RE: Volvo to fit all cars with 112mph speed limiter

[LordGrover]

Were discounted insurance and/or road tax offered, I'd probably take them up on it. I can't remember the last time I exceeded 90 let alone 100 on the motorway in my daily.

[Johnny42]

There's no reason to assume Volvo drivers know what speed they are going; they don't pay attention to anything else. So this is clearly a good thing!

[DamianQS]

So pleased I bought the XC60 last year de-restricted lol

[CambsBill]

cptsideways said:

Makes for cheaper development costs, wind noise, tyre choice, aero appendages, things not falling off, NVH, gear ratios, etc etc.

This.

In truth, how many drivers never exceed this kind of speed ever in their cars - I would guess 90%+ (PH company directors excepted of course). So the reality is that the vast majority won't see any difference.

The upside to Volvo is they can reduce their development and materials costs in all sorts of areas, so buyers could see a lower purchase/PCP cost, lower maintenance & insurance and things like gear ratios better optimised for realistic driving scenarios rather than having to work up to a speed that the cars will probably never see in real life.

Edited by CambsBill on Monday 4th March 14:44

[TWPC]

Muzzer79 said:

fast diesel boy said:

Next RE:..Volvo go into administration.

Good riddance.

You really think Volvo, with annual sales totalling 600,000 cars a year, will go into administration because they're speed limiting their cars?

It's a Volvo, not a Ferrari. How many of them do you think actually go above 100mph in their whole life cycle?

Indeed!
From Volvo's website, 'Volvo Cars set a new global sales record in 2018, breaking the 600,000 sales milestone for the first time ever since the company was founded in 1927. The company’s sales rose 12.4 per cent to 642,253 cars in 2018, compared with the same period the year before.'
Sales rose another 11.3% year-on-year in Jan and Feb.

I would suggest that Volvo have a firmer grasp of their position in the car market and what drives their sales than many brands...

[warch]

Usual PH knee jerking going on. Japanese cars have been speed restricted to 112mph for years.

[kambites]

I've never driven a road car faster than 112mph anyway, so I couldn't care less.

[Haltamer]

warch said:

Usual PH knee jerking going on. Japanese cars have been speed restricted to 112mph for years.

In Japan only?

This is a concious decision by Volvo to restrict all cars, regardless of legislation - A bit different IMO.

[AC43]

Limiting them to 112mph is all well and good but I'm more worried by the tiny lady across the road who drives her XC90 everywhere in full on weapon mode. Don't cross the road or pull out in front of her. She's got 2.5 tonnes of wide-open-throttle tank to smash the little people out of the way.

[DBRacingGod]

Jhonno said:

The start of a slippery slope..

Control. Removing freedom of choice. Tracking.

Disagree with this PR nonsense. I wonder if they can show how many were actually killed over 112mph to justify it.

Being Volvo customers would probably pay a premium to have the speed reduced still further.

[EazyDuz]

Good idea IMO. The car should recognise motorways and limit speed to 70mph but this is a step in the right direction. Way too many mouthbreathers tailgating in lane 3 trying to break the law and exceed 70 as it is.

[Black S2K]

chrisch77 said:

I'm pretty sure the whole safety thing is just a PR smokescreen. The real reason for limiting the top speed of Volvo's future cars is likely to be linked directly with their already stated commitment to electrifying all new models launched after 2019, and a trend we will see from other manufacturers in the future. If the vehicle speed is limited to a sensible number then a 'through the road' hybrid system (a la 'Volvo twin engine') does not need a multi speed gearbox on the electric axle and can deliver useful electric performance with a single gear, which keeps size/weight/cost of the vehicle down.

High performance hybrids (think BMW i8) have to have a more complex two speed gearbox on the electrified axle (or at least a motor disconnect clutch) to ensure that the electric motor does not exceed its maximum speed capability when the vehicle uses the full drag restricted top speed afforded by the conventional internal combustion engined powertrain. Without multiple gears or disconnect clutch the motor would have to be geared so tall that it would offer poor EV performance at low speed and/or limited gradeability in EV mode. On the other hand, overspeeding an electric motor would result in thermal meltdown.

Chris

This.

I think a move towards Lambda 1 emission standards might also have a lot to do with it.

[RemyMartin81D]

fast diesel boy said:

RemyMartin81D said:

Odd thing to say.

Why is that odd? Do you not like fast cars?

Get a mico mate.

To write off a manufacturer on the basis on this one article is laughable. I seriously doubt 90% of Volvos go over 100mph let alone the headline figure.

Only thing that I can say good riddance too, is fast diesels with their cancer emissions. They'll soon be gone

[deckster]

DBRacingGod said:

Jhonno said:

The start of a slippery slope..

Control. Removing freedom of choice. Tracking.

Disagree with this PR nonsense. I wonder if they can show how many were actually killed over 112mph to justify it.

Being Volvo customers would probably pay a premium to have the speed reduced still further.

I know you meant that disparagingly, but you're also quite possibly right. Volvo have a stated goal of zero KSIs in their cars from 2020; now whether they'll achieve that is doubtful, but you can't argue that they're trying and that the message will undoubtedly resonate with their core customer base.

I also found this quote very interesting from their CEO very interesting:

Auto Express said:

Håkan Samuelsson, CEO of Volvo Cars, said: "We want to start a conversation about whether car makers have the right or maybe even an obligation to install technology in cars that changes their driver’s behaviour, to tackle things like speeding, intoxication or distraction. We don’t have a firm answer to this question, but believe we should take leadership in the discussion and be a pioneer."

To be blunt, it's all coming. I firmly predict that in a few years time, like it or not, we won't have a choice of whether to speed or not as the car will stop you from doing so; see also tailgating, pulling out in front of people and not stopping at pedestrian crossings. Then not too long after that,
we don't be allowed to drive at all. But that's a different conversation.

[swisstoni]

A bit odd really. Most tttery and accidents will be occurring well under this speed limit anyway.

I think it’s just Volvo trying to differentiate themselves as the ‘safety’ brand a bit more.
Good luck to them but maybe they’d be better off coming up with some new attractive output.
I see plenty XC90s but not much else.

[sgtBerbatov]

Why would you want to buy or even drive a car that doesn't trust you to drive it?

[Fire99]

The bigger issue I have with regards to GPS limited speed, is that I'm basically broadcasting to the powers at be where I am at all times.
So some that may not be an issue but for me there is a principal of being free and not being effectively snooped on.

I know when GPS's were first introduced in an old company of mine. The claim was purely to make journeys more efficient for the Technicians etc.. It was a very short time before they were asking why a Technician had stopped at a certain place or allegedly taken a break etc etc...

So it's a direction I'm quite adverse to.

[Macboy]

fast diesel boy said:

Next RE:..Volvo go into administration.

Good riddance.

You are an ill-informed buffoon. Volvo, a profitable, award-winning and growing modern brand owned by one of the fastest growing and most financially stable Chinese automotive groups is going to go into administration because you disagree with their safety campaign focussed entirely on the people who already buy and appreciate the brand? Yeah, good call.

[kambites]

sgtBerbatov said:

Why would you want to buy or even drive a car that doesn't trust you to drive it?

So you don't want/have ABS or traction control or parking sensors or... in your car then? All systems which exist to help drivers not to make mistakes which they really shouldn't.

Why would you want a Volvo which is capable of doing more than 113mph? I don't want a speed limiter, but I can't see any particular reason to object to one either in this sort of car.

Edited by kambites on Monday 4th March 15:01

[Tigger2050]

112 mph based on what measure?

My previous car was registering speeds 10% over actual, if the car is using its own calibration that 112 is going to be less than that, on my previous car it would have equated to about an actual 100 mph.