Z owners, will cruise engage over 90MPH???
#21
Robbyn, I'm not defending leadfoot, but what does it matter if the cruise only goes up to 80 when the car itself is capable of going 155 mph? By your logic any high speed accident would open a car manufacturer to liability. Also what about other companies that have no limit on the cruise control? Do you think they are in deep doodoo?
You may be right, but I don't think Nissan would have any liability if the owner was exceeding the rules of speed and safety.
You may be right, but I don't think Nissan would have any liability if the owner was exceeding the rules of speed and safety.
#22
Originally posted by rai
Robbyn, I'm not defending leadfoot, but what does it matter if the cruise only goes up to 80 when the car itself is capable of going 155 mph? By your logic any high speed accident would open a car manufacturer to liability. Also what about other companies that have no limit on the cruise control? Do you think they are in deep doodoo?
You may be right, but I don't think Nissan would have any liability if the owner was exceeding the rules of speed and safety.
Robbyn, I'm not defending leadfoot, but what does it matter if the cruise only goes up to 80 when the car itself is capable of going 155 mph? By your logic any high speed accident would open a car manufacturer to liability. Also what about other companies that have no limit on the cruise control? Do you think they are in deep doodoo?
You may be right, but I don't think Nissan would have any liability if the owner was exceeding the rules of speed and safety.
#23
HMMMM now I'm killing small children. I was sincerely interested in knowing. I suspected that it would be the case in that both my current Nissan and previous Infiniti had the same limiter.
I did ask my technician if there was a bypass but he too was unaware that there was a limiter. I am not sure if an aftermarket chip or ECU upgrade can remove it.
I am not trying to make trouble but I am interested in buying a sports car to go fast. I am not quite sure how some of you have missed that not so insignificant fact. I truly believe that you can operate safely in excess of 100MPH because I have been doing it for years and have never even had a close call in that time. I disagree with the insinuation that I do not pay attention, you couldn't be further from the truth.
It is somewhat ironic that the car is capable of hitting 155MPH (which I believe is also a result of a limiter) yet you can only set the cruise control at 89. My Toyota Tundar can hit 89 with a good tailwind.
Again, your holier than thou attitudes are pretty arrogant, our individual reasons for buying cars should be respected, not attacked. I appreciate those of you who may not agree with my driving habits are at least able to respond with civility.
I did ask my technician if there was a bypass but he too was unaware that there was a limiter. I am not sure if an aftermarket chip or ECU upgrade can remove it.
I am not trying to make trouble but I am interested in buying a sports car to go fast. I am not quite sure how some of you have missed that not so insignificant fact. I truly believe that you can operate safely in excess of 100MPH because I have been doing it for years and have never even had a close call in that time. I disagree with the insinuation that I do not pay attention, you couldn't be further from the truth.
It is somewhat ironic that the car is capable of hitting 155MPH (which I believe is also a result of a limiter) yet you can only set the cruise control at 89. My Toyota Tundar can hit 89 with a good tailwind.
Again, your holier than thou attitudes are pretty arrogant, our individual reasons for buying cars should be respected, not attacked. I appreciate those of you who may not agree with my driving habits are at least able to respond with civility.
#24
Concerning the speed-limiting cruise control:
Thank you Nissan for preventing leadfoot from placing the cruise at 100+mph. Thank you also for protecting me and my family from being on the same highway as an idiot (sorry for the derogatory image but necessary here) who has had the cruise control at up to 150mph for the past 45 minutes. This is the type of irresponsible behavior that harms others. Apparently leadfoot is too immature and self-centered to see the big picture here.
Thank you Nissan for preventing leadfoot from placing the cruise at 100+mph. Thank you also for protecting me and my family from being on the same highway as an idiot (sorry for the derogatory image but necessary here) who has had the cruise control at up to 150mph for the past 45 minutes. This is the type of irresponsible behavior that harms others. Apparently leadfoot is too immature and self-centered to see the big picture here.
Last edited by rep15; 08-27-2002 at 12:42 AM.
#25
Guest
Posts: n/a
Leadfoot,
No one is saying that you specifically are negligent. But someone else may be, and if they did what robbyn described the situation may occur.
Some people are quite adept at handling those high speeds but Nissan must protect against the 'lowest common denominator'
Factor
No one is saying that you specifically are negligent. But someone else may be, and if they did what robbyn described the situation may occur.
Some people are quite adept at handling those high speeds but Nissan must protect against the 'lowest common denominator'
Factor
#26
Originally posted by dv_johnson
I think I can safely say that doing over 90 with the cruise on is more dangerous than doing 90 or more with your foot on the accelerator. No matter how you slice it, with Cruise, you don't focus quite as much, because the car manipulates itself speed-wise.
I think I can safely say that doing over 90 with the cruise on is more dangerous than doing 90 or more with your foot on the accelerator. No matter how you slice it, with Cruise, you don't focus quite as much, because the car manipulates itself speed-wise.
I agree. Using cruise control can result in delayed driver reaction. The car will not slow down until cruise control is deactivated; in an emergency, this will be more dangerous than if cruise control is not engaged.
Leadfoot - I hope that this isn't the main deterrent for buying a Z. I'm sure you're quite attentive, and could handle 90+ cruise control. I just look at cruise control as a way to obey the posted speed (or about 10 over), but not a way to prolong speed at more than that.
Right, I don't think people have attacked leadfoot's driving ability, merely questioning his judgement in using cruise control above 90 and criticizing his desire for that feature.
Thank goodness it's America. You can do it your way, and I can mine. And it's all good...
#27
Guest
Posts: n/a
The liability argument seems quit weak to me. Say you hit that little girl while looking in your vanity mirrors at 150mph. Is Nissan now liable for not providing a mechanism to prevent them from opening over a certain speed? How about adjusting the radio controls? Listening to loud music? Getting something out of the rear storage compartment? I do believe that Nissan implemented the cruise speed limit for "safety" but I do not believe it has anything do with liability. If there was so much risk to the manufacturer being liable to driver negligance they would never sell the car in the first place.
Secondly, the responses over this persons opinion that this is a deal breaker are just ridiculous. Everyone buys a car for different reasons, and we're talking about a significant amount of money. If the speed limited cruise would require him to adjust his driving habits, I can understand it breaking the deal. It's clear that he wasn't blindly in love with the car as some members here in the first place, though. It's not like it's the only sports car on the market, and just because has is choosing something different doesn't mean he's saying the car sucks. Don't be so defensive! We're all automotive enthusiasts here, right?
Secondly, the responses over this persons opinion that this is a deal breaker are just ridiculous. Everyone buys a car for different reasons, and we're talking about a significant amount of money. If the speed limited cruise would require him to adjust his driving habits, I can understand it breaking the deal. It's clear that he wasn't blindly in love with the car as some members here in the first place, though. It's not like it's the only sports car on the market, and just because has is choosing something different doesn't mean he's saying the car sucks. Don't be so defensive! We're all automotive enthusiasts here, right?
#28
Originally posted by Macabre
It's not like it's the only sports car on the market, and just because has is choosing something different doesn't mean he's saying the car sucks. Don't be so defensive! We're all automotive enthusiasts here, right?
It's not like it's the only sports car on the market, and just because has is choosing something different doesn't mean he's saying the car sucks. Don't be so defensive! We're all automotive enthusiasts here, right?
#29
Originally posted by rep15
It appears to me the thread is dealing with irreponsible driving behavior and safety, not the car. Most were just stunned that this feature could actually be a concern to a prospective buyer.
It appears to me the thread is dealing with irreponsible driving behavior and safety, not the car. Most were just stunned that this feature could actually be a concern to a prospective buyer.
And Macabre is correct, I did not say the car sucked. I still think its a great car, great value. But I'm not going to settle for it if it does not meet my needs.
#30
Originally posted by leadfoot
I am not trying to make trouble but I am interested in buying a sports car to go fast. I am not quite sure how some of you have missed that not so insignificant fact. I truly believe that you can operate safely in excess of 100MPH because I have been doing it for years and have never even had a close call in that time. I disagree with the insinuation that I do not pay attention, you couldn't be further from the truth.
I am not trying to make trouble but I am interested in buying a sports car to go fast. I am not quite sure how some of you have missed that not so insignificant fact. I truly believe that you can operate safely in excess of 100MPH because I have been doing it for years and have never even had a close call in that time. I disagree with the insinuation that I do not pay attention, you couldn't be further from the truth.
You seem to be a driving enthusiast by your own admission - great. But if this is true, why are you even using a cruise control at high speed. As soon as you initiate cruise control you are no longer driving the car but merely aiming it.
I can see using it at freeway speed which, I will admit is boring for long periods, but not at triple digits. There is enough thrill at that speed to not want to dilute it with having he computer help you drive the car.
#32
Originally posted by rep15
Ok forgetting the safety issue which is apparently not connecting with you:
You seem to be a driving enthusiast by your own admission - great. But if this is true, why are you even using a cruise control at high speed. As soon as you initiate cruise control you are no longer driving the car but merely aiming it.
I can see using it at freeway speed which, I will admit is boring for long periods, but not at triple digits. There is enough thrill at that speed to not want to dilute it with having he computer help you drive the car.
Ok forgetting the safety issue which is apparently not connecting with you:
You seem to be a driving enthusiast by your own admission - great. But if this is true, why are you even using a cruise control at high speed. As soon as you initiate cruise control you are no longer driving the car but merely aiming it.
I can see using it at freeway speed which, I will admit is boring for long periods, but not at triple digits. There is enough thrill at that speed to not want to dilute it with having he computer help you drive the car.
In and around Seattle 405,520, I90, I5 I would not drive that fast. Down here in AZ, the highways are very straight and very long. It may seem to you that what I am saying is excessive but I think if you were here and exposed to it, you know soccer moms doing 90 in there Town and Countrys you may not think it was so bad.
Anyway, I just got off the phone with the Service Manager at the Nissan dealership who laughed because he said he had been asked about it many times. He said he did not know of any internal solution as he has investigated the issue in the past. Apparently Nissan has been doing this for some time. He is going to research the issue and see if anyone makes an aftermarket chip that will defeat the limiter.
#33
leadfoot
I think you have been attacked unfairly regarding this issue. If I had a vote I would say this is up there with putting the power outlet behind the driver seat. I mean what's the point.
As you say it's not as if you are putting the cruise control on 100 and driving thru school zones. I don't know what's the big deal with other people thinking it is immoral to use cruise control over 89 mph. I have seen countless kids weaving in and out of heavy traffic (average speed 80 mph) while they are doing over 100 mph with very dangerous closing velocities. Putting many other people at risk.
I think we should be selective as to what kind of driving we dissaprove of. After all 100 mph in your hands in selected situations is probably safer than someone driving below the speed limit by a 90 year old, or kids cutting in front of people who are moving along at a reasonable pace.
I hope you can come up with something, the cruise control being a mechanical system (I think) can be jury rigged just like people with corvetts are able to disable the stupid 1-4 skip shift.
If you find out you can post in the DIY section of the revised site.
As you say it's not as if you are putting the cruise control on 100 and driving thru school zones. I don't know what's the big deal with other people thinking it is immoral to use cruise control over 89 mph. I have seen countless kids weaving in and out of heavy traffic (average speed 80 mph) while they are doing over 100 mph with very dangerous closing velocities. Putting many other people at risk.
I think we should be selective as to what kind of driving we dissaprove of. After all 100 mph in your hands in selected situations is probably safer than someone driving below the speed limit by a 90 year old, or kids cutting in front of people who are moving along at a reasonable pace.
I hope you can come up with something, the cruise control being a mechanical system (I think) can be jury rigged just like people with corvetts are able to disable the stupid 1-4 skip shift.
If you find out you can post in the DIY section of the revised site.
#34
Guest
Posts: n/a
Unfortunately, it is not a mechanical system. One of the benefits of DBW is that it does not use a second throttle cable for cruise control, it's just the computer controlling the servo-mechanism attached to the TB. It's possible that a 'chip' could cure it, but who knows, and you'd be creating possible warranty hassles.
#35
First off, none of you, that I know of, have even driven the Z (don't mean to be holier then thou). Once you do, the LAST THING YOU EVEN CARE ABOUT is the damn cruise control limitations. I go to Vegas Regularly, setting it at 90 is fine, I can punch it for light periods of time to get some more speed if I want, but most people are right, cruising at 120 on cruise control is not smart. Besides, that is a sad *** deal breaker...what happened to love of sports cars??? Sports car that used to not even have RADIOS or AIR CONDITIONERS, No leather, No Back seats, no luggage room, just form and function and there are people with the nerve to complain about this crap. People continue to amaze me. Drive the car, then tell me the damn cruise control is a Deal Breaker. LOL!
#36
Thanks for saving the lecture guys. Maybe I'm an *** for even bringing it up. The Nissan guy said the cruise is a separate function whatever that means, so its possible that the top speed limiter and fuel/iginition mapping are completely separate from the cruise control. I will post if there is a reasonable fix.
I like LA-Z's idea of a sports car. I have had a few, Porsches, BMW's, the Vette. I am very familiar with the term compromise. The fact of the matter is they are really getting their stuff together and people can be more selective, retentive, picky whatever you want to call it. The whole reason I am so interested in the Z is that it does seem to be a really great all around car with a lot of reliability and good build quality. Its a great value too. And though its not quite up to the Vette in perfromance I believe for me it will be fast enough. But for once I'm making a list of do's and don'ts. If it it doesn't meet my needs or expectations it only affects me, no one else. It certainly doesn't take anything away from the car.
I love to read the posts "just got it" and "love the Z" I mean thats what its about, the joy, not the car but the joy of the experience. I still hope to get one, there are still an awful lot of things to like, no doubt about it.
The reason its called a deal killer is because the deal is ALIVE and you find that one nagging issue that may kill the deal. But LA-Z maybe right, I may drive it and throw the list out the window, you know I hope it is that good.
I like LA-Z's idea of a sports car. I have had a few, Porsches, BMW's, the Vette. I am very familiar with the term compromise. The fact of the matter is they are really getting their stuff together and people can be more selective, retentive, picky whatever you want to call it. The whole reason I am so interested in the Z is that it does seem to be a really great all around car with a lot of reliability and good build quality. Its a great value too. And though its not quite up to the Vette in perfromance I believe for me it will be fast enough. But for once I'm making a list of do's and don'ts. If it it doesn't meet my needs or expectations it only affects me, no one else. It certainly doesn't take anything away from the car.
I love to read the posts "just got it" and "love the Z" I mean thats what its about, the joy, not the car but the joy of the experience. I still hope to get one, there are still an awful lot of things to like, no doubt about it.
The reason its called a deal killer is because the deal is ALIVE and you find that one nagging issue that may kill the deal. But LA-Z maybe right, I may drive it and throw the list out the window, you know I hope it is that good.
#37
Originally posted by robbyn
I am a lawyer specializing in patent litigation and I know very liitle about personal injury law, BUT, I think setting a very high cruise control limit opens Nissan up to some serious liability issues. I believe the fastest speed limit in the U.S. is 75 now that Montana has day time speed limts (someone correct me if I'm wrong). And if leadfoot lost control of his car when his cruise was set at 130 and he killed some little girl, if I had my choice I would much rather be the lawyer suing Nissan, than the lawyer defending Nissan. I think it would be pretty easy for a lawyer to convince a jury that Nissan was negligent by allowing a cruise control that could be set over 50 MPH faster than the highest legal speed limit in the U.S. BTW, I understand that Nissan's negligence would be much less than leadfoot's, but under tort law in most states anyone whose negligence contributed to an accident is liable for the entire amount of damage caused. I will now duck while the anti-lawyer flamers come out of the woodwork.
I am a lawyer specializing in patent litigation and I know very liitle about personal injury law, BUT, I think setting a very high cruise control limit opens Nissan up to some serious liability issues. I believe the fastest speed limit in the U.S. is 75 now that Montana has day time speed limts (someone correct me if I'm wrong). And if leadfoot lost control of his car when his cruise was set at 130 and he killed some little girl, if I had my choice I would much rather be the lawyer suing Nissan, than the lawyer defending Nissan. I think it would be pretty easy for a lawyer to convince a jury that Nissan was negligent by allowing a cruise control that could be set over 50 MPH faster than the highest legal speed limit in the U.S. BTW, I understand that Nissan's negligence would be much less than leadfoot's, but under tort law in most states anyone whose negligence contributed to an accident is liable for the entire amount of damage caused. I will now duck while the anti-lawyer flamers come out of the woodwork.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
CFAUVEL
Exterior & Interior
3
10-01-2015 03:20 PM