QUOTE (Jean-Pierre @ Feb 25 2006, 05:04 PM)

If your statistics are correct (and I haven't checked them) then it shows that restrictive speed limits does not reduce the likelihood of being involved in a car accident as the US has far more restrictive speed limits.
Jean-Pierre
During the 70's fuel crisis, the speed limit on british motorways was reduced to 60 mph to conserve fuel. One of the side effects was that, despite lower traffic density due to the shortage and increased price of fuel, the accident rate on motorways actually went up.
This is mostly due to the personally perceived danger limit. The closer a person is to that limit, the more attentive they are. The reduction in the speed limit lead to drivers spending more time looking at the scenery, and concentrating less on driving. The result being that they were less likely to notice the pre-cursors to a possible accident, so it becomes an actual accident.
This is one of the reasons for the high accident rate in america. Drivers are not fully occupied with driving (additionally, on a five lane highway, the edges of the road are further away, reducing the perception of speed). It is inattentiveness which leads to the accidents. The death rate is higher, because american drivers do not like using sealtbelts, and prefer to drive large SUV's which do not have to be built to car safety regulations, or motorbikes without protective clothing/helmets.
It is also a fact that the vast majority of accidents (fatal or otherwise) occur at under 50 kph in towns, rather than at higher speeds on motorways, and mostly within the first or the last 500m of a journey.
While it is true that you are more likely to be killed hitting a motorway brige support, or diving under the rear of a stationary truck at 200 kph than at 50 kph, you are generally not allowed to drive at 50 kph on a motorway. The difference between hitting a solid stationary object 130 kph or 200 kph is not much for the occupants of a car. It is mostly a matter of luck if you survive either, although you may be slightly more dead at 200

Modern cars are generally very safe for the occupants up to 65 kph, because they are built to help the occupants survive that sort of impact. Although this does also help in some higher speed situations, most of the active safatey devices (belt strainers and airbags) don't get enough time to deploy fully in significantly higher speed accidents than 65 kph. For cost reasons, these systems are exactly layed-out to provide just enough protection for the occupants at 65 kph NCAP impacts to get a 4 or 5 star rating, which is good for the advertising dept.
It should be a matter of elementary physics to understand that the deployment time needs to be reduced in relation to the square of the initial impact speed. Therefore, at 130 kph impact, the airbags and belt strainers are only quarter deployed when you get to where they need to be, and your momentum is four times that at 65 kph. This means you will get quite a smack from the steering wheel or dashboard, and that is not counting the additional passenger compartment deformation which occurs at those higher speeds.
However, motorway accidents rarely involve hitting solid stationary objects. Mostly they involve "glancing" impacts to deformable objects, followed by spins or grinding along a crashbarrier, so the actual speed of impact bringing the vehicle to a halt is lower than the speed being driven
So we have a situation that, at the speeds where most accident impacts occur, the car occupants are pretty well protected against injury in modern cars. That cannot, however, be said for other road users, such as pedestrians, cyclist, motorbikers, or even the drivers of older cars.
It is not speed that kills, per se, it is lack of attention to speed. Just as there are no "killer roads", only drivers who have not adequately considered the nature of the road they are driving on, the vehicle they are driving in, and their personal reactions and skills behind the wheel.
The most dangerous nut in any vehicle is always the one holding the steering wheel.