normal and full aware of your surroundings.

But if I'm both safe and legal, how do you propose to stop me?

I can't, I can not legally do anything to stop you. And as I've said if the law enforcement find it to be reckless then I support them to deal out punishment in whatever way they deem fitting, whether the spirited driver feels they were within the law or not.

Interesting that you pick two examples of people driving normally who aren't aware of everything that is around them...


I quite like the third example - emergency vehicles which are, in the UK, driven by people specifically taught how to drive above the legal limit (which no longer applies to them) but within a safe limit...

Checking for speeding motorist and for pedestrians/bikers in the roadway are something you need to be aware of. I wasn't going to list every single thing an aware driver needed to well be aware of. That list would be huge, I was merely giving example hence the etc. at the end. I was just pulling a few examples.

I'm curious why you think it the first two aren't something drivers need to be aware of.

 

[Famine]

Actually it is an opinion, some feel that spirited driving is acceptable on the road while others do not. I feel there is everything wrong with anything other then normal driving on the road and that is my opinion.

Because you don't understand the concept of the Safe Limit. I made a post in the old Premium thread which linked to some articles you in particular might find enlightening. I'll PM you with a direct link if you're interested.

The only one to determine whether or not we are right or wrong is the law enforcement if they pull you over for driving like such.

Also I feel you are only with in the safe limits when you are driving normal and full aware of your surroundings.

I can not legally do anything to stop you. And as I've said if the law enforcement find it to be reckless then I support them to deal out punishment in whatever way they deem fitting, whether the spirited driver feels they were within the law or not.

And given that my definition of safe driving comes directly from Roadcraft, the advance police driving "bible", only with the additional factor of the legal limits (since I am not exempted), that looks unlikely.

Though, like them, I am not exempt from making mistakes. And, like them, I allow for my mistakes - which is why I'd never approach driving on the very edge while on public roads.

Checking for speeding motorist and for pedestrians/bikers in the roadway are something you need to be aware of. I wasn't going to list every single thing an aware driver needed to well be aware of. That list would be huge, I was merely giving example hence the etc. at the end. I was just pulling a few examples.

I'm curious why you think it the first two aren't something drivers need to be aware of.

You misunderstand - the two examples you cited first ("the motorist flying up on the outside lane", "the idiotic biker in the road") were both people driving normally for them who aren't aware of their surroundings, instead hoping that other motorists notice them.

 

[Joey D]

Because you don't understand the concept of the Safe Limit. I made a post in the old Premium thread which linked to some articles you in particular might find enlightening. I'll PM you with a direct link if you're interested.

I'll be happy to give them a read, but why not just post them in here so other members can read them since they would be in tone with the thread.

Safe limits means different things to different people, what I see is a safe limit isn't what you see as a safe limit and vice versa. It also has a lot to do with the area you grew up in. I only briefly drove in UK so I can't even remotely comment on how it is over there. Going by our discussion it must be quite different.

And given that my definition of safe driving comes directly from Roadcraft, the advance police driving "bible", only with the additional factor of the legal limits (since I am not exempted), that looks unlikely.

Though, like them, I am not exempt from making mistakes. And, like them, I allow for my mistakes - which is why I'd never approach driving on the very edge while on public roads.

It's the mistakes that concern me though, you could go through a corner spirited 999 times but on that 1000 times there could be an unexpected obstacle you need to avoid and my not be able to. Yes it could happen if you were driving normal, but there is a less of a chance (even if slightly) if you are driving normal.

You misunderstand - the two examples you cited first ("the motorist flying up on the outside lane", "the idiotic biker in the road") were both people driving normally for them who aren't aware of their surroundings, instead hoping that other motorists notice them.

Ah yes, my apologies for that.

 

[Famine]

Safe limits means different things to different people, what I see is a safe limit isn't what you see as a safe limit and vice versa. It also has a lot to do with the area you grew up in. I only briefly drove in UK so I can't even remotely comment on how it is over there. Going by our discussion it must be quite different.

There really isn't any room for manouevre on what a safe limit is - though there's plenty of scope within what is legal.

It's the mistakes that concern me though, you could go through a corner spirited 999 times but on that 1000 times there could be an unexpected obstacle you need to avoid and my not be able to. Yes it could happen if you were driving normal, but there is a less of a chance (even if slightly) if you are driving normal.

You show me someone who makes NO mistakes during a week's driving, and I'll show you a liar.

Unexpected obstacles are one of the things you expect while observing a safe limit. Remember rule 1: Always be sure you can stop in the distance you can see to be clear. If any unexpected obstacle hoves into view you ought to be able to stop before you hit it. If not, you were going too fast and not observing a safe limit.

 

[Stevisiov]

Actually it is an opinion, some feel that spirited driving is acceptable on the road while others do not. I feel there is everything wrong with anything other then normal driving on the road and that is my opinion.

I can't see what is to disagree with, be it your opinion or not you base it on the premise that spirited driving is more dangerous than normal driving. Just re-read Dave A's or Famines posts a bit more carefully. While you may think spirited driving is more dangerous, conversely I would be inclined to say that spirited driving is in fact just as safe if not safer. You increase your focus when driving spiritedly and also increase your awareness, unlike normal driving when you are very much in Autopilot. Sure you are conscious but you brain isn't processing at the rate it could, if you are bored in particular this effect can be pronounced long journeys can have that effect. Having fun whilst driving (note, that doesn't mean driving dangerously) will help keep your brain engaged so to speak, if your mind is fully on the task in hand then you are very likely to be safer than someone who is driving autonomously without thinking too much.

As I said, this isn't really a matter of opinion, you can (that’s right can) drive safely and spiritedly, the only reason I can see that you don't agree is that you have a misinterpretation of what spirited driving is.

 

[Joey D]

As I said, this isn't really a matter of opinion, you can (that’s right can) drive safely and spiritedly, the only reason I can see that you don't agree is that you have a misinterpretation of what spirited driving is.

I've stated that:

-Everyone has a different view of spirited driving.
-I believe that sort of driving has no place on the public road.
-Spirited driving doesn't mean you are going to crash, I think there is an increased risk.
-Any increased risk is bad judgment call.

This is why I do not agree. This is an opinion matter whether you think it is or not. You are entitled to feel as you do, as am I. I don't see what is so hard about that, it seems like it's a common thing on these boards though.

 

[Danoff]

I've stated that:

-Everyone has a different view of spirited driving.

Famine is using it as something with a hard and fast definition. Adopt his definition (for convenience). If you still disagree, then by all means continue with the conversation. If you no longer disagree, then you're not really arguing about anything important - just language convention.

-I believe that sort of driving has no place on the public road.

See if you still agree with this after you adopt Famine's precise definition for spirited driving.

-Spirited driving doesn't mean you are going to crash, I think there is an increased risk.
-Any increased risk is bad judgment call.

Then taking the road at all is a bad judgement call. You should ride a bus, or take light rail or some other form of public transportation. And you should definitely not buy any car even closely resembling a mini cooper, which is certainly not the safest car you could own.

Risks are inherent with getting up in the morning and existing in the world. Spirited driving is an attempt to enjoy driving while maintaining safety. And I believe that this can be done and is quite a good thing to do.

I think one of the most unsafe aspects of driving is the fact that 90% of the people around you have no idea what their cars are capable of. If people did a little more spirited driving and understood their car's handling characteristics a bit better, I'd feel a whole lot safer.

 

[Joey D]

Famine is using it as something with a hard and fast definition. Adopt his definition (for convenience). If you still disagree, then by all means continue with the conversation. If you no longer disagree, then you're not really arguing about anything important - just language convention.

See if you still agree with this after you adopt Famine's precise definition for spirited driving.

Then maybe Famine should redirect me to his definition because I don't know word for word what it was. I understand you don't have to drive fast or break the limits of the road but I still feel driving anything over normally what your are supposed to be doing adds increased and un-needed risk.

You should ride a bus, or take light rail or some other form of public transportation.

I would love to but there is no such thing in Michigan. I couldn't even take a bus if I wanted to anywhere near my home. The nearest stop is on my universities campus which doesn't do any good.

And you should definitely not buy any car even closely resembling a mini cooper, which is certainly not the safest car you could own.

I didn't buy the Mini for it's safety, I bought it because it's efficient and fuel prices keep on going up. Seemed logical that since I needed a new vehicle I might as well buy something that's economical.

I think one of the most unsafe aspects of driving is the fact that 90% of the people around you have no idea what their cars are capable of. If people did a little more spirited driving and understood their car's handling characteristics a bit better, I'd feel a whole lot safer.

I'd feel safer if American's got proper training in driving a vehicle and lost the distractions like mobile phones, iPods, eating, putting on make-up, and reading.

 

[Danoff]

I would love to but there is no such thing in Michigan.

...and that's the only thing holding you back. If public transportation existed that was relatively convenient for you to get where you wanted to go, you wouldn't drive because of the risk. Is that correct?

I didn't buy the Mini for it's safety, I bought it because it's efficient and fuel prices keep on going up. Seemed logical that since I needed a new vehicle I might as well buy something that's economical.

I thought you were concerned about risk. Surely it's worth a few extra bucks at the gas station to ensure that you're not taking on unnecessary risk. And still, I have to wonder about your choice of car given that economy and safety were your primary concerns.

I'd feel safer if American's got proper training in driving a vehicle and lost the distractions like mobile phones, iPods, eating, putting on make-up, and reading.

Me too. One of the ways to do that is to learn how to identify what is safe and what is not. Throughout this thread you have attempted to run from that question entirely and have instead leaned on "normal" or "legal" to help you identify safe. Famine has road-based, handling-based definitions for safe. Which would you prefer that drivers adhere to?

 

[Joey D]

...and that's the only thing holding you back. If public transportation existed that was relatively convenient for you to get where you wanted to go, you wouldn't drive because of the risk. Is that correct?

No I wouldn't drive because it's expensive and bothersome. If my area had public transportation I wouldn't own a car, or I might own a very small car that was cheap to maintain and put fuel in. You are putting words into my mouth. I know that driving is risky, I've already stated that, all I'm saying is spirited driving is raising that risk unnecessarily in my view.

I thought you were concerned about risk. Surely it's worth a few extra bucks at the gas station to ensure that you're not taking on unnecessary risk. And still, I have to wonder about your choice of car given that economy and safety were your primary concerns.

Once again you are putting words into my mouth. My main concern wasn't safety, it was fuel mileage, look back at my car finding thread.

The Mini is a safe vehicle, there are several airbags, stability control, traction control, and a fairly strong frame. Go to North American Motoring, you'll see some serious accidents and everyone has been fine. People assume that small cars are dangerous, which they aren't. I'd rather be in a crash with the Mini then an F-150.

http://bridger.us/2002/12/16/CrashTestingMINICooperVsFordF150/

Me too. One of the ways to do that is to learn how to identify what is safe and what is not. Throughout this thread you have attempted to run from that question entirely and have instead leaned on "normal" or "legal" to help you identify safe. Famine has road-based, handling-based definitions for safe. Which would you prefer that drivers adhere to?

Safe is driving within the legal limits, with enough space between cars, and being very well aware of everything around you. No distractions, no fooling around. That is the ideal safe way to drive, follow that and you'll see a huge reduction in accidents, however that's not going to happen. At least I can do my part in driving safe. I think you are just trying to nitpick things apart now.

 

[HACKr]

Hey Joey, watch out, you might actaully have fun on the road! We wouldn't want that now would we?

 

[Joey D]

Hey Joey, watch out, you might actaully have fun on the road! We wouldn't want that now would we?

I'll have fun at the auto crosses, roads aren't meant for your driving jollies, they are meant to get you to your destination. Or have I overlooked that part?

 

[Danoff]

No I wouldn't drive because it's expensive and bothersome. If my area had public transportation I wouldn't own a car, or I might own a very small car that was cheap to maintain and put fuel in. You are putting words into my mouth. I know that driving is risky, I've already stated that, all I'm saying is spirited driving is raising that risk unnecessarily in my view.

Ok, let's review how we got here. I said:

"Then taking the road at all is a bad judgement call. You should ride a bus, or take light rail or some other form of public transportation."

You said (and I'm piecing two posts together here):

I would love to... [because otherwise]... it's expensive and bothersome.

See that doesn't actually address my point at all. When I claim that not taking public transportation to avoid risks makes you a hypocrite, your response about expense or bother doesn't really help.

Once again you are putting words into my mouth. My main concern wasn't safety, it was fuel mileage, look back at my car finding thread.

all I'm saying is spirited driving is raising that risk unnecessarily in my view.

Again here we have you talking about raising risk unnecessarily. So when you purchased your car, you certainly SHOULD have attempted to minimize risk if this really is important to you. Again, I'm claiming a bit of hypocrisy here as you claim that you refuse to do anything to increase your road risk, but at the same time claim that your car was purchased for economy rather than safety.

The Mini is a safe vehicle, there are several airbags, stability control, traction control, and a fairly strong frame. Go to North American Motoring, you'll see some serious accidents and everyone has been fine. People assume that small cars are dangerous, which they aren't. I'd rather be in a crash with the Mini then an F-150.

I don't remember suggesting the F-150 to you. I do, however, remember suggesting that if you refuse to increase your road risk unnecessarily, you made a funny car choice - and I stand by that. There are certainly safer cars you could have purchased.

Safe is driving within the legal limits, with enough space between cars, and being very well aware of everything around you. No distractions, no fooling around. That is the ideal safe way to drive, follow that and you'll see a huge reduction in accidents, however that's not going to happen. At least I can do my part in driving safe. I think you are just trying to nitpick things apart now.

I don't see why it's necessary to attack my motives here. I'd prefer that you concentrate on the points I'm making rather than trying to figure out whether I have a more sinister intent. The stand you're taking here is one that isn't really defensible, and I'm hoping you'll see that soon. Driving isn't all about being safe. If it were, you wouldn't drive, you definitely wouldn't own a mini, and you definitely wouldn't exceed the speed limit unless you were FORCED to by surrounding traffic.

I think it's time that you admit that driving isn't all about safety.

 

[CraftyLandShark]

Famine may have mentioned this at some point, but this has turned into such a multi-quote and multi-font debate that quite frankly I think my contacts would melt if I re-read it all But...

There's a strong argument to be made for the fact that spirited driving (not defined as driving fast) may actually be safer than driving normally. Given the mindset of the person who makes a clear distinction between driving fast and driving spiritedly, the spirited driver is likely much more focused on every detail of the experience, which necessarily includes what may lie at the exit of the blind hard righthander he's approaching.

Everyday driving includes all sorts of various distractions that could easily make it more dangerous. Obviously there are the extreme cases like texting-while-driving, etc. Think for a moment though about the things many of us -me included - may do on a regular basis: Changing the CD or fiddling with the iPod, holding a conversation with a passenger, taking a sip of coffee on the way to work, looking to the backseat at the groceries for a moment to make sure the gallon of milk didn't crush the loaf of bread after that last intersection, and one that almost anyone on this message board would be guilty of - craning your head around to catch a last glimpse of that Lotus Exige that just passed you in the opposing lane. Obviously some of us are more conscious of these things than others, but as Famine said, show me a man who says he hasn't made a mistake in a week of driving, and I'll show you a liar.

None of these distractions are at issue during spirited driving, which usually takes place on lightly traveled backroads at ebb traffic hours.

 

[Joey D]

Screw danoff you win, you obviously know more than I.

 

[niky]

Pooh on me for staying out... but this has been an entertaining read. Which is what I posted the thread for.

I quite agree with Famine on the delineation between the "safe" limit and the "legal" limit. Simply put, the safe limit is what speed you can go at while still being aware of, and able to react to, your surroundings and potential dangers. The "legal" limit doesn't take this into account. A 55 mph legal limit is complete bollocks when a sudden fog descends, which lowers the safe limit to quite a lot less. This leads to a lot of accidents on the highway.

I've done my fair share of both "spirited" driving (until now) and "street-racing" (when I was younger). And in street racing, you see a lot of what was talked about here... you're not paying attention to other road users... you're hoping they're paying attention to you.

In spirited driving, you're watching everything. I can go for a spirited drive up in the mountains, and not once will I squeal the tires or exceed the posted limit. I'll be busy enjoying the way the car moves underneath me. It's possible to drive too fast, but like I've said, it's like any other recreational activity... if you do it stupid, you'll get hurt. And street-racing, by definition, is already stupid, because the street just isn't wide enough to race on...

I can't believe you don't autocross, Famine... it's lots of fun. Of course, it's bad on your tires, your brakes, your wheel-bearings, your engine... ah... who'm I kidding... it's sado-masochism of the automotive kind, and you need some good pockets to keep your car in good condition while doing this...

 

[Casio]

Although I agree with you Joey. If you were really only concerned about fuel economy, why not save some money and get a Base Yaris/Fit, or a Prius for not much more.

 

[Famine]

I can't believe you don't autocross, Famine... it's lots of fun. Of course, it's bad on your tires, your brakes, your wheel-bearings, your engine... ah... who'm I kidding... it's sado-masochism of the automotive kind, and you need some good pockets to keep your car in good condition while doing this...

Seriously, find me a public autocross event anywhere in the UK...

Although I agree with you Joey. If you were really only concerned about fuel economy, why not save some money and get a Base Yaris/Fit, or a Prius for not much more.

A Prius? For fuel economy? Are you mad?