[ep103]

For people who don't follow this, records for the cannonball run are usually always a few years old (people wait to announce hoping the statue of limitations expires, or at least makes it less likely). That said, its unlikely to change too much, most recent records were done in wildly expensive cars (retrofitted with additional gas tanks, radar, police scanners, etc), and usually include aerial support for the entire trip to scan for speedtraps and the like.

[maxxxxx]

In short, it's a bunch of reckless rich assholes who have no respect for other people on the road. Go on a proper racetrack and show what you can do there.

[lfowles]

A racetrack would be a completely different test of skill. From what I understand a cannonball run is largely planning and endurance.

Edit: Not to discount the idea that it is reckless to do it on public roads...

[maxxxxx]

The main skill of Cannonball is to be more reckless than others and see what you can get away with. I don't want to meet some sleep deprived and probably drugged up "racers" on the road. If they want endurance they can do a 24 hour race. If they want a difficult track they can go to the Nuerburgring in Germany and do the 24 our race there. Or just try it in the wet.

[dsfyu404ed]

No, the main skill is planning. Whether or not you're endangering other people it's hard to cover lots of miles quickly on roads with other people. Nobody who's serious about a good time is going to be on a crowded road. It's a waste of time.

You have to balance your route planning between weather, peak commuter hour, shortest route, fuel stops, speed traps, etc, across a few thousand miles and a few time zones.

The biggest risk to "others" is that when traveling much faster light traffic you have little margin for error if someone in that traffic does something dumb.

[mikestew]

No, the main skill is planning.

That's the main skill of the Iron Butt Rally (www.ironbutt.com), in which I have previously had a podium placing. Because of the structure of the rally (which is not how fast can you go from point-to-point), logistical considerations are your biggest enemy. Can I get from point A to point B, with optional out-of-the-way stops at points X, Y, and Z, and still get to B on time (with heavy penalties if you're late)? Get a ticket, and the organizers find out (and they will), you're out. The organizers try very hard to keep speed out of the rally. As they say, it's a rally and not a race.

But I'll tell you what, when it's just after sunrise in the Panhandle of Texas, there isn't a car on the road, and I need to be in L. A. in twelve hours, well, let's just say legality isn't at the top of my list. The harsh reality is that if time is a consideration at all, then pragmatism says that the faster you go, the more time you have to sleep, eat, or add Point W to your list of stops. That's largely why I quit participating in such events, because unless they want to do it timed rally style (IOW, you must be at fixed points neither early or late), all the platitudes in world aren't going to keep the speeds down.

[maxxxxx]

That's like saying robbing a bank requires planning and the only risk is that one of the bank employees does something "dumb". They are endangering people and if they want to show their manhood they can go to a race track and show what they can do there. That's where the big boys go. Doing Cannonball is a pseudo achievement.

[default-kramer]

> The biggest risk to "others" is that when traveling much faster light traffic you have little margin for error if someone in that traffic does something dumb.

The speed limit exists partially because "dumb things" are inevitable. A driver who ignores this inevitability is at least as guilty as the driver who did the "dumb thing."

[dsfyu404ed]

In a theoretical world that doesn't include ticket revenue and "think of the children" speed limit is a function of road design and some reasonable average vehicle/driver/conditions. They are an output rather than an input. You don't just assign a speed limit. It's based on the road and condition. In the real world US speed limits outside of urban areas are laughably low for reasonably attentive drivers in clear weather and light traffic.

In an well maintained sedan there is no reason why one cannot drive at triple digit speeds on the vast majority of the US interstate highway system if traffic conditions are light enough to permit it. The biggest risk from traveling much faster than other traffic on limited access highways is rear ending someone who changes lanes without a signal.

Speed limits exit not because "dumb things are inevitable" but because dumb things are far less common when traffic is moving a close to uniform speed and providing a suggested speed that most drivers find reasonable most of the time helps traffic flow more uniformly and safely.

Furthermore, the rules of the road provide massive redundancy. That's why a margin for error exists. By going much faster or slower than other traffic you are getting rid of the margin. If you're going fast you're depending on other people to not move unexpectedly. If you're going too slow you're depending on other people to be driving slow enough and paying attention enough

The person who changes lanes without signaling while going 50 in a 60 where everyone goes 70 can only claim the moral high ground over the person who rear ends them because they were going 80 and couldn't compensate adequately so long as the latter party doesn't have a dash cam.

[ep103]

Why doesn't the rest of humanity meet my expectations of what is acceptable?

[reaperducer]

It's not a real Cannonball Run unless you do it in a Trans Am with a tractor trailer full of Coors.

[ep103]

That would be the http://www.the2904.org : )