Speed Limiter Debate

[Brian P]

I'll give you a few good reasons why the nannies shouldn't bring about this turboidea..

1) It raises the costs of car ownership for everyone by a few hundreds of dollars per motor vehicle

While I agree with your other points, this one is not true for any modern vehicle (i.e. electronic controls). It's a few extra lines of code in the software, which are in many cases already there, simply requiring an existing number in the code to be set to a different one. Cost is essentially $0, although if the manufacturer chooses to use a different setting for Canada as for elsewhere, it adds some minor logistics costs to keep track of another part number.

Of course, changing this setting is trivial for any tuner.

[Rob MacLennan]

Speed limiters are a good idea. Do we really need to travel 50+ over the limit on community roads? Think, no more 50 over charges/license with its outrageous fines, impound fees, court appearances, loss of insurance coverage, etc. However, they should raise speed limits on highways to 120km/hr to even things out. Always taking, never giving!........................ Now there's also the issue of what to do when you want to "track" your vehicle?

How many actual street racing deaths have occurred on 100 Kmh limit roads? My memory says not a whole lot as we're talking about racing, not speeding.

So doing triple the limit in a school zone is OK, but you can't do more than 50 over on a limited access highway? Unless a speed limiter is tied to a GPS, with speed limits encoded, it's essentially pointless. As others have pointed out it would be trivial to bypass while not having any effect on older vehicles anyway, as it couldn't be retroactive. Why create a law that does nothing, while simultaneously being unenforceable?

[raginduck]

My cars were limited to 155 MPH. I had them all removed.... just because. I have never had any of my car(s) any where near those speeds on public roads, and never will.

[Icbones]

The worst case scenario if this private members bill passes, is that if you are caught with a tampered speed limiter, the penalties could include vehicle forfeiture. The Civil Remedies program is forever expanding their mandate.

The Safer Roads for a Safer Ontario Act, 2007, passed on May 29, 2007, further amended the Civil Remedies Act to allow civil courts to impound and order the forfeiture, as instruments of unlawful activity, vehicles used or likely to be used by people who have two or more previous licence suspensions relating to drinking and driving offences or who have continued to drive while their licence is suspended for drinking and driving.

Two street racing cars forfeited as instruments of unlawful activities are crushed under a front-end loader.
Police say both cars were substantially modified for the purpose of racing with features added to the engine and exhaust to increase power, the vehicles’ road clearance lowered to increase speed and the backseats and interior panels removed to reduce the cars’ weight.

It would not be a stretch of the imagination that karygiannis would include de-activation of a speed limiter to be included as a reason for forfeiture. There is a department in the Attorney Generals office that is dedicated to the CRIA act.

http://www.infogo.gov.on.ca/infogo/o...2022&locale=en

There are 17 people working there and after checking what they earn (~$2million / year) under the salary disclosure act, you can bet they are thinking up new ways to justify their continued employment. The 7 listeded below are the only ones making > $100,000/year. There are 10 more probably in the 80k range.

Department Name Position Salary

Attorney General HARRISON TROY Director $167,383.26

Attorney General MILLER HOWARD Counsel $157,827.54

Attorney General CHANTZIS KONSTANTINA Counsel $115,089.41

Attorney General EVANS JULIA Counsel $141,082.80

Attorney General PHELAN DANIEL Counsel $105,160.61

Attorney General TRAIN ROSALYN Counsel $189,570.71

Attorney General THOMPSON LORI Assistant Crown Attorney $152,593.77

[Rob MacLennan]

@Icbones - The bill that we're talking about is Federal, not Provincial.

[Icbones]

Yes. But who will inforce the law if passed? Province, HTA? This is where it becomes confusing when politicians at different levels (federal vs Provincial) start poking their noses into other jurisdictions. It is the same as the Boat safe program. It is federal but enforced by the provinces. So I think I have made a valid point as to the consequences if this bill is passed into law.

[Rob MacLennan]

Yes. But who will inforce the law if passed? Province, HTA? This is where it becomes confusing when politicians at different levels (federal vs Provincial) start poking their noses into other jurisdictions. It is the same as the Boat safe program. It is federal but enforced by the provinces. So I think I have made a valid point as to the consequences if this bill is passed into law.

My point is that they can pass whatever law they want to at the Federal level, and enforce it from the manufacturing standpoint, but Provincial and Civic enforcement will be nil. You won't get nailed under a law like this, until you've actually been caught breaking another law. It becomes yet another "Do you want fries with that?" charge.

[kiterider]

While I agree with your other points, this one is not true for any modern vehicle (i.e. electronic controls). It's a few extra lines of code in the software, which are in many cases already there, simply requiring an existing number in the code to be set to a different one. Cost is essentially $0, although if the manufacturer chooses to use a different setting for Canada as for elsewhere, it adds some minor logistics costs to keep track of another part number.

Of course, changing this setting is trivial for any tuner.

the assumption here us that all manufacturers already have the said firmware in place. For the ones that don't its still an expense from a hardware and software standpoint

[mmmnaked]

the assumption here us that all manufacturers already have the said firmware in place. For the ones that don't its still an expense from a hardware and software standpoint

Every car has a speed limiter.

[RockerGuy]

Every car has a speed limiter.

Some higher end cars don't

My car once did 220; in a safe controlled environment

[172Driver]

Couldn't give a rat's a** in the car.... I'm not even sure if the TDI would go that quick without sending at least a couple pistons into orbit!

But on the bike.... no way! Track days would suck!



(I realize there are car people who would think the same way)

[mmmnaked]

Some higher end cars don't

My car once did 220; in a safe controlled environment

Like what? A Ferrari Enzo or a Pagani Zonda maybe....

Road going cars have speed limiters to keep them from exceeding the tire ratings. This is common. Every car has the capability to have its speed limited by a few lines of extra code, it takes nothing. It would cost the manufacturers nothing.

[toybm]

One high end car in Japan (Skyline GTR) has IIRC a speed limiter that is deactivated when you pull up to local race tracks, all through software and onboard GPS. And unlike NA cars retuning a japanese market ecu is not a simple plug and play, possible but certainly not a simple affair.

[soto]

Wouldn't an acceleration limiter make more sense to discourage racing? It's all about the acceleration.

Also would be good for gas consumption and emissions!

It would have to be mechanical so it can't easily be bypassed... Im thinking engine displacement limit per weight.

Then everyone could go back to racing bicycles like god intended

[kiterider]

Wouldn't an acceleration limiter make more sense to discourage racing? It's all about the acceleration.

Also would be good for gas consumption and emissions!

It would have to be mechanical so it can't easily be bypassed... Im thinking engine displacement limit per weight.

Then everyone could go back to racing bicycles like god intended

Sacrilegious!!! WTF dude. The fun part about motorcycling is the acceleration, not the speed in itself. That's equivalent to castration and then throwing you into a room filled with playboy bunnies. Assuming that they'd sleep with you that is. Moot point that you'd probably not even be aroused then, but you get the picture.

edit -soto, by "you" I don't mean you per se. Just using the word you in the generic or indefinite sense, which also would mean me in this case. Just thought I'd clarify that

[soto]

Assuming that they'd sleep with you that is.
...
edit -soto, by "you" I don't mean you per se. Just using the word you in the generic or indefinite sense, which also would mean me in this case.

I've got a Porsche key-chain that pretty much gets me any chick! except for when I forget to take my dirt bike helmet off...

[Brian P]

the assumption here us that all manufacturers already have the said firmware in place. For the ones that don't its still an expense from a hardware and software standpoint

All cars with OBD-II have the road speed known to the ECU and have the fuel injection controlled by the ECU. All cars since 1996 have OBD-II. At that point, it's a few lines of code, if it isn't already there.

[FullMotoJacket]

All cars with OBD-II have the road speed known to the ECU and have the fuel injection controlled by the ECU. All cars since 1996 have OBD-II. At that point, it's a few lines of code, if it isn't already there.

Yup. My Audi use to cut off the fuel at 209 kmh.


Use to.

[RockerGuy]

Like what? A Ferrari Enzo or a Pagani Zonda maybe....

Road going cars have speed limiters to keep them from exceeding the tire ratings. This is common. Every car has the capability to have its speed limited by a few lines of extra code, it takes nothing. It would cost the manufacturers nothing.

BMW 328i

[FullMotoJacket]

BMW 328i

The 328i is limited to 209 kmh and the Sport version is limited to 249 kmh