I would hope this is obvious, but "driving in the dark at 50 mph over the speed limit" has a high risk of causing a fatal collision.
how do you compare a dedicated, concentrated driver + spotter/navigator pair with $20k of equipment and performance/safety modifications in a BMW M5 to: your typical groggy office worker fatass drinking coffee, listening to an audio book, eating an egg mcmuffin and texting on his phone doing 85mph down the interstate on his morning commute, in a shitbox Saturn with drum brakes and an under-inflated tires that couldn't brake from 85mph in a mile's distance?
you're surrounded by far more dangerous things on the road every day, it just looks boring and pedestrian like some guy going to work instead of exciting and dangerous like 2 guys with sunglasses in an M5 speeding down the highway.
Formula one is relatively safe nowadays because all cars are safe, the drivers have superhuman driving ability, are physically prepared, and wear safety gear, because the circuits are smooth and without things you can hit that will kill you, and because medical assistance is close by when needed.
Yeah, and driving a pen into your eyeball is FAR less dangerous than shooting yourself in the head with a .45. I'm not sure why I should care about the distinction, though. Your shithead texting at 85mph and Mr. "I'm Too Rich To Obey The Law" here are both assholes endangering innocent people with willful carelessness. Fuck 'em both.
To which I call BS.
How come German highways (that do not have such BS low traffic limits as Interstates, and are actually unlimited in large stretches) are safer than the interstates?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_autobahns#Speed_limits
http://www.thinktransatlantic4.com/2012/04/is-autobahn-safer...
95 is great as long as we all agree that that is what the road should be driven at. But you don't get to unilaterally decide the speed limit.
(I used to do 140-160mph in UAE, Kuwait, etc. pretty frequently, on roads which were 60-70mph speed limits, but would never exceed the speed limit in cities. Then I discovered camels.)
The article makes it clear that he plans ahead, relies upon support, and tries to stick to straight stretches of highway. Good for him, and if he wants to risk his life doing 130 down a deserted highway at 2 in the morning so be it. But honestly, from the article, it looks like he has a habit of weaving through traffic at unsafe speeds, and as someone who's nearly been killed by insane drivers trying similar stuff...well, honestly, I'm not impressed.
I don't find it plausible that anyone could not be impressed by this, though of course approval of this is going to be spotty.
From a technical perspective, I guess I'm impressed by the fact that he was able to marshal together the resources, time, and support necessary to make this happen. He's done similar stunts without killing anyone, so I'm somewhat impressed by his driving skills (although there's also the advanced safety technologies in his car, as well as the intrinsic chance you'll find yourself in a situation that could result in an accident). His endurance is also admirable - it must have been very difficult racing the clock for hours on end while maintaining extreme concentration. But then, there are also people who drive drunk, drive while distracted, or drive dangerously badly-maintained vehicles regularly, and nothing happens to them, so I guess that makes the 'reckless driving' aspect slightly less impressive.