Aurion quicker than a GTI, really?

[Tom87]

If you crash, yes. If you are next to another car then maybe you can get done under street racing. But if you are enjoying a series of corners in a safe but enthusiastic way, then no. Who said anything about not slowing down for corners? You know those yellow signs? They are advisory signs, right. Not changes to the speed limit.

I drive 50,000km a year with no points taken off my license but still have fun.

Drama queens who make sweeping statements based on limited experience piss me off.

Seriously. The Toyota dealership is that way. You see everything as black/white. The law is full of shades of grey.

I agree the law is full of blurred and grey areas. But you don't seem to grasp the grim reality of the "Road is not a racetrack" emphasis our authorities are jamming down our throats.

Further to this and in regards to the grey areas of these laws; in the event of an incident I do not believe I could afford the legal support which would be required to convince a court that what I was doing had no potential for an accident!

Much easier to simply abide by the rules as often as possible.

Actually, the yellow signs are still factored in if there is an incident (i.e. you crash into another car) as you were advised to drive at a speed less than the limit.

Also, you can get done under the hoon laws in QLD for driving in a rapid pace by yourself, it just usually happens when there is another car beside you at the traffic lights.

^^ This.

If you want to have fun with your car you've just got to take it to a private course if you're not rich enough to fight the law. Simple as that these days!

[Diesel_vert]

A few more points I'd like to add in this nicely derailed thread:

There are many social and/or psychological reasons why vehicles marketed as performance vehicles are bought by the consumer (separate from reasons due to the vehicle's technical capabilities).

...

A driver is obligated to drive to the conditions, irrespective of the regulations that prevail at the time.

Travelling below the posted speed limit may be necessary during certain circumstances, in which to do otherwise may be dangerous.

Not slowing down for corners does not necessarily satisfy the condition of dangerous or reckless driving. Like most things, it needs context.

A good driver should be capable in their ability to assess and evaluate possible risks and dangers towards themselves and the public.

The joy of driving need not come at the expense of breaking the road rules.

[Tobes_WIR35]

A good driver should be capable in their ability to assess and evaluate possible risks and dangers towards themselves and the public.

Most people are not good drivers. In fact, most people aren't even drivers at all - they are just steerers. They have no idea about the dynamics of a vehicle or driving techniques. That is why the road rules and speed limits are what they are. The 5% of us who are actually "drivers" have to be dumbed down to their level.

[Diesel_vert]

Most people are not good drivers. In fact, most people aren't even drivers at all - they are just steerers. They have no idea about the dynamics of a vehicle or driving techniques.

No, not exactly.

A good driver (on the public highway) should be capable in their ability to assess and evaluate possible risks and dangers towards themselves and the public.

One does not necessarily need to be knowledgeable in the field of vehicle dynamics or require finely-tuned driving techniques to do that.

That is why the road rules and speed limits are what they are. The 5% of us who are actually "drivers" have to be dumbed down to their level.

Getting between point A and point B in a safe and timely manner is the priority on the public highway.

Being skilled in the craft of driving has little to do with one's ability to evaluate potential risk and hazards, nor is it a prerequisite to enjoy driving.

The road is there to share. It's the public highway, not the private highway.

[Tobes_WIR35]

I disagree. How can you assess a risk if you don't know the details of the consequences? Risk assessment 101.
As an engineer I assess risk all day, every day. I could not do this if I was not trained, experienced and conscientious.
Relating that to driving, how does a "driver" know what they're about to do is or is not "risky" if they have no idea of how their vehicle will react, or how they will get themselves out of a bad situation?

[Diesel_vert]

I disagree. How can you assess a risk if you don't know the details of the consequences? Risk assessment 101.
As an engineer I assess risk all day, every day. I could not do this if I was not trained, experienced and conscientious.
Relating that to driving, how does a "driver" know what they're about to do is or is not "risky" if they have no idea of how their vehicle will react, or how they will get themselves out of a bad situation?

You drive within the limits of the prevailing conditions, the vehicle itself, and your own abilities - whichever is the lower of three.

A reasonable person will certainly be aware of the general risks and what may potentially happen if they travel too fast for the conditions or exceed the limits of the vehicle or their own talent. A reasonable person does not necessarily need to have studied in the field of vehicle dynamics or recognise the nuances of how a vehicle reacts to a driver's inputs and its surrounding environment to know what the likely consequences will be.

There are numerous controls in the form of licensing (testing methods) and regulations (signs warning of potential hazards, compulsory and advisory speed limits, etc). They are not perfect I grant you, but they do enormously aid the driver in their ability to evaluate potential risks.

It goes without saying that having the ability to control a vehicle that has gone above and beyond its limits will obviously aid in its recovery. However, not all potential risks and hazards on the road are connected with the ability to control a vehicle, nor does it always determine the likelihood of a risk materialising. Sometimes, a car may behave in a fashion, or things may just happen to you, in a way that is independent of the actions of whoever is behind the wheel.

A more prudent method of minimising the likelihood of risk materialising would be to drive within the conditions and one's own limits, even if it may slightly inconvenience 5% of drivers on the roads.

[Tom87]

Thanks for the read. Very well thought out and presented.

(I think you just bitch slapped this thread with wisdom, btw)

[ParaBul]

A more prudent method of minimising the likelihood of risk materialising would be to drive within the conditions and one's own limits, even if it may slightly inconvenience 5% of drivers on the roads.

Very well constructed argument, with which I completely agree. I have no problem whatsoever with other people driving within their limits, and/or the limits of their vehicle. I do have problems with them deciding that their limit is the ultimate limit, and it's inappropriate for anybody else to drive faster.

If you're driving below the speed limit, and somebody catches up to you, don't accelerate simply because a nice straight stretch opens up. Let people overtake. If you're happy for others to lose minutes on their drive, why not forgo a few seconds on yours?

(Sorry Diesel_vert - generic use of "you" - not intended to accuse you of anything. )

[Tobes_WIR35]

You drive within the limits of the prevailing conditions, the vehicle itself, and your own abilities - whichever is the lower of three.

A reasonable person will certainly be aware of the general risks and what may potentially happen if they travel too fast for the conditions or exceed the limits of the vehicle or their own talent. A reasonable person does not necessarily need to have studied in the field of vehicle dynamics or recognise the nuances of how a vehicle reacts to a driver's inputs and its surrounding environment to know what the likely consequences will be.

There are numerous controls in the form of licensing (testing methods) and regulations (signs warning of potential hazards, compulsory and advisory speed limits, etc). They are not perfect I grant you, but they do enormously aid the driver in their ability to evaluate potential risks.

It goes without saying that having the ability to control a vehicle that has gone above and beyond its limits will obviously aid in its recovery. However, not all potential risks and hazards on the road are connected with the ability to control a vehicle, nor does it always determine the likelihood of a risk materialising. Sometimes, a car may behave in a fashion, or things may just happen to you, in a way that is independent of the actions of whoever is behind the wheel.

A more prudent method of minimising the likelihood of risk materialising would be to drive within the conditions and one's own limits, even if it may slightly inconvenience 5% of drivers on the roads.

A little patronizing, but you've essentially just re-written my initial point, albeit using a lot more words.

My initial point was that the road rules and speed limits are designed for the vast majority of motorists who don't have a clue about vehicle dynamics, or dynamic driving, and have limited ability to assess risk in that context.

The road rules, signs and speed limits aren't really there to aid people in assessing risk, they're there to reduce or remove the risk, because too many "drivers" can't assess it for themselves.