The NTSB Wants More Speed-Limiting Tech in New Vehicles

by Chris Teague

Published: November 15th, 2023

the ntsb wants more speed limiting tech in new vehicles

New cars have all sorts of driver monitoring tech on board that can tell when a person is paying attention or has their hands on the wheel, but the National Transportation Safety Board feels there’s a need for more. The NTSB asked 17 automakers to add anti-speeding tech to new vehicles going forward, following an extremely deadly crash in Las Vegas last year that left nine people dead.

The crash was caused by a driver traveling 103 mph in a 2018 Dodge Challenger. Five other vehicles were involved, including a minivan with seven people inside. Besides the drugs in the driver’s system, the car’s extreme speed turned it into a deadly battering ram.

Following its investigation into the crash, the NTSB asked 17 automakers, including BMW, Ford, GM, Honda, and VW, to equip new vehicles with speed-assistance features. The NTSB recommended that the vehicles have a speed warning system at a minimum, but some automakers offer more aggressive systems that make it harder and more annoying to speed.

The NTSB also asked the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to require speed-limiting tech in new vehicles and recommended the group add testing criteria for the functions in its New Car Assessment Program (NCAP). The NHTSA is reviewing public comments on the topic of speed-assist tech, but the NTSB has continued pushing forward with its efforts, asking the IIHS to assess the impact of risky behaviors portrayed in vehicle marketing campaigns.

While many of us would probably rather not have more monitoring equipment in our cars, there’s no doubt that driver aids save lives. On top of that, the number of advanced safety features is set to increase as vehicles become more connected, not the other way around.

[Image: Railway FX via Shutterstock]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

#NTSB #NHTSA #IIHS

Chris Teague

Chris grew up in, under, and around cars, but took the long way around to becoming an automotive writer. After a career in technology consulting and a trip through business school, Chris began writing about the automotive industry as a way to reconnect with his passion and get behind the wheel of a new car every week. He focuses on taking complex industry stories and making them digestible by any reader. Just don’t expect him to stay away from high-mileage Porsches.

More by Chris Teague

Comments

Join the conversation

7 of 81 comments

Watersketch on Nov 16, 2023

I would happily program my vehicle to never go above 80mph, and same for the car my teenage daughter drives. Doesn't need to be some high-tech solution.
And my employer would gladly do the same on all our fleet vehicles.

You want unlimited speed? Take it the track.

1 Reply
- See 2 previous
- Fie on Fiasler on Nov 16, 2023
  
  I can't count the number of times the ability to quickly accelerate to 'illegal' speeds got me out of potentially life-threatening situations. But hey, you do you... like a good little obedient government toady.
  
  2
- MaintenanceCosts on Nov 17, 2023
  
  Horse feathers.
  I've been driving for 32 years, 6 of those professionally. I've probably driven over half a million miles. I can remember two situations in my entire driving career where acceleration saved me from a potential crash. In both cases the top speed I reached was legal or close to it.
  
  1
- Fie on Fiasler on Nov 17, 2023
  
  All right, Col. Potter. Take your pills and settle down for your nap.
  
  2
- Stuki Moi on Nov 17, 2023
  
  The new 'Busa has such a speed limiter, on top of a normal cruise control. It's a brilliant piece of license saving tech, for a 100mph-in-first-gear bike. Problem is, though, that speed limits are almost invariable entirely arbitrarily set and imposed. "Safe and prudent", as Montana used to say, is the (only) correct way of policing speed: Cops obtain enough evidence to make it likely to a grand jury they can PROVE "NOT safe and prudent" to a jury of the driver's peers. Then trial, then conviction.
  
  Like
Johnny ringo on Nov 16, 2023

LIke it or not driving a vehicle of any kind is inherently dangerous, add drugs, road rage, distracted driving and you have the makings of of a potentially dangerous happening. And you don't have to be driving at 103 mph to have a tragedy, that can occur at 35, 40 mph. If someone gets repeatedly pulled over for impaired driving, take their license away take away their license until they complete some type of treatment program and can demonstrate they can properly operate a vehicle.

1 Reply
- See 1 previous
- Fie on Fiasler on Nov 17, 2023
  
  "If someone gets repeatedly pulled over for impaired driving, take their license away take away their license until they complete some type of treatment program and can demonstrate they can properly operate a vehicle."
  I have a simpler and far more effective solution. It involves a bullet to the head after the third offense, at most.
  Anyone who can't get themselves together by then really doesn't need to be wasting oxygen that could be used far more productively by Better examples of the species.
  
  Like
- MaintenanceCosts on Nov 17, 2023
  
  You sure love your social Darwinism. If you are that confident in your evolutionary superiority, you should move somewhere where the social system is more Darwinist, and you'll rise to the top. Somewhere like, maybe, southern Somalia or the Western Sahara. Then you can have your freedom without all these nagging people insisting that society should protect your inferiors.
  
  1
- Fie on Fiasler on Nov 17, 2023
  
  Nah. I prefer to stay here and do my part to bring about a Better, Stronger America for Better, Stronger Americans.
  And you don't rate as "people" at all to me.
  
  Like
- Ken on Dec 05, 2023
  
  Why give them multiple chances to kill minivans full of children?
  
  Like

Recent Comments

Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.
FreedMike If Dodge were smart - and I don't think they are - they'd spend their money refreshing and reworking the Durango (which I think is entering model year 3,221), versus going down the same "stuff 'em full of motor and give 'em cool new paint options" path. That's the approach they used with the Charger and Challenger, and both those models are dead. The Durango is still a strong product in a strong market; why not keep it fresher?
Bill Wade I was driving a new Subaru a few weeks ago on I-10 near Tucson and it suddenly decided to slam on the brakes from a tumbleweed blowing across the highway. I just about had a heart attack while it nearly threw my mom through the windshield and dumped our grocery bags all over the place. It seems like a bad idea to me, the tech isn't ready.
FreedMike I don't get the business case for these plug-in hybrid Jeep off roaders. They're a LOT more expensive (almost fourteen grand for the four-door Wrangler) and still get lousy MPG. They're certainly quick, but the last thing the Wrangler - one of the most obtuse-handling vehicles you can buy - needs is MOOOAAAARRRR POWER. In my neck of the woods, where off-road vehicles are big, the only 4Xe models I see of the wrangler wear fleet (rental) plates. What's the point? Wrangler sales have taken a massive plunge the last few years - why doesn't Jeep focus on affordability and value versus tech that only a very small part of its' buyer base would appreciate?
Bill Wade I think about my dealer who was clueless about uConnect updates and still can't fix station presets disappearing and the manufacturers want me to trust them and their dealers to address any self driving concerns when they can't fix a simple radio?Right.