The most apparent reasons to me are :
To pull away from that tailgating asshole who won’t get off your bumper.
To pull ahead and avoid a wreck when some asshole starts crowding into your lane, and seems unable to grasp the idea that two cars can not occupy the same space at the same time.
To whip around and accelerate past the wreck that one of the aforementioned assholes just caused right in front of you.
And, that could be 65 mph on level ground. It doesn’t factor in a steep incline. Or any incline.
Why do governments allow sharp knives to be sold when stabbing someone to death is illegal?
Because they hurt less than dull ones? 
The 50km/h case is actually pretty borderline, depending on driver attention, tyre quality, road conditions etc. A car travelling at 80km/h is also producing more noise and generally more noticeable, but a child or animal might be just as likely to run out onto the road.
By the way, traffic light models (at least in Australia) assume a reaction time of 0.75 seconds, yet the research suggests that median reaction times (to traffic lights, railroad crossings) are typically between 1.0-1.3 seconds. Who are they trying to fool? I have actually contacted the traffic safety minister of my state over this - they didn’t disagree with either the model or the research (some of which was done by Monash university), yet they don’t want to change it!
If you do this, you become an arsehole as well. Just pull over and let them pass. It’s just not worth the stress…
Yep, its marginal, that’s why I chose 30ml. And its “best case” scenario.
The point I took away though is that at 50km/h I would stop. At 80 km/h - I wouldn’t even have time to react.
The model I based the figures on assumed 3/4 second to “notice” + 3/4 second to carry out any action.
I am not exactly sure what point you are trying to make.
Good point.
Pulling over or speeding up rewards their behaviour, thus causing them to do it more. I try to just ignore them, or slow down slightly. If they back off, speed up. I find most people (or at least most people stupid enough to tailgate) can be trained like hamsters: the closer they get the more I slow, the more they back off the more I speed up. They learn.
Well, except you’re usually breaking the law by using this method. Most states have a law pertaining to impeding the flow of traffic. My grandfather received at ticket for it that stuck while doing 10 over the speed limit in the fast lane. Not to mention that you’re contributing to an unsafe situation on the freeway by not leaving the left lane clear for passing, and encouraging them to (possibly) break the law further by passing you on the right. Seriously, when I am a passenger, I suggest we move over the first time someone passes us on the right. My mother drives me insane by waiting for the fourth or fifth suggestion.
I understand it’s frustrating to “lose” to someone who’s being such a jerk. But you’re not really helping, and they’ll get theirs if they keep going.
As to the OP: Limiting power will solve nothing. Not only is the power necessary to get up the hill, when you get to the other side, all that energy is essentially stored by gravity pulling you back down. Don’t brake, and you’ll be going plenty fast, provided you were patient enough to get to the top of a pretty long, steep hill.
Edit: Sorry, I just noticed you are in Australia. I am not sure if you have laws of this nature there. I still stand by my advice, since they’re really not learning anything, trust me.
My technique wouldn’t work on dual carriageways with another lane free, but that’s irrelevant anyway because I’d never use it there or need to, because if I’m not passing someone and there is space in the outside lane, I’m in it, so some impatient would-be tailgater is just going to use the free inside lane to pass anyway. So straight away your comment has no relevance and doesn’t really make sense.
Sounds like what your father got pinged for was being in the wrong lane. There is no way on earth that you are going to get ticketed for doing the limit or slightly more while in the correct lane. And that’s all I mean by “slowing down slightly” in this context, because let’s face it obnoxious tailgaters aren’t the sort of people who are happy to travel at or only slightly above the limit.
Further, people tailgate to physically threaten you into committing an infringement of the law to suit their convenience. I’m not going to give in to that.
Finally, as to whether people aren’t really learning anything, I’ve already said my experience is that most people’s behaviour changes when they figure out what you are doing. Whether you ask me to trust you or not.
Why do you keep coming in here with silly arguments from absurdity?
If you have a contribution to the debate, let’s hear it.
Here I’ll help you get started.
“The reason I think governments don’t want to enforce speed limits at manufacturer level is…”
You fill in your compelling argument.
My worst experience with this was years ago, when I still rode a bike. This clown was simply fucking with me. He wouldn’t pass, he wouldn’t back off, he was on my ass for no reason, other than to fuck with me, and it was dangerous. I had no choice but to gun it. Just to keep him off me.
Because the question is absurd.
You haven’t articulated why it is absurd.
Sure, no one ever gets tailgated while there are other lanes free. That’s why I see it every day, I am sure. Your technique doesn’t work anywhere passing is allowed, either. Nonetheless, I have had people continue to tailgate me until I’ve pulled over on the shoulder to force them to pass me while traveling on the Farm-to-Market roads here. I don’t drive slowly, mind you.
My Grandfather (get it right, bub) was charged with impeding the flow of traffic. I repeat, he was exceeding the speed limit by 10 mph in the outside lane. I would have felt that the car tailgating him would have been charged with following too closely, but this was not the case. The officer decided that he was not passing traffic in the inside lanes (which were also exceeding the posted speed limit) fast enough, and he was issued a ticket. This happened on a Northern California freeway in the 1980s, I do not remember the particular one. Being in the correct lane was not mentioned.
If you think you’re teaching wisdom or behavior to someone, have at it. Since you’re willing to endanger yourself in order to not “give in” to someone, I am glad I don’t ride with you. My grandfather probably was doing the same thing you do when he was issued the ticket. I am much like he was. I used to employ even more aggressive techniques than this against tailgaters when I was young. After some stupidly dangerous experiences, and thinking about what * I* was doing, I stopped doing those things, but continued to do what you do when bullied by tailgaters. After a couple of dangerous situations caused by that, I decided that wasn’t too bright, either. YMMV
I’ll stop hijacking now, I swear
Oh, and actually related to the OP: Any system that was based on GPS may have issues with certain situations. I autocross, and 2 of our sites are parking lots that are fairly close to the roads. It’s totally legal for me to be going as fast as I can in that parking lot. Some of the very powerful cars will break 70, I have hit the rev limiter in second many times, which is 59 mph. A couple of times I was hitting it long enough to justify being in third for a moment. The GPS receiver in my phone would most likely assume I was on the nearby (30-40 ft away) road, breaking the speed limit. Sitting still it does pretty well at telling if I am in the driveway or the street, but while moving it seems to lose accuracy.
Add to the accuracy problems the fact that you can defeat such a system by clipping an antenna wire (heck, if I was a teenager, I’d install a switch in my parent’s car!), and you’ll start to see that such a system isn’t going to cure the problem of having a lead foot, either. Heck, sane people are illegally taking parts of the emissions systems out of their cars, which can totally annihilate the speed limit already, out of the idea that the car will be even faster without it.
If it works for me most of the time then it isn’t very relevant that some people are so stupid or stubborn it won’t work. There are plenty of good techniques in life that don’t work every time.
People have been charged with all sorts of things for all sorts of wrong reasons. What can you do? If I was going to let my rule be “never do anything that could give rise to a dumbass charge against me” I’d never leave my house. In fact, I couldn’t remain there either. And if this is a major issue in the relevant jurisdiction I’ll bear it in mind, and in the very very specific circumstances of your grandfather’s ticket, I won’t use my technique. Your point of general application is…?
Endanger how? What should I do? Speed up? Speeding is much more dangerous to me than having someone tailgate me (nose tail collision mostly hurt those behind). And it puts me in the wrong. Pull over? Pulling over creates a significant traffic hazard and a very significant risk. Read a basic text on where accidents occur. It might surprise you. I can recommend “Traffic” by Tom Vanderbilt, it’s a good read. Slowing slightly and smoothly is by far the safest option.
Others have, however. Must I tread the same ground? Here’s a novel thought, however : Possession of Object X is not primae facie evidence that Object X will be used illegally. If the government were to legislate against all possible artifacts that might possibly be used illegally then it would have little time for anything else, as well as hopelessly clogging the courts with useless cases.
As to whether I “keep coming in here,” I have done so exactly twice, so it hardly seems to fit the criteria. And if you don’t think that the first post I responded to was absurd, well, we need to get together and agree upon a definition.
Some auto insurance companies are already testing “telematic” devices. These are little doohickeys that plug into the OBD port on your car; they contain a GPS, software which continually tracks what the car is doing (speed, g-forces, etc.) as well as a communications device which uses a cell-phone signal to send data back to the insurer. (Note that the OnStar device in GM cars can do a lot of the same stuff.)
The idea is that, if you drive in a prudent manner (minimizing sudden acceleration / deceleration, not speeding, etc.), the system will know this, and you’ll get a discount on your auto insurance. And, conversely, if you drive in a less prudent manner, you won’t get those discounts (though, at this point, they’re not saying that your insurance rate would go up).
What if there is no place to pull over, and they are so close that even just letting off the gas means they will hit you? I was thinking of freeway/interstate driving. If you were talking about just tooling around the neighborhood, then yes you can pull over, as you’re both travellling at a much lower speed and there are plenty of spots to pull over.