Trio breaks Cannonball Run record; NY to LA in 27 hours

[Stevicus]

Trio drives from New York to Los Angeles in 27 hours, setting new Cannonball Run record

Three car enthusiasts became the new Cannonball Run record holders last month – with a top speed of 193 mph and an average of 103 mph for more than a day. Drivers Arne Toman and Doug Tabbutt, and spotter Berkeley Chadwick, made the 2,800-mile journey from New York to Los Angeles in 27 hours and 25 minutes.

As first reported by "Road and Track," the trio shaved more than an hour off the old record, which was set in 2013. They stopped for a total of 22 minutes.

In the 1981 movie "Cannonball Run," Burt Reynolds and Dom Deluise crossed the country in an ambulance. Toman, Tabbutt and Chadwick, however, rode in a souped-up Mercedes. The car was modified over the course of two years, specifically with setting the record in mind, "CBS This Morning: Saturday" co-host Dana Jacobson reports.

"We've got a couple radar detectors, a CB radio, a police scanner, we used gyro-stabilized binoculars, and something new for this trip that's never been done is we used a thermal scope on the roof of the car so we're able to see anything warm on the side of the road waiting out before us," Toman said.

They were also aided by a network of spotters, driving ahead of them and reporting road conditions as well as the placement of police speed traps.

Top speed of 193 mph, and an average of 103 mph. But then they had radar detectors and spotters to alert them of speed traps. If it was just like in the race in the movie, they'd be working against each other.

I actually thought The Gumball Rally was a better film. But Cannonball Run wasn't bad, although it wasn't so good that I had any desire to see Cannonball Run II (which I heard was kind of bad).

Safety experts criticized the stunt:

But the feat is drawing criticism from safety experts. The Governors Highway Safety Association said "speeding is widely deemed culturally acceptable by the motoring public. We need to change that narrative and make speeding as socially unacceptable as drunk driving."

Toman maintains the team never put any other drivers at risk. "There was no close calls at all. We don't pass people at a high rate of speed, simply because it's dangerous, and if we were to do that, to drive recklessly, they're just going to call the police, and then we're just going to have police waiting for us."

I don't agree with their statement that "speeding is widely deemed culturally acceptable by the motoring public." Most people drive a reasonable and prudent speed, even if it may exceed the posted speed limit. I think it's more correct to say that much of the motoring public is cynical regarding speed limits set by those who have an eye towards raising revenue through traffic citations.

The public doesn't actually believe our government has much concern about safety, since there are too many instances of speed traps and other gimmicks solely to raise revenue. That appears to be the root of a lot of the defiance against speed limits and why speeding is deemed culturally acceptable.

 

[Revoltingest]

Prison time sounds appropriate.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

~5000ish Americans died in single terror attack, government response? 18 years of constant war, trillions of dollars spent, and ~2,000,000ish people killed and maimed in the fighting. ~40,000ish Americans die on your roads each year, government's response? Lets your infrastructure crumble, treats speed prevention as a revenue raiser and little else. Pretty selective "concern about safety", there, Mr. Government.

 

[Brickjectivity]

~5000ish Americans died in single terror attack, government response? 18 years of constant war, trillions of dollars spent, and ~2,000,000ish people killed and maimed in the fighting.

Official US government records indicate about 60,000 total injuries and deaths from all of the war on terror in all of its phases. Its only Russian propaganda that claims 2 million have been killed. Sixty thousand is a very large number and fits the situation. 2 million is just not realistic. Sixty thousand is a large number. Remember that Iraq surrendered almost immediately. Fighting after that was sporadic. The USA has had complete technological superiority, satellite coverage and has always pursued leaders in order to achieve surrenders. The opponents have always had to resort to gorilla style combat, so there has been no need for an open bloody field of battle. Sixty thousand Americans and non American have been injured or killed in total, not two million.

Twelve times the number killed in the terror attacks. Its a lot, but its not even 1/10 of a million, nowhere near two million.

~40,000ish Americans die on your roads each year, government's response? Lets your infrastructure crumble, treats speed prevention as a revenue raiser and little else. Pretty selective "concern about safety", there, Mr. Government.

Many roads are under construction at all times. The infrastructure still supports lots of trucking. It is true that many parts of the roads are older, but they are not 'Crumbling'. When Americans hear 'Crumbling infrastructure' we know it is an exaggeration; but that is expected when politicians are arguing. They always exaggerate in conversation. They talk about how the other politician is going to cause society to fail etc. Its unfortunately traditional for them to make outrageous claims.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Official US government records indicate about 60,000 total injuries and deaths from all of the war on terror in all of its phases. Its only Russian propaganda that claims 2 million have been killed. Sixty thousand is a very large number and fits the situation. 2 million is just not realistic. Sixty thousand is a large number. Remember that Iraq surrendered almost immediately. Fighting after that was sporadic. The USA has had complete technological superiority, satellite coverage and has always pursued leaders in order to achieve surrenders. The opponents have always had to resort to gorilla style combat, so there has been no need for an open bloody field of battle. Sixty thousand Americans and non American have been injured or killed in total, not two million.

Twelve times the number killed in the terror attacks. Its a lot, but its not even 1/10 of a million, nowhere near two million.

Not really my point here, so, loath as I am to derail, here's some light reading for you. Note: It doesn't include indirect deaths, or the conflict in Syria, which I was including in my figure. Either way, while 2mil may be a high estimate, 60thou is a ridiculously low one https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/2018/Human Costs, Nov 8 2018 CoW.pdf

Many roads are under construction at all times. The infrastructure still supports lots of trucking. It is true that many parts of the roads are older, but they are not 'Crumbling'. When Americans hear 'Crumbling infrastructure' we know it is an exaggeration; but that is expected when politicians are arguing. They always exaggerate in conversation. They talk about how the other politician is going to cause society to fail etc. Its unfortunately traditional for them to make outrageous claims.

My point about misplaced and inconsistent priorities stands. Quibble over the definition of "crumble" as you see necessary.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Prison time sounds appropriate.

Or the morgue.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Not really my point here, so, loath as I am to derail, here's some light reading for you.

I also have no wish to derail, and this particular Russian propaganda (number 2 million deaths) costs lives rather than saving them. US does not try to exterminate civilians or anyone fighting that offers surrender. Also your light reading verifies the US government statistics. In its tallies most of its numbers have a superscript which leads to more information which differentiate anti government forces from pro government forces. It shows that if a US force is involved it always will accept surrenders and never massacres populations (which is what the 2 million number attempts to claim).

 

[Revoltingest]

Or the morgue.

I hope they take out no one with them.

 

[Stevicus]

Many roads are under construction at all times. The infrastructure still supports lots of trucking. It is true that many parts of the roads are older, but they are not 'Crumbling'. When Americans hear 'Crumbling infrastructure' we know it is an exaggeration; but that is expected when politicians are arguing. They always exaggerate in conversation. They talk about how the other politician is going to cause society to fail etc. Its unfortunately traditional for them to make outrageous claims.

I'm not sure how exaggerated it is. I've seen articles which have provided hard data as to which percentage of roads, bridges, and tunnels are deficient or in need of upgrade/repair. A lot of the roads around here are in pretty bad shape. They claim that they don't have enough money and keep pushing for sales tax increases and bond elections, but they waste so much of the money they already get.

 

[Stevicus]

Prison time sounds appropriate.

Well, they said they didn't have any accidents, injuries, or altercations with the police.

However, it just occurred to me that they could close off one interstate for one weekend, just like they sometimes close off city streets for races. They could have a coast-to-coast race, but it wouldn't involve any risk to innocent bystanders.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, they said they didn't have any accidents, injuries, or altercations with the police.

However, it just occurred to me that they could close off one interstate for one weekend, just like they sometimes close off city streets for races. They could have a coast-to-coast race, but it wouldn't involve any risk to innocent bystanders.

Anyone who'd close down interstate highways should join them in prison.
Btw, even though they had no accidents, their driving certainly put them
at much higher risk for causing them.

 

[Stevicus]

Anyone who'd close down interstate highways should join them in prison.

Why? It would just be a contest, like any other race. Sure, there are risks, just like with the Indy 500 or any of the Grand Prix races where they close off city streets for the race. This would be kind of the same thing on a larger scale.

I don't think people would mind if it was just one weekend a year. In fact, it would probably attract a lot of spectators and fans.

Btw, even though they had no accidents, their driving certainly put them
at much higher risk for causing them.

Point taken. It was definitely a risky stunt, but it seems the solution would be to have it as an organized race. I don't know that they should go to prison, though; but either way, you'd have to catch them first. And that's part of the whole allure, to be able to speed across the country without getting caught.

 

[Revoltingest]

Why? It would just be a contest, like any other race.

They should be punished for inconveniencing the rest of us.