Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Hardware Technology

Volvo To Impose 112mph Speed Limit On All New Cars From 2020 (theguardian.com) 534

Volvo will limit the top speed to 112mph on all its new cars from 2020 in an attempt to reduce the number of accidents. "The cap will prevent drivers from accelerating to the top speeds of up to 155mph many Volvos can reach," reports The Guardian. From the report: Volvo is believed to be the first carmaker to install the cap across its entire range. Police vehicles will be exempt. Similar technology has been installed on several high-performance cars in Germany, but at a much higher speed limit. The general speed limit for motorways in EU member states is 75-80mph (120-130km/h). Germany does not have a general cap for motorways but recommends a speed of up to 80mph. Speeding remained one of the main contributors to road deaths, Volvo said, along with drug and drink intoxication and mobile phone use. Volvo is also exploring how geofencing -- a virtual geographic boundary defined by GPS technology -- can be used to automatically limit speeds around schools and hospitals. Hakan Samuelsson, Volvo's president and chief executive, said: "While a speed limitation is not a cure-all, it's worth doing if we can even save one life. We want to start a conversation about whether carmakers have the right or maybe even an obligation to install technology in cars that changes their driver's behavior."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Volvo To Impose 112mph Speed Limit On All New Cars From 2020

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 04, 2019 @06:27PM (#58215954)

    "Volvo is also exploring how geofencing -- a virtual geographic boundary defined by GPS technology -- can be used to automatically limit speeds around schools and hospitals." - This part, this is a very very very bad idea.

    • Virtue signalling (Score:2, Insightful)

      by TheMeuge ( 645043 )

      Maybe they should also chide the drivers for being too wasteful of gas if they happen to accelerate too fast... or issue fines for using the wrong pronouns.

    • by vlad30 ( 44644 ) on Monday March 04, 2019 @06:41PM (#58216060)
      Actually I'd like a mode where it essentially limited to the speed limit unless I chose to exceed it for lets say overtaking. I have this almost in my current car instead of cruise control a speed limit is set. It only needs to follow the GPS defined speed limits to be more useful.
      • by Anonymous Coward

        I want a mode where the car only goes the speed limit when law enforcement or a speed camera is nearby.

      • There needs to be a whole information system for informing the cars when the posted speed limit changes.
      • I'd rather it be customisable to set either a percentage or flat offset of the posted limit. That offset could be positive or negative and that percentage could exceed 100.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        The problem with GPS systems is that the map data gets out of date. Even Tesla has that problem with their over-the-air updates take months or years to recognize new limits.

        Other manufacturers have the ability to read road signs with a camera now, but it's not 100% perfect.

        Being stuck at a lower limit on a fast road is potentially quite dangerous. Having said that, why not limit to say 150 kph except when near Germany? Germany is pretty static so no issues with map updates, and the limit in the rest of Euro

    • That would be hilarious. The GPS protocol is completely open. Buy a HackRF and broadcast the coordinates of a school zone on the freeway.

    • It's a great idea. Perhaps "Geery" (what; did you think Volvo was still Scandinavian??) can call it the "Non-Ludicrous Edition" and offer a fat fucking rebate to compensate the customer for the Tercel-like "performance."
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by rmdingler ( 1955220 )

      "Damn car manufacturers telling me what to Do... For who exactly, is 112 mph not fast enough?

      In fact, unless you're the Madison Avenue stalwart professional driver on a closed course, why should you be able to drive that recklessly on the public highways and put the rest of us at risk of getting caught up in a vehicular altercation with you?

      Mah rights!

      • What if you're a German rushing your poor sickly mother down the autobahn to the hospital for some emergency and you couldn't get her there in time and she died because some Swedish stuffed shirt decided that YOUR damn Volvo shouldn't go over 112mph?
        • by rmdingler ( 1955220 ) on Monday March 04, 2019 @07:25PM (#58216334) Journal

          The threat to your poor sickly mother has to at least be weighed against the threat to other drivers, including someone else's perfectly healthy mother headed down the autobahn to market.

          That, and if your auto hits a fat rabbit at 112 mph, you and mother are going to arrive at the hospital in another vehicle... one with lights and a siren.

        • by Xenx ( 2211586 )
          In this hypothetical case you chose to purchase a car that was speed capped at 112mph. Why would you expect it to go any faster? It's no different than buying a car that isn't capable of going faster.
          • Exactly.

            My car won’t go faster than 130 mph because they discovered that around that speed, the back-end has an annoying habit of leaving the ground.

            Somehow, I survive with this limitation.

            I’ve never encountered this, frankly. The fastest I’ve driven was 120 mph on an empty highway in Utah.

      • by rogoshen1 ( 2922505 ) on Monday March 04, 2019 @07:58PM (#58216512)

        What if at some point in time, the powers that be deem 80 MPH as being too fast?

        What if your insurance company gets wind of this, and offers a better rate if you opt in to some kind of governor? (and eventually makes it cost prohibitive to not opt in?)

        Part of living in a free god damn society is having the freedom to do questionable, potentially stupid things. The individual learns from their mistakes, and is better for it. The problem with "but your rights end at wherever" argument is that it's an ever shifting, subjective line. And probably tends to get more and more narrow over time.

        I'd rather live with some amount of risk than limiting everyone to the equivalent of safety scissors and butter knives.

        • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 04, 2019 @08:49PM (#58216706)

          Honestly, it's hard to argue against it when it's 32 mph faster than the highest posted limit in the countries the car is sold in.

          You can argue that you should be free to do what you want, but the fact is you already very much breaking the law at the limit. It's honestly a bit surprising they didn't govern it to 90 mphs (highest posted limit/suggestion + roughly 10%). Ironically, it's probably actually law enforcement that would be most against that...they tend to profit on speeding fines and honestly if we tech ourselves out of speeding they end up out of work. So it's no surprise it's limited high enough to max out tickets, but low enough they can easily catch you.

        • What if your insurance company gets wind of this, and offers a better rate if you opt in to some kind of governor? (and eventually makes it cost prohibitive to not opt in?)

          The same thing that happens with most regulations that make dangerous things more expensive; the rich can still play with their toys while the rest of us look on in envy. Working as intended.

        • What if your insurance company gets wind of this

          Insurance companies already use black box data in determining the pay-out during an accident. God help you if you're doing more than 93mph on the autobahn and someone else causes an accident. Guess what, insurance company says you're still liable.

        • Part of living in a free god damn society is having the freedom to do questionable, potentially stupid things. The individual learns from their mistakes, and is better for it.

          There is a big difference between stupid things that hurt you, and stupid things that hurt other people.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Chas ( 5144 )

        Maybe if I take my car to a track day, I might want to run it SLIGHTLY faster than the posted speed limits on the roads around the track.

        Maybe once you sell me something, it's NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS what I do with it.

    • by quenda ( 644621 ) on Monday March 04, 2019 @09:47PM (#58216952)

      The popular Ford Falcon in Australia was limited to 180km/hr also, as an easy "fix" to a tailshaft problem. (rear-wheel-drive 4-litre engine)

      Of course, nobody cared, as there are no roads in Australia capable of that speed, even if you could afford the fuel bills. ]
      It saves money on tyres too, as they don't need to be rated as high.

      • by dryeo ( 100693 )

        Do you think the average person considers tyre speed rating?

        • by quenda ( 644621 )

          Do you think the average person considers tyre speed rating?

          The engineers do, so the first set of tyres at least.
          I needed a new set of low-profile tyres for a "sporty" car, and one shop tried to sell me some extremely expensive ones, because that is what the law demanded.
          The tyres I bought later for half the price, were technically illegal because rated only for 210km/hr instead of 240, or something like that. I doubt I ever exceeded 160. (overtaking road trains.)

  • Even now, when Volvos (along with half the failed euro car brands) are just Fords, Volvo owners are _non-drivers_.

    • by jrumney ( 197329 )
      Volvos are not Fords. They are Geelys since 2010.
      • That's the ownership.

        But the design is still done in Sweeden.
        • by jrumney ( 197329 )
          Last I checked, Ford was not doing its design in Sweden...
        • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

          Pfft, yeah right, great bullshit advertising, the company is it's bloody owners end of story. Design my arse, they will design what ever the fuck their owners tell them to design, no matter how cheap and nasty it is.

          What they will do is bullshit trade on the brand, basically selling trust, not providing trust but burning it up selling junk under the brand of a company that built up a solid reputation, MAXIMUM PROFIT this quarter, of course the real outcome, golden parachutes for the executives when the com

  • by zippo01 ( 688802 ) on Monday March 04, 2019 @06:31PM (#58215982)
    Why would I buy something that comes with arbitrary limits? Maybe if I was a rental car company, business or government, but as an individual this would be a massive turn off. If I want to kill myself at 113 MPH, volvo shouldn't stop me.
    • Yes, 112mph is arbitrary. If 80mph is the legal limit, it should be locked to that.

    • by HornWumpus ( 783565 ) on Monday March 04, 2019 @06:35PM (#58216020)

      Almost all cars are currently limited to 155. By a gentleman's agreement between the manufacturers and insurance companies.

      That makes some sense. Aero becomes critical at about 150. Those that care, can easily NOP that part of the ECU, when they hopefully install the airdam and spoiler.

    • seriously, it won't be that hard. If you're the kind of person who is willing to take a card up to 155 mph you hopefully know enough about the car to disable the feature.

      OTOH I'm not sure I'd want this in my car in case it screwed up and wouldn't let me accelerate. It's just one more thing to go wrong in my car. Still, I stopped being interested in Volvo when they stopped making non-interference engines and I had to worry about a busted drive belt taking my engine out the same as every other car...
    • by Gravis Zero ( 934156 ) on Monday March 04, 2019 @06:55PM (#58216148)

      If I want to kill myself at 113 MPH, volvo shouldn't stop me.

      This is on par with anti-vaxxer logic because it's not your road. Other people drive on it and if you run into them and die at top speed then you are likely to kill them too.

      When you can afford to have your own roads build then I'm sure Volvo will be willing to sell you a custom car for you to die in at the highest possible speed.

    • by ljw1004 ( 764174 ) on Monday March 04, 2019 @07:05PM (#58216196)

      Why would I buy something that comes with arbitrary limits? Maybe if I was a rental car company, business or government, but as an individual this would be a massive turn off. If I want to kill myself at 113 MPH, volvo shouldn't stop me.

      Why should Volvo want you as a customer? If you buy your next car from a different manufacturer, then Volvo's safety stats will look even better than their competition, and they'll generate more sales from people who care about safety. (which is already their primary audience, I believe).

      Imagine I'm buying a car and I have a family. "Hmmm... Volvo cars have injury rate of X per 100k miles, and Ford cars have a higher injury rate of Y per 100k miles, so I know which one I'll buy." That will be a higher priority for me than the ability to go above 112mph.

    • why would you care if you are in a country where speed limit is 80? If you are into track days or anything that involves speeds above 113 you aren't going to be buying a volvo in the first place. It isn't like you are buying a volvo for its speed, they aren't sportscars
    • The president was quoted " it's worth doing if we can even save one life." That's stupid.

      Well, once the limit is 112 mph, they'll realize that 100 mph is safer still, so on the basis one the "just one life" argument they'll drop the speed again.

      This logic cycle will repeat until the capped speed is one at which no life can possibly lost, including the life of drivers with severe health issues and frail pedestrians. They'll end up at a capped speed of under 10 mph. Better yet, let's not drive at all.

      .

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Solandri ( 704621 )
        When Mount Saint Helens erupted in 1980 [wikipedia.org], one of the survivors had been camping near the mountain, saw the eruption, and got into his car. He reported he was flooring it at 100 mph down the road ahead of the pyroclastic flow, and passed another car doing 75 mph. He survived. The couple in the 75 mph car died.

        So if your standard is saving a single life, then artificially limiting the top speed can cost lives too.
        • by sandmaninator ( 884661 ) on Monday March 04, 2019 @11:23PM (#58217288)

          The Volvo will have rear-facing cameras for pyroclastic flow detection and in the event one is seen approaching the vehicle, the speed limiter is lifted.

        • Re:Just one life (Score:4, Insightful)

          by dasunt ( 249686 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2019 @09:14AM (#58218692)

          When Mount Saint Helens erupted in 1980 [wikipedia.org], one of the survivors had been camping near the mountain, saw the eruption, and got into his car. He reported he was flooring it at 100 mph down the road ahead of the pyroclastic flow, and passed another car doing 75 mph. He survived. The couple in the 75 mph car died.

          This reminds me of the excuse people used to have about not wearing seatbelts because they didn't want to get trapped in a burning car.

          Technically, it could happen. It probably has happened in the past. But practically speaking, not wearing a seatbelt is far more dangerous than wearing a seatbelt.

    • Volvo are implementing a "Saftey Vision" that "nobody will be killed or seriously injured in a new Volvo car by 2020."

      The automatic braking system can see so far ahead. Roads have a minimum skid resistance. A human body can take a certain acceleration. The two other factors is how the front end crumples and the speed of travel. It's not arbitrary.

      The reason that you'd buy something with that limit would be that you value being alive.

      If I want to kill myself at 113 MPH, volvo shouldn't stop me.

      This isn't Volvo's business model. You want a Kia.

  • by b0s0z0ku ( 752509 ) on Monday March 04, 2019 @06:41PM (#58216054)
    Volvo can put cheaper tires on their cars from the factory to avoid liability. 112 mph = 180km/h. I suspect this will be quietly removable with the proper scan software, same as many GM cars are.
  • Japanese JDM cars are limited to 180kph too.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 04, 2019 @06:52PM (#58216124)

    ... please do not think German drivers only need to fulfil the same requirements, that people in the US need to before they are allowed on to drive on the roads.

    In Germany we have extensive schooling, many hours of practical training, and strict driving test that you are expected to fail at the slightest misstep. And it's *expensive*. You usually pay a couple of *thousand* bucks for the whole thing.
    On the streets, every driver *expects* you to drive properly. With far more rules. (Like not overtaking on the right lane.)

    And you see this. Everything flows far more elegantly. People are skilled and proud of it.

    Of course since alcohol is our national dish, you will still have morons driving drunk and messing up on weekend nights and the like. But they only need to be caught once, and their license is *gone*. (They have to take the "idiot test" to get it back. Which is not much better than starting from scratch, afaik.)

    That is why we don't have speed limits for about 50% of the highway (= Autobahn). We can handle it!

    (I recommend taking the additional lessons for avoiding crashes. You get to learn ice drifting and other cool maneuvers like a pro. Just in case.)

    I wish the US also had a culture of not expecting everyone to be a moron until they are. It feels lime that attitude is the main breeding ground for morons in the first place.

  • Volvo died in 99 when the were bastardized by Ford. Ford then sold their stepchild to the Chinese. A similar fate happened to Saab.

  • Saving lives? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by bmomjian ( 195858 ) on Monday March 04, 2019 @07:07PM (#58216208) Homepage

    Maybe they can save lives by not selling cars at all. Have they tried that? Using their logic, seems it would be worth it.

    • What if somebody is being chased at 112 miles per hour by a psycho with a gun? Maybe a gang banger or a corrupt cop? Would it be worth uncapping the speed limit if it saves even one life?

      Or maybe this is the Chinese impulse to impose control from the top down. Which seems more likely?

  • by Cederic ( 9623 ) on Monday March 04, 2019 @07:13PM (#58216252) Journal

    How many people have died in a Volvo while driving about 112mph?

    I'm not sure this will save any lives at all.

    • by Kjella ( 173770 )

      Well, when I went to study in Germany we managed to push a very packed, under powered Volvo station wagon (4 guys + luggage) up to 200 km/h (125 mph) on the 20 km (10+ miles) of straight Autobahn past Frankfurt, just to see what was possible. I'm very glad we didn't have to find out how long it'd take to stop. Since then I've gone 135 mph in a BMW and 150 mph in a Mustang, but both those cars felt like they were actually made to drive at that speed at least on an almost empty, straight, dry three-lane road

  • Because we share roads. One bad driver can do a lot of damage. Volvo targets safety conscious customers. This is a very modest gesture , more likely done to spur debate on safety. How many people have ever had the chance or desire to even go that fast? I have no idea but sampling my friends and family none of us. Again main point is to bring safety attention discussion. Speeders - who get caught, go to driver safety classes and watch shocking videos of true events as a reminder. I would like more drive reco
  • https://www.volvocars.com/en-e... [volvocars.com]

    Born on the racing circuits of Sweden !

  • by Nocturrne ( 912399 ) on Monday March 04, 2019 @09:45PM (#58216948)

    Seriously, how many people have even driven a car over 112mph, and if so, why? Unless you live in a very remote place with very low population, the chance of traffic being light enough to even exceed the normal speed limit is pretty low.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by djinn6 ( 1868030 )

      "You don't need it, therefore you shouldn't have it" is the most authoritarian argument I've ever heard. By that logic, you can ban just about anything.

      TV? Banned. Go spend that time being productive.

      Meat? Banned. Eat rice and beans.

      Sex? For procreation only.

  • by p51d007 ( 656414 ) on Monday March 04, 2019 @10:43PM (#58217148)
    My car is limited at 114mph, but I've seen a TON of software chips that would unlock it. This will be the same. The factory cars will be locked, but they can be "cracked". The fastest I've ever driven, was when I was a dumb kid...120mph in my 69 Galaxie fastback, with the 490 4bbl carb. Young and dumb. Now, even on the interstate, I rarely go over 75.
  • In Sweden, they make two cars. One for the left lane (the SAAB) and one for the right lane (Volvo). Some things don't change !
  • by jeti ( 105266 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2019 @01:58AM (#58217676)
    German car makers have been doing this since the nineties. BMW was the first to limit their cars to 250km/h (155mp/h). Mercedes, Audi and all the other brands followed voluntarily. Even for motorcycles, there is an international gentlemens agreement. While they are not limited, the maximum speed is only given as 300+ km/h for any bike that could exceed that speed.

We are Microsoft. Unix is irrelevant. Openness is futile. Prepare to be assimilated.

Working...