top speed

[574-240sx]

Sorry if i offended you. Ill keep my profanity to doo-doo head and gosh dangit from now on :icesangel

However, it is my buisness when my life is on the line and have no qualms about voicing my opinion. Im a member here just like you, If your opinion differs, you are entitled to it, just like me.

Can we still be freinds?:bearchug

-matt

Everyone is friends here on Nico. Never said you were wrong. Everyone takes a risk when driving, even when you are a passenger. Its wrong to speed, most people learned that in drivers education, if they didn't they probably soon found out that speeding was wrong. Yes you voiced your opinion that you don't condone to speeding excessively on public roads because it puts everyone whos on the roads lives in danger. Once in awhile people do get the urge. I'm sure most people know the risk they just don't know how big of risk that really is and what the consequences really are. Nick

Yes we can still be friends, J-spec

[entity]

Uh i got pulled over after after I was clocked at 142 Don't know if that helps any. Go go redline in 5th =)

I'm suprised the cop even caught up to you considering you were prolly out of his line of sight by the time he pulled onto the road. Can their crown vics even go 140?

[D1SR240]

yea how much was the ticket man

or did u get like arrested?

[trpower7]

J-Spec is right. Quit driving more than 100mph on a street road. You kill people that way. I don't care what your opinion is or whether you want to be able to do what you want, it's stupid and you deserve whatever happens to you. Not to mention this topic is stupid in the first place, anyone with an FSM, a knowledge of gear ratios, wheel/tire dimensions and final drive ratio can calculate (x) speed at (x) rpm. It's just simple math. Don't go cutting your speed limiters unless you NEED it for a TRACK car. Stupid people kill people driving 100+ mph, I don't care how "careful" or whatever you say you are. Apparently you aren't. Pure and simple.

[Hellion240sx]

i was behind this camaro one time and he pulled on me so i tailed him then he just styarted leaving me fast. so i floored it. tured down the radio. i was so stoked the needle was going down 100...110....then it kept going!!!! i was like holy ****!!!! what is going on?!?!?!? itwent down to right b4 the numbers i cant picture it right now but then , the best part, the whole car like stopped for like a split second!!! thatsa when i decided to slow down. it was a rush! i havent done it since. that is the first trime i have done it in the 7 years i have hads my car! it wasa grwat, but i dont think i will do it again. i crise at 80 and 90mph sometimes. but thats as fast as i will go.

so how much was the ticket?

[RMiller]

Sorry if i offended you. Ill keep my profanity to doo-doo head and gosh dangit from now on :icesangel

However, it is my buisness when my life is on the line and have no qualms about voicing my opinion. Im a member here just like you, If your opinion differs, you are entitled to it, just like me.

Can we still be freinds?:bearchug

-matt

Matt,

Just like to say that I really appreciate your tactful approach to situations that come up on the forums, as in the above quote. It's pleasant to hear what you have to say.

Thanks,

Ryan

[EazyBreazy]

i dun understand it. everytime i hit the rev limit. i didnt even know i was about to. i was too busy watching the road. even at 3 in the morn. when the only other person on it is my boy in his 350z. if yoiu people are so concerned with how fast your going you need to video tape the speedo. cus at a hundred miles an hour your going 150 feet per sec. at 137 your doing 200 feet per second. when do you guys have time to look at the speedo. i sure as hell dont trust other people that much.

[spec-u-later]

100 fun but 150 is better. Not that I have done it but I just wanna hear another ABC after school special. Drugs and hookers are fun too. :pface

[entity]

100 fun but 150 is better. Not that I have done it but I just wanna hear another ABC after school special. Drugs and hookers are fun too. :pface

Or even better, drugs & hookers while your going 150.

[Chingon]

hehe....while going 150 sure is dangerous....I believe it's a rush...and something that someone should try at least once. It's an accomplishment w/you and your machine (much like a drift). However..., while I have not done it, I would not consider it w/o proper suspension/brakes/tires, and a whole lot of lonely highway.

[Dougster]

I think I am done with my speed rush...A client thought he would show off in his 95 Vette and of course couldn't handle it, we crashed at about 65 MPH through a telephone pole...Very lucky to be still around walking...Have fun but be careful guys!

[NY94J30]

I am just curious if those who have made the point that 100+ is too dangerous ever exceed the speed limit themselves? And if so, where have you determined that the correct line for safe speeding and unsafe speeding exists? It is selective morality at best (and hypocrisy at worst) to decide on your own that some amount of speeding is okay while others are not okay, i.e. to what extent its okay to break the law. 65 in 55 is just as illegal as 100 in 65. I understand that at some point carelessness becomes recklessness but I'm not certain that that is for you to determine.

[driftaholic]

i think for some people once they get to a certain speed, the rush kicks in and all rationality goes out the window.

temporary insanity

kinda like when you come home and find another man in your bed with your wife and then think you're allowed to kill him

[spitz7985]

I am just curious if those who have made the point that 100+ is too dangerous ever exceed the speed limit themselves? And if so, where have you determined that the correct line for safe speeding and unsafe speeding exists? It is selective morality at best (and hypocrisy at worst) to decide on your own that some amount of speeding is okay while others are not okay, i.e. to what extent its okay to break the law. 65 in 55 is just as illegal as 100 in 65. I understand that at some point carelessness becomes recklessness but I'm not certain that that is for you to determine.

:Werd

I guess German drivers of the Autobahn are all reckless? I've heard it is more dangerous to go 65 then it is to go 95 (on the Autobahn).

[Onizuka]

I am just curious if those who have made the point that 100+ is too dangerous ever exceed the speed limit themselves? And if so, where have you determined that the correct line for safe speeding and unsafe speeding exists? It is selective morality at best (and hypocrisy at worst) to decide on your own that some amount of speeding is okay while others are not okay, i.e. to what extent its okay to break the law. 65 in 55 is just as illegal as 100 in 65.

First, 100 in a 65 caries much worse penalties than 65 in a 55, but I guess thats just selective morality in our penal system. Its the same as the way armed robbery carries a worse penalty than pickpocketing, both the same core crime, but with vastly different results that can occure from actions of the criminal. Call it hypocrisy if you want, I feel much better with everyone going 10 over than just one person going stupid fast on a public road. Yes I have gone over the speed limit and will continue to do so, yet I will still be driving slower than 90% of the people on the road.

If driving 100mph is ok in your book, fine. I will feel sorry for the people that have to share the road with you.

-matt

[Onizuka]

:Werd

I guess German drivers of the Autobahn are all reckless? I've heard it is more dangerous to go 65 then it is to go 95 (on the Autobahn).

Does that have anything to do with the US highway system?

Your right, we should all go 95mph on highways designed in the 1950's for 55mph speedlimits, those stupid engineers dont know what they are talking about anyways.

[NY94J30]

My point is that you do not have the moral ground to stand on in your argument. The same way you cannot rail against armed robbery while picking peoples pockets. Nowhere did I say that driving 100 mph was safe, not that it was not more dangerous than 65 mph, though I wonder how it is that you've taken it upon yourself to determine how much excesive speed it too much? how dangerous is too dangerous?

[Onizuka]

You could argue driving at all is too dangerous. Am I a bad person for driving as slow as traffic allows me and then critizising those who speed excessivly?

As far as my determination of what is acceptible, I have seen plenty of horror photos of high speed wrecks, plenty of studies on highway speeds vs fatal accident rate, and even studied the economics of average speed vs time saved. 95% (educated guess, probably higher) of all cars sold in america are DESIGNED to operate at 55-65mph in terms of suspension, fuel economy, and crash safety.

[trpower7]

He has every right to argue. Selective morality is absolutely acceptable. Too dangerous is where the risk starts increasing exponentially, pure and simple. In a 55 mph zone when you start getting over 65, 70, 75 risk increases exponentially not only to you but to others. I have every moral ground to say that it is completely unsafe to drive more than 100mph on ANY US highway or road otherwise. The risk is exponentially increased and therefore it is wrong, pure and simple. It's morons that try to justify their own stupidity by claiming that it is just stupidity and that everyone does stupid things so why should their absoltuely aggregious and stupid error matter more than anyone else's minor oversight.

[NY94J30]

He has every right to argue. Selective morality is absolutely acceptable. Too dangerous is where the risk starts increasing exponentially, pure and simple. In a 55 mph zone when you start getting over 65, 70, 75 risk increases exponentially not only to you but to others. I have every moral ground to say that it is completely unsafe to drive more than 100mph on ANY US highway or road otherwise. The risk is exponentially increased and therefore it is wrong, pure and simple. It's morons that try to justify their own stupidity by claiming that it is just stupidity and that everyone does stupid things so why should their absoltuely aggregious and stupid error matter more than anyone else's minor oversight.

At no point did I say he had no right to argue; I said he had no moral ground to stand on. And of course selective morality is acceptable, if you have no intention of your argument holding weight.

Let me reiterate my point: Driving at excessive speed (100+ mph) is clearly a dangerous activity and in violation of traffic regulations. However, as is driving 66 mph in a 65. One who subjectively feels it is acceptable to drive one mile over the speed limit has no right to determine that it is not acceptable to drive 35 miles over the speed limit. Once one's determination moves beyond the objective realm (i.e. the state mandated speed limt), and into the subjective realm (i.e. in my determination one mile over is okay) there is no longer a quantifiable standard. It has moved into the realm of subjective morality, and one cannot say with any authority that I feel that 66 is okay but 68 (or 69, 73, 92...) is excessive. It is not for an individual to determine what amount of violation is acceptable. Its a matter of subjective opinion vs. state authority.

You argue statistics in this matter, but this is just as troublesome. That suggests that one may determine what risk is acceptable and what is not. i.e. my level of risk is an acceptable level while in my opinion yours is not. Who determines what is acceptable - the state, not the individual.

And egregious is spelled w/ an e and one g

[Onizuka]

Your splitting hairs here. Your basically calling me morally unfit to conclude that people who drive 100+ on public roads are wrong. I would bet my life that 100% of ALL drivers have made a traffic violation, the that make the whole of all drivers in the world morally unfit to make any kind of judgment? I mean, who is a district Judge, who went 56 in the 55 zone on his way to the court room, to send me to jail for murdering someone? He is just as bad a man as I am right?

Are you playing the preacher or the devils advocate here? You're arguing a point that no one would defend (except maybe you).

Bottom line, there always has been, and always will be, discrimination between various crimes. 35 over IS a more serious crime than 1 over according to law. Im not the one who came up with this crazy way of dealing with violators, but im sure as hell not complaning. Last time I was following a police officer on route 422, I stayed behind him for several miles going 10 over the speed limit. Should I be arrested for this? Better yet should I call the higher authorities on the officer? Why didnt the police officer pull me over? Why didnt the police officer pull over the people going faster than us? If he did pull me over what Moral ground does he have to stand on to punish me and not himself?

Alas, every disicion you make has a risk. From miniscule (clipping your toe nails) to the endangerment of your life and those around you (driving 100+ on public roads), risk is always there. It would be foolish to think that calculating these risks is not important.

[trpower7]

The point is very clear. When risk starts to exponentially increase it is wrong. Statistics say that at 10mph over an stated speed limit risk starts to exponentially increase. Pure and simple. And speedometers can be out of spec +-5mph for any number of reasons. You start going 10-15 mph over on a state highway and you are exponentially increasing risk to yourself and more importantly to others. This is the simple fact. Selective morality is acceptable as long as you have a large percentage of people that accept that level of morality. In my case, I certainly do. Every state legislature, every voting body that has ever decided we need speed limits and they need to be (x). Pure and Simple.

[llamabeta]

Stupid people kill people driving 100+ mph, I don't care how "careful" or whatever you say you are. Apparently you aren't. Pure and simple.

Stupid people kill people at any mph. I don't care how narrowed your view is and whatever you say you are. Apparently you arent thinking. Pure and simple. Thanks for adding to the stupidness of the post.

Anywho... cutting the wire works. Pull the 5th gear sensor as well or you will hit a fuel cut at 5000rpm. I pulled to 129MPH on my digital speedometer. (FYI: Empty road no wildlife. You happy?)

These arguments get old fast.

[D-UNIT]

hehe....while going 150 sure is dangerous....I believe it's a rush...and something that someone should try at least once. It's an accomplishment w/you and your machine (much like a drift). However..., while I have not done it, I would not consider it w/o proper suspension/brakes/tires, and a whole lot of lonely highway.

heck yeah!! hehehe!! i'VE DONE 160mph!! *woot*!!! talk about tunnel vision!! More like toilet paper roll vision!!

[trpower7]

That's utterly retarded. The risk EXPONENTIALLY INCREASES. There is nothing "narrow" about that, it's the fact. When risk exponentially increases, such happens, easy. No two ways about it here folks.

[bvanev]

WOW!!! How 'bout this. If you drive fast, to the point that the law determines it to be reckless, and you injure or kill someone, you should be ready to be indebted to that persons family for the rest of your life. The reality of it is that high speeds equal exponentially higher risks of injury and death. Yes there are a lot of slow 'cautious' driver accidents, but the injury/death ratio is much lower. I only recommend that you stop thinking of your thrills, get them on the track, and start thinking about the family that you could destroy. It only takes one mistake, maybe not even yours. NO ONE EVER THINKS THAT IT CAN HAPPEN TO THEM.

[entity]

i think for some people once they get to a certain speed, the rush kicks in and all rationality goes out the window.

temporary insanity

kinda like when you come home and find another man in your bed with your wife and then think you're allowed to kill him

You mean your not allowed to kill him?:chainsaw

[MECPInstaller]

i've only tried topping my car out once i was up to 116-120 wasn't looking at the speedo much and i was still going i thought the speedlimiter kicked in at like 113? don't like going fast cause no radar detector yet and shure as hell don't need a ticket for going over 110:) my rev limit works alil past redline but have never had the speed limiter kick in? is there a problem there????

[240sxOwner]

I will put my 2 cents in on this. I have a 93 coupe with HUD and before i cut the ecu wire my HUD said 112 and would back me to 107. Then i installed my Nismo 4.6 Gears and when it said 101 it dropped down (speedo was off). Then i cut the wire and it let me go a little faster but then the 5500(?) rev limiter stopped me...By the way if you are staying NA, get these gears...there awesome. I raced my friend who had a stock 93 coupe (same as mine) and at the end of 2nd i had at least 2 cars...and at the end of third i had a lot more. He now has a Na 3000gt

[Hellion240sx]

160mph what were you driving? my friend did 140 in his s2000. i cant remember 5H!T i think i blanked out, i was in the passenger seat. tunnel vision, yeah. i didnt even want to look at the cars that we were flying past. they were just a blur in my peripherial view. yeash that was a rush. i think the reason ppl go over the spped limit, in excessive amounts, is the thrill factor, or your in a rush. heh. yes it is dangerous, but ppl still do it. just like driving a car is dangerous. everything in life you do is basically dangerous. you might be as careful as can be take every precaution there is and then some, but but there is someone else who isn't. eh blah im done.