speed limits and penalties

[MkII]

This illustrates the point nicely I think:

 

http://www.zippyvideos.com/8197731624397576/differencebetween30and50mph/*webmimic

[mrforgetful]

Blocked here. To be honest I think any numpty could tell you the difference between hitting something at 50 over 30 is gonn be nearly twice as devastating.

[john]

We should have motorways with unlimited speeds to a point, perhaps make better use of ANPR and allow all newer cars to run at say 110 in L3 upwards if they are newer and meet various standards, anything less than say 7 years old must stick to the 70. Or just sod the lot and give us unlimted Motorways and Dual Carriagways. All I say is i wish they would up the speed on some A roads.

[GrumbleDook]

If we had the sort of drivers in this country that tool adequate safeguards to look after their car (weekly oil, trye, fluid checks to say the least) then that would be one thing ... but most drivers over here srive too close ... especially at speed on the motorways.

 

Upping the speed limit will just make things worse.

 

Then again, I am in favour of everyone resitting their test (written and practical) every five years.

[enjay]

allow all newer cars to run at say 110 in L3 upwards if they are newer and meet various standards, anything less than say 7 years old must stick to the 70.

That would be carnage. Imagine one of your older cars comes up behind a lorry in L2 so pulls out into L3 at 60, then 65 and finally (after a little while as it is low powered) reaches 70. While it is doing this, you are thumping up behind it at 110, so some 50mph faster than it. Are your reactions - and those of the drivers behind you who couldn't see the slower car pull out - quick enough to avoid smacking in to the back of it?

 

In response to the earlier comments of "but a strict 30 enforcement means I have to watch the speedometer all the time", all I can say is try driving at 27 instead - you will get to your destination in basically the same time, won't have to watch your speedo, won't get caught speeding, won't get fined and won't kill anyone. Simple, no?

[mrforgetful]

In response to the earlier comments of "but a strict 30 enforcement means I have to watch the speedometer all the time", all I can say is try driving at 27 instead - you will get to your destination in basically the same time, won't have to watch your speedo, won't get caught speeding, won't get fined and won't kill anyone. Simple, no?

 

Except I'd have the car behind me right up my arse and all the ones behind that bunched up which is dangerous in itself.

 

You're saying drive like a learner, but I'm sure you know as well as I do it can be quite awful seeing how people drive behind those.

[enjay]

You're saying drive like a learner

No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that driving at 28 while watching the road won't kill you, but driving at 30 while watching your speedo just might.

 

Where are you going in such a rush that those 2mph through town make all the difference, anyway? And surely if it is somewhere SO important, it is better to get there a minute later and alive than not get there at all.

 

I really don't think that cars will "bunch up" all that far behind you just because you're doing 28, and if the person behind you gets irate and starts beeping the horn, then by all means speed up to 30 or 35 (i.e. 30 + 10% + 2), start watching your speedo and then explain yourself to the dead kid's parents.

[mrforgetful]

Fair enough I will.

 

But you know aswell as I do that until an accident happens, more people complain about 'learners', 'sunday drivers' and 'old grannies' than people who are the odd mph over the limit.

[MkII]

Blocked here. To be honest I think any numpty could tell you the difference between hitting something at 50 over 30 is gonn be nearly twice as devastating.

 

Was a joke & not serious

[mrforgetful]

Regarding people driving up your ar$e. Is it safer to be doing 35mph with someone 5 metres behind (giving about 1/3 a second stopping distance) or 25mph with someone 5 metres behind (about 1/2 a second stopping distance)?

 

You need to take responsibility for your own speed instead of looking to blame other road users for your lack of skill, common sense and self control.

 

5 metres? Where do you live? Trust me if you drive round Bradford it makes Spain and Italy look like...something that's calm and safe.

 

I'm not saying speed, I've already stated that I adjust my driving to the conditions, road, time and all the otehr things.

 

I have never caused an accident. I have however being hit 4 times by people pulling out of side roads onto the main road I was driving on. Actually thinking about it if I'd been going faster they'd have missed me

[mrforgetful]

You're right I am.

 

To be honest it depends again on conditions, road etc on how I deal with those people.

 

If it's a residential area I tend to slow even slower which really annoys them, we're talking put it in second and let the gear do the driving not the accelerator.

If it's on an empty main road I'll slow to 20 then accelerate fast to the limit, if that doesn't work I sometimes pull over and let them past. Thogh that's usuallywhen they're in a 4x4 with lights right in my mirrors, or with main beam on, which happens more than you'd imagine.

[CyberNerd]

I'm sure when the speed limits were set it was appropriate - 60mph around county lanes in the dark/ice on a 1950's motorcycle with poor lighting and virtually no brakes. hmm note to self: buy classic motorcycle.

sounds fun whilst observing spped limits- country lanes on a 150mph superbike is getting boring at 60.

[CESIL]

Unfortunately spped is a matter of perception...people tend to drive at a speed that feels safe to them.

When I was young I thought I was a fantastic driver so I would want to drive much faster (after all it was the 'other' drivers who were the problem).

Later as a company car driver I was always going somewhere much more important than everyone else so I drove fast and aggressively getting increasingly annoyed with slower drivers.

Nowadays I have slowed down and keep to the limits and guess what?

I have adjusted to these lower speeds and have realised how much more time I have to react to 'other' drivers.

I don't have to worry about cameras (unless in an unfamiliar area where I am just extra careful).

I also spend less on fuel.

 

To echo what others have said...I have realised that no journey is so vital that it is worth risking an accident.

 

As a final comment, I have a 17 year old son who is about to start driving lessons and I have realised how much my attitude to driving could influence him and affect his safety...

[mrforgetful]

1) Inner-City limits should be decreased in high risk areas such as schools and should be better enforced (in America noone speeds past a school).

 

2) Increase the limit on motorways to reflect the increased capability of modern vehicles over the old vehicles the limits represent.

 

3) Educate people more on the correct way to use motorway lanes, keep to the inside lane until you need to overtake then move back.

[GrumbleDook]

And here follows the guidance on people driving too close to you.

 

When a vehicle is approaching you from behind and there is obviously not the safe stopping distance between you and them, then it is your responsibility to ensure the you extend the distance between you and the car in front. This is especially important when travelling at speed, where the likelihood of your own stopping distance being changed by the vehicle behind you shunting you forward.

 

If the vehicle behind you is behaving aggressively you should take appropriate action to allow them past, make a note of their details and inform the police at the earliest opportunity.

 

In the event of you not being able to pull over to allow them past then it is reasonable to presume that you will increase you speed until it is safe to pull over out of the stream of traffic. This does not constitute a legal defence should it be taken to court, but may be taken into consideration by the judge. This detail may also be used to prosecute the following vehicle for dangerous driving or reckless endangerment.

 

(I knew my old notes would come in handy one day).

 

As someone who was hit by a car travelling a fair bit over the limit (approx 50 in a 30 zone near a school) I consider myself damn lucky ... as someone who has been knocked off their bike by cars having to swerve out of the way of, or avoid, speeding motorists I am a tad frustrated by people who speed ...

 

As someone who has been on his hands and knees at the side of the M3 looking for body parts after a pile-up I can't stress enough that speed kills ... driving too close kills ... and most of us are not as good a driver as we think.

[CyberNerd]

Brakes, lights and roads have got better, the human brain's ability to react quickly, and the body's ability to survive impact hasn't changed.

tell that to the gaming generation.

anyways I do mostly stick to the speed limit, albeit on one wheel.

[CyberNerd]

only when I accelerate too hard

[mrforgetful]

I'm sure when the speed limits were set it was appropriate - 60mph around county lanes in the dark/ice on a 1950's motorcycle with poor lighting and virtually no brakes. hmm note to self: buy classic motorcycle.

sounds fun whilst observing spped limits- country lanes on a 150mph superbike is getting boring at 60.

 

Brakes, lights and roads have got better, the human brain's ability to react quickly, and the body's ability to survive impact hasn't changed.

 

Anyone who thinks their judgement allows them to choose whether to abide by the legal limits or not is extremely arrogant.

 

So you're telling me you'd feel no more at risk crashing at 70 in a Morris Minor than you would in a 5* ncap awarded modern car?

 

You're telling me that modern cars have no more grip then a 40 year old car?

 

Modern cars are safer and you can survive an impact better.

 

Even pedestrians are less at risk these days as some cars are designed to try absord impact. I'm not saying it'd be good for you don't get me wrong!

[Lee_K_81]

And here follows the guidance on people driving too close to you.

 

When a vehicle is approaching you from behind and there is obviously not the safe stopping distance between you and them, then it is your responsibility to ensure the you extend the distance between you and the car in front.

 

I always thought that the best option was to slow down (gradually not suddenly) until the distance between you and the car behind is correct for the speed you are driving. The reverse would just encourage people to drive agressively forcing people to speed up or move out the way.

[GrumbleDook]

But the car you crash into *may* be that 40 year old Moggie Minor ... and the damage you do to them at 70 is different to that at 80 or 90 mph.

 

The kid you hit at 35 will still have injuries ...

 

Speed limits are not just there to stop accidents ... they are there for damage limitation too ...

 

Pedestrians and bicycles may be less at risk ... but they are still at risk and reducing your speed is proven to be more effective that nearly every other design change that has happened to cars over the last 20 years. The 2 that have made a different are ABS (in a positive way) and Bull Bars on anything and everything (in a seriously negative way).

 

If people are confident that they are good drivers and that they can handle driving faster than 70, have good reaction speeds, look after their car and know that the present system is not fitting ... then go and do your advanced driving course. It will improve your insurance and there are other valuable skills you will learn too.

[mrforgetful]

I thought Advanced driving courses only made a difference when you first passed?

[enjay]

I thought Advanced driving courses only made a difference when you first passed?

No, you can learn new stuff at any age :-)

[mrforgetful]

I meant to insurance lol.

 

Unfortunately I'm not with enough funds to go paying for things that don't a) save me money or b) feed me.

[GrumbleDook]

And here follows the guidance on people driving too close to you.

 

When a vehicle is approaching you from behind and there is obviously not the safe stopping distance between you and them, then it is your responsibility to ensure the you extend the distance between you and the car in front.

 

I always thought that the best option was to slow down (gradually not suddenly) until the distance between you and the car behind is correct for the speed you are driving. The reverse would just encourage people to drive agressively forcing people to speed up or move out the way.

 

That is sort of what I said ... you slow down so that the distance between you and the car in front is greater ...

 

Perhaps an example would be better.

 

You are travelling at 50 mph ... you are the 53 metres behind the car in front (15 metres thinking distance + 38 metres braking distance) and the car behind you is about 10 metres ... most people would not be concerned by this ... but then they are 5 metres behind and they are way under the thinking distance. The car in front suddenly brakes ... they are also in a super-duper car that has fantastic tires and takes less that the published 53 metres ... it means that you car has to stop quickly ... however, the car behind shunts into you ... and that 38 metres braking distance suddenly becomes 45 metres ... you hit the car in front.

 

I good rule of thumb is to guess the distance of the car behind ... and for every metre they are too close then allo for an extra 2 metres stopping distance.

 

Whilst doing this on the fly whilst driving would tax a supercomputer there is an easy rule to follow. Use a fixed point to measure the distance between you and that vehicle in front. It should take you 2 seconds to reach that point after the point after the car in front has passed it. This is commonly known as the '2 second rule'.

 

If you have a car driving too close behind you then extend that 2 seconds ... make it 3 seconds. If the vehicle behind you is a heavy vehicle then make it 4 or 5 seconds.

 

Some people say that you should swerve to avoid accidents. This is not always safe and can actually cause more carnage. It does take training and practice (in a safe environment) to learn the best time to swerve and the best time to just accept that you are going to get hit.

 

Remember that being hit from the rear or the front is usually safer that being hit at an angle or directly on the side due to modern designs.

[witch]

I think you are thinking of 'Pass Plus' which does make a difference when you first pass. Advanced drivers continue to get discounts.

 

I think that people should have to resit their tests every few years - and 70 year olds CERTAINLY should. When my father got to 75, the doc just signed him as capable of driving when actually he really wasn't.

 

As for what you do when someone is too close - having JUST been on the driver awareness course at Police Headquarters, they said you should NEVER speed up to try and increase the space between you and the person behind you - it doesnt work, puts you at risk, and anyway the likelihood is that they will speed up to catch up with you. They were not happy about you trying to get out of the way, either, as the inclination is to 'scuttle' out the the way when it isn't completely safe. Their advice was to ignore the person, make sure you aren't driving fast, and just wait, as in almost all cases they will overtake you very quickly.

And despite gaming and the like, there is no evidence to show that normal reaction times have speeded up at all.