View Single Post
Old 03-06-2019, 11:12 AM   #15
Nick M3
Relic
 
Nick M3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Bethesda, MD
Posts: 12,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by clyde View Post
What bothers me about the idea of starting a safety argument at 112mph is that 112mph will probably have an imperceptible impact on traffic fatalities. It's also not very fast and perfectly reasonable on tens of thousands of miles of Interstate and US highways outside of built up metro areas. It's even often a sane and reasonable speed on the NJTP northbound from Exits 1-5 (but almost never southbound).

Anyway...

My initial guess is that capping speeds at 112mph will not hurt Volvo's sales or their reputation among their buyers, but will cut their costs by, um, a lot.

If your cars can't go over 112mph, you don't need to design all the parts and systems to perform over 112mph. You don't need to test them over 112mph. Parts costs go down, initially making new car sales more profitable and, later, saving customers money post-warranty with lower parts replacement costs.

If they really wanted to spark a safety conversation to have a safety conversation and safety based outcome, they'd cap speeds at 80mph or less.
Obviously a really different market, but trying that didn’t seem like it worked out great in the V6 Mustang.
__________________
2011 M3
2006 Sierra 2500HD 4WD LBZ/Allison
2004 X5 3.0i 6MT
1995 M3 S50B32
1990 325is
1989 M3 S54B32

Hers:
1989 325iX
1996 911 Turbo


Nick M3 is offline   Reply With Quote