55 in a 30 limit!

[witch]

...er, I don't 'scold' elsiegee dear - I'm not edugeek's mother!

 

A bit less jumping to conclusions by some on here would be good though

According to a friend of mine who is a traffic cop, going up to 75 to overtake (if the person you are overtaking suddenly sped up for example) is fine and usually quite obvious to the police.

He also says that whilst travelling in a straight line at very high speed is indeed reasonably safe, you are travelling so fast that you do not really have time to 'check the carriageway in front of you' before you reach a hazard, and so he doesn't advocate it at all.

He sees a lot of accidents and does not feel that there is any particular breed of car that is any safer than any other - there are many many cars with good safety records and features, and many that do not have much in the way of these things

Anyway, whether you agree with it or not, the law is the law, and we cannot choose which laws to obey.

Edited September 9, 2011 by witch

[GrumbleDook]

The traffic police turn a blind eye, the reason is they know that speed is not the key issue on the M1,M6 etc, but if you start changing lanes, tailgating etc they will soon pull you over. You see just because a politician makes a law does not mean that the foot soldiers are going to enforce it.

 

Actually, the foot soldiers are pretty keen on enforcing it too (certainly my mates who operate up and down M1 do) and since they see the end results of when it goes wrong the evidence they give to enquiries (which is what is passed on up the chain) is pretty spot on with its advice.

 

WHO have conducted significant evidence based research across the world and have made some very country-specific recommendations. This is then taken up by those completing research in the UK, who will also take into account the specific driving styles and attitudes of our drivers.

 

Speed is significantly linked to the probability of a crash / collision

The probability of a crash involving an injury is proportional to the square of the speed. The probability of a serious crash is proportional to the cube of the speed. The probability of a fatal crash is proportional to the fourth power of the speed.

 

If you want to read more on this then have a look at the research from Prof. John Whitlegg, who has done some work around the M6. You can find similar research done and published for ACPO, HSE, AA, IAM and many more.

 

Run flat tyres do not protect against mechanical failure of brakes / wheels, do not protect against oil spots, do not protect against flying debris. They will not save you should you have a sneezing fit and loose control. They will not save you in the event of you having a heart attack. They will not save you if something falls onto the road unexpectantly.

[Jose]

@witch

your friend is correct if a hazard was around a corner you would stand no chance of seeing it, but as someone that use M1.M40,M6 on a regular basis and averages at night around 115mph and even quicker on the M6 toll when its empty I can confirm that that there are not many sudden bends or twists. The M40 when the weather is bad is a pain, I slow right down to 55-60mph as the M40 is not as well lit as the M1.

How your friend can claim that quality premium german saloon is not safer and have better brakes than a old metro driven by a single mum from a council estate without insurance is beyond me.

 

I drove old french cars for 13 years, as soon I went german I could feel the brakes were better, my wheels never skid as even if i try to hammer it a yellow triangle flashes on my dash and reduces the power to the wheels to ensure safety.

Edited September 9, 2011 by Jose

[elsiegee40]

...er, I don't 'scold' elsiegee dear - I'm not edugeek's mother!

Oh, go on with you! As your triplet, I don't entirely accept your denial!

[Jose]

Actually, the foot soldiers are pretty keen on enforcing it too (certainly my mates who operate up and down M1 do) and since they see the end results of when it goes wrong the evidence they give to enquiries (which is what is passed on up the chain) is pretty spot on with its advice.

 

WHO have conducted significant evidence based research across the world and have made some very country-specific recommendations. This is then taken up by those completing research in the UK, who will also take into account the specific driving styles and attitudes of our drivers.

 

Speed is significantly linked to the probability of a crash / collision

 

 

If you want to read more on this then have a look at the research from Prof. John Whitlegg, who has done some work around the M6. You can find similar research done and published for ACPO, HSE, AA, IAM and many more.

 

Run flat tyres do not protect against mechanical failure of brakes / wheels, do not protect against oil spots, do not protect against flying debris. They will not save you should you have a sneezing fit and loose control. They will not save you in the event of you having a heart attack. They will not save you if something falls onto the road unexpectantly.

 

Like I said in a earlier post, I make the decision not Prof whateverhisname is based on weather conditions, my cars condition and other traffic. If you service your car, keep it under warranty and if the garage tells you you need to change some tyres or brakes soon, tell the garage to keep the car 1-2 more days and do any work required. In other words keep your kit well maintained. Some people just get a car through it mot and don't bother replacing hings unless forced by a mot failure.

Edited September 9, 2011 by Jose
spelling

[witch]

@witch

your friend is correct if a hazard was around a corner you would stand no chance of seeing it, but as someone that use M1.M40,M6 on a regular basis and averages at night around 115mph and even quicker on the M6 toll when its empty I can confirm that that there are not many sudden bends or twists. The M40 when the weather is bad is a pain, I slow right down to 55-60mph as the M40 is not as well lit as the M1.

How your friend can claim that quality premium german saloon is not safer and have better brakes than a old metro driven by a single mum from a council estate without insurance is beyond me.

 

I drove old french cars for 13 years, as soon I went german I could feel the brakes were better, my wheels never skid as even if i try to hammer it a yellow triangle flashes on my dash and reduces the power to the wheels to ensure safety.

This is where I wish i had a second persona who isn't a mod. I say this as a geek, NOT a mod....

 

If you READ my post properly you would see that I did NOT say that my friend claimed that a german car wasnt better than an old metro - merely that there are many good cars and many bad cars - and that good ones arent just german ones. You appear to believe that only german cars are any good - a little blinkered, I think.

Why the comment about a single mother from a council estate with no insurance? What has that got to do with anything? Why say it? Just prejudice. There are many old, unsafe cars driven by all sorts of people but as your argument revolves around the safety of the car I cannot see why the person driving it has any relevance at all?

 

You are still advocating breaking the law - would you be happy if everyone decided which laws they are going to obey?

[Guest Guest]

Speed is significantly linked to the probability of a crash / collision

 

The probability of a crash involving an injury is proportional to the square of the speed. The probability of a serious crash is proportional to the cube of the speed. The probability of a fatal crash is proportional to the fourth power of the speed.

 

That whole attitude annoys me about motoring. It seems to say "people are going to crash, so lets just make the crashes less fatal". Which is fair enough, but why not also focus on not having crashes in the first place? Speed kills. True, but only if you have an accident to go with it. I know plenty of people who have got done for speeding when they didn't have an accident, but I also know lots of people who have had accident through carelessness yet haven't been done. It just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

Surely doing 60 in a 50 but in a perfectly safe manor is less dangerous than doing 30 in a 40 but paying no attention to the road. It just seems to me that the police should be focusing more on people who have no lane discipline, don't use indicators, mount curbs when parking, etc. I know why they do it as 31>30 therefore you broke the law, where as other aspects of motoring are subjective and thus harder to prove. It just seems wrong to me that you can be penalised for paying more attention to the road than to your speedo.

 

The law on speed is so black and white. Most residential streets are 30mph but doing 30 down them is highly dangerous, yet perfectly legal (unless a copper can prove what you were doing was dangerous). Doing 80 on an empty motorway is perfectly safe yet illegal... and we all know which one is most likely to get you 3 points.

Edited September 9, 2011 by Guest

[Jose]

That whole attitude annoys me about motoring. It seems to say "people are going to crash, so lets just make the crashes less fatal". Which is fair enough, but why not also focus on not having crashes in the first place? Speed kills. True, but only if you have an accident to go with it. I know plenty of people who have got done for speeding when they didn't have an accident, but I also know lots of people who have had accident through carelessness yet haven't been done. It just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

Surely doing 60 in a 50 but in a perfectly safe manor is less dangerous than doing 30 in a 40 but paying no attention to the road. It just seems to me that the police should be focusing more on people who have no lane discipline, don't use indicators, mount curbs when parking, etc. I know why they do it as 31>30 therefore you broke the law, where as other aspects of motoring are subjective and thus harder to prove. It just seems wrong to me that you can be penalised for paying more attention to the road than to your speedo.

 

The law on speed is so black and white. Most residential streets are 30mph but doing 30 down them is highly dangerous, yet perfectly legal (unless a copper can prove what you were doing was dangerous). Doing 80 on an empty motorway is perfectly safe yet illegal... and we all know which one is most likely to get you 3 points.

 

you are very very unlikely to get done doing 80mph on a motorway unless its a temp camera due to road works where safety off workers is taken very seriously, quite rightly. If I'm on a motorway during the daytime I tend to hover around the 85-93 mark, this should keep you out of court should you lasered or photod.

Unfortunately my parents car has a garage door opener on their car that causes inteference with most police laser guns, luckily if a laser tries to take a reading then it warns them to enable them to slow down and turn off the garage door opener to enable the laser to get a new reading. I only advise having one of these if you actually have a garage door that use that frequency otherwise its fairly pointless and a waste of money and could prevent a policeman getting a acurate reading of your speed.

In order to improve your knowledge of known blackspots for serious accidents my mum has a gatso dectecter, this informs her when she is entering a high risk area so she can slow her speed as she goes through the high speed area reducing the chance of a accident.

[sted]

you are very very unlikely to get done doing 80mph on a motorway unless its a temp camera due to road works where safety off workers is taken very seriously, quite rightly. If I'm on a motorway during the daytime I tend to hover around the 85-93 mark, this should keep you out of court should you lasered or photod.

Unfortunately my parents car has a garage door opener on their car that causes inteference with most police laser guns, luckily if a laser tries to take a reading then it warns them to enable them to slow down and turn off the garage door opener to enable the laser to get a new reading. I only advise having one of these if you actually have a garage door that use that frequency otherwise its fairly pointless and a waste of money and could prevent a policeman getting a acurate reading of your speed.

In order to improve your knowledge of known blackspots for serious accidents my mum has a gatso dectecter, this informs her when she is entering a high risk area so she can slow her speed as she goes through the high speed area reducing the chance of a accident.

 

So you are prepared to break the law but not take the consequences how hypocritical if you believe its right to do those speeds take the camera and argue in court

 

Also when muppets like brake say speed is involved in x percent of crashes they are wrong its 100% as if no car is moving they cant have an accident

[CESIL]

I don't care what a website says, a person I trust entirely to be telling the truth got one for doing less than 35 in a 30 (which that website says). I most certainly trust him more than I trust a website made by our police, especially when the top 2 or 3 rungs of the ladder are up for corruption and fraud...

 

It always makes me laugh when you say something on the internet and then you get "yeah alright prove it". Next time I see him I'll get a borrow of his ticket, scan it and post it on here so that you can verify it

 

I did say I have yet to see any evidence...I am quite happy to be proved wrong so if you can show me the ticket I would be very interested to see it...

 

You don't say whether your your trustworthy friend was caught by an automatic system or a real person...if he demonstrated the sort of attitude towards the police that you do then I am not surprised he got done...

[SYNACK]

For the person caught at 105MPH you are so lucky your not in NZ, you would have been thrown in jail for that. Our law enforcement/traffic enforcement is so insanely strict on that kind of thing that I a honestly suprised the local cops have not yet sumarily shot someone for speeding.

[GrumbleDook]

@J17sparky speed is directly linked to the probability of a crash so there is an immediate fix there ... if you want to reduce crashes then people should slow down. In areas where there is an increased risk already (and where this is proven due to analysis of crashes / collisions / incidents) then an even lower speed is enforced. The reasons why it seems a tad unfair that the speed in built up areas is not in keeping with on motorways is that the severity of injury and risk of fatality increases so much. it is a bought balancing act and the speeds that are in place today are still there due to significant research ... not just political decisions / bureaucratic people.

 

Speed is not the only factor though, as you quite rightly say, but there is also legislation to try to deal with other aspects too ... use of mobile phones, instructions / guidance about having regular breaks, etc.

[GrumbleDook]

Like I said in a earlier post, I make the decision not Prof whateverhisname is based on weather conditions, my cars condition and other traffic. If you service your car, keep it under warranty and if the garage tells you you need to change some tyres or brakes soon, tell the garage to keep the car 1-2 more days and do any work required. In other words keep your kit well maintained. Some people just get a car through it mot and don't bother replacing things unless forced by a mot failure.

 

You make the decision based on your own experience and expertise ... and yet you attempt to rubbish other experts who have a far wider understanding? Wow ... I would love to be a teacher in your place, telling you that you know bugger all as *I* can make whatever decisions about how I use my IT ... and I bet you even like to tell a Judge that he knows bugger all about the law too, should you get what you deserve and be hauled up in front of one.

 

Why should a garage tell you that you need to look at your tyres? Surely an expert like you does a First Parade on your car each day? Checking all fluids, tyre pressures, condition of tyres, ensuring all indicators and lights are working, etc? If you don't then how you can fully claim to know that your car is in perfect working order?

[SYNACK]

GD lets just agree that cars are a rubbish topic, the car is a total anomoly in modern society, they give people freedom, move at high speeds, make noise and travel about full of highly combustable liquid. They travel around in unfenced off areas and the govenment can't apoint security guard to x-ray you at each end of your journey and tell you what a privilage it is that they are letting you do something of your own free will.

 

As it has been said before if cars were invented today no govenment would let its citizens have that much power and responcibility. The saftey nazis would blocade the govenment to prevent them existing at all and if they were somehow forced through they would be limited to 5km/h anyway.

 

The car itself is at odds with the western govenments of the world which all ascribe to the overtly oppressive nanny state framework imposed by the no risk, no looser, fluffy safety cornered society of today.

 

Yes speed can be an atributing factor, as can thickwitted pedestrians, distractions, alchohol, drugs and crappy roads with shocking surfaces and bad camber. Laying all the blame on speed is wrong as is the assumption that the balance is right now given advances in technology of cars, roads etc. It could be higher or lower depending on the circumstances but the sole targeting of speed is of limited help.

 

In reality the only way to make the car truely acceptable to the padded corners mindset of today is to ban it outright. Stupid, yes but that is what you get when the sheep are in charge.

 

 

Back to the OPs topic I with them luck with their daughters situation and I hope that the punnishment they meter out is as fair as possible and that your daughter is able to learn from it without it costing her future oppertunities.

[Guest Guest]

I did say I have yet to see any evidence...I am quite happy to be proved wrong so if you can show me the ticket I would be very interested to see it...

 

You don't say whether your your trustworthy friend was caught by an automatic system or a real person...if he demonstrated the sort of attitude towards the police that you do then I am not surprised he got done...

 

How do you know what attitude I show towards the police? Are you a stalker? Are you following me around with a a camera coz that's the only way I can think you would know me from Adam. Otherwise you are just making assumptions which would just make you an idiot...

Edited September 10, 2011 by Guest

[Guest Guest]

@J17sparky speed is directly linked to the probability of a crash

 

But it's nowhere near as simple as that, otherwise motorways would be the most dangerous roads but all evidence says they are by far the safest. Speed relative to driving conditions; be that weather, traffic, road design and maintenance, etc.

 

Don't get me wrong, speed has obviously got something to do with it but speed seems like the only thing the police seem interested in doing you for, and like I mentioned, until another factor comes into play speed can never result in an accident.

 

Today I saw a tractor type vehicle with rubber cat tracks towing a massive plough. I went to overtake it on a dual carriageway road but it just pulled over into my lane. It was only when it was in my lane that I realised it was in fact indicating but due to the fact it had around 20 flashing amber lights on it I couldn't spot the indicators. It then turned onto a 70mph 4 lane road which is by far the busiest in the area... A vehicle with tens of large spiky bits of metal, with inadequate indicators, doing a maximum of 30mph on a 70 - now to me that's far far more dangerous then doing 20% above the limit.

 

Like I said, speed is so black and white. I just wish they would focus on the cause of accidents rather than the contributing factors to how much damage is done as a result.

Edited September 10, 2011 by Guest

[CESIL]

How do you know what attitude I show towards the police?

Do you mean apart from your accusation concerning fraud and corruption?

especially when the top 2 or 3 rungs of the ladder are up for corruption and fraud

[speckytecky]

Got a Primary and a secondary level school in my Crescent - never seen any speed enforcement here in the 13 years I have lived here. Seen some clear cases of speeding and a heap of cases of idiotic driving - particularly people who should have their licences removed forever for being inconsiderate and dangerous gits by pavement parking (when dropping off or picking up little darlings) in such a way that if ever there was need for an ambulance or fire engine to get through then it would be a case of bif bash bang!

 

Agree - this is the best route to take IMHO

 

We have two cameras, one each side of the road, set up within 100yds of the local middle school gates - and there are two on the main road through the next village where children going to 4 different schools walk, as well as a 20mph limit next to the local first school. So there ARE some in the correct places.

[witch]

You make the decision based on your own experience and expertise ... and yet you attempt to rubbish other experts who have a far wider understanding? Wow ... I would love to be a teacher in your place, telling you that you know bugger all as *I* can make whatever decisions about how I use my IT ... and I bet you even like to tell a Judge that he knows bugger all about the law too, should you get what you deserve and be hauled up in front of one.

 

Why should a garage tell you that you need to look at your tyres? Surely an expert like you does a First Parade on your car each day? Checking all fluids, tyre pressures, condition of tyres, ensuring all indicators and lights are working, etc? If you don't then how you can fully claim to know that your car is in perfect working order?

 

...and breathe...

(ta for saying it all though) _

Edited September 10, 2011 by witch

[mac_shinobi]

 

Why should a garage tell you that you need to look at your tyres? Surely an expert like you does a First Parade on your car each day? Checking all fluids, tyre pressures, condition of tyres, ensuring all indicators and lights are working, etc? If you don't then how you can fully claim to know that your car is in perfect working order?

 

Car passed the MOT a few months back and I do check Oil, water, tyre pressures etc. Had one of those tyre companies as part of a work initiative come around and had a note on my car saying that one or two of my tyres were low / worn and also may split, this was literally after it passed its MOT and they swapped one of the tyres in order to pass the MOT. The tyres seemed ok to me with the tread worn away but not to the point it was less then 1.6mm.

 

Yet here I am still with the same 4 tyres and its still going strong.

[Trapper]

I also feel driving well below the speed limit to annoy faster drivers is also dangerous driving and asking for an accident.

 

I don't agree with doing 70 in a 30. But my personal feeling is if you have a clear road, a safe road, a good car and are willing to take the chance on a mobile camera unit then perhaps 40 in a 30 isn't the worst sin imaginable.

 

Around Birmingham we have four lane straight roads, which are 30 zones. Anywhere else in the country they'd be at least 40. It's all there are as a money making scheme for the local authorities.

[mac_shinobi]

I also feel driving well below the speed limit to annoy faster drivers is also dangerous driving and asking for an accident.

 

I don't agree with doing 70 in a 30. But my personal feeling is if you have a clear road, a safe road, a good car and are willing to take the chance on a mobile camera unit then perhaps 40 in a 30 isn't the worst sin imaginable.

 

 

Most of the time its that my speedo may show 70 but when using my tom tom it shows 68 so not sure which one is more accurate and the people who are going faster, are literally doing that to the point where it is well over the speed limit ie 80 mph plus

[Jose]

You make the decision based on your own experience and expertise ... and yet you attempt to rubbish other experts who have a far wider understanding? Wow ... I would love to be a teacher in your place, telling you that you know bugger all as *I* can make whatever decisions about how I use my IT ... and I bet you even like to tell a Judge that he knows bugger all about the law too, should you get what you deserve and be hauled up in front of one.

 

Why should a garage tell you that you need to look at your tyres? Surely an expert like you does a First Parade on your car each day? Checking all fluids, tyre pressures, condition of tyres, ensuring all indicators and lights are working, etc? If you don't then how you can fully claim to know that your car is in perfect working order?

 

These experts base their decisions on averages, average drivers ability, average weather conditions, average cars. Until someone provides evidence based on good quality saloon cars, BMW, Mercs, SaaB etc, that have run flat tyres, well maintained and serviced, good condition expensive tyres, some tyres can cost upto 400+. You then do tests on the M1 or M6 which is mainly straight and you would have conditions similiar to what I do late at night coming back from watching Palace play up north.

 

I pay good moeny to a quality main dealer garage to look after and maintain my car, if they tell me something needs fixing then its done usually under warranty, either way it gets done. Also I don't need to check manually if theres any issues with the car either a duff light or tyre pressure then it tells me on the dash. Technology moves on. To me the biggest safety improvment is run flat tyres before a blow out at 90+ meant you were in real trouble.

 

I have been to court several times in my life to date and always found not guilty, I would never tell a Judge or a magistrate that, that would be silly as they are about to make a decision that could effect your life. I have stood up in court and accused the cps and local police of being useless, the magistrate laughed, asked me to go next door to the police station so some paperwork could be checked with my car rental company, upon my return the usher took my paperwork in, then came backout and told me I was free to go home and the case was chucked out.

You see I trust and respect the court and traffic police its the berks making the stupid rules that cause issues, if the foot soldiers don't like the rules the will not enforce them.

[localzuk]

@Jose - as someone who works in IT, it is kind of surprising you have so much trust in technology. You seem to think that current technology somehow suddenly negates unforeseen circumstances. You rely on your car to tell you of problems with various things. For example, run flat tyres provide zero protection against serious danger at high speeds. They are only rated up to around 55mph for most brands, and up to about 70mph for better brands. The ones supplied on BMWs are Bridgestone, and are rated at 50Mph for 100 miles.

 

Your car computer can tell you about oil pressure and tyre pressure, sure, but can it tell you that the tread on the inside of your front left tyre is worn? Can it tell you that some berk in a Porsche will pull in front of you when you're going 110mph? Or that the engineer that you pay good money for forgot to tighten a nut somewhere? Or that the model of car you're driving has a design flaw? All those things happen, and none of them can be displayed on a little LCD display on your dash.

 

Your attitude is one of arrogance and selfishness, and it will bite you in the arse at some point. Relying on technology is a folly, and most people in IT should know this!

[Jose]

The ones supplied on BMWs are Bridgestone, and are rated at 50Mph for 100 miles.

 

That information tells you what speeds are safe after the puncture and for how long, it is not the maxium speed that the tyre can be used at before the original safety aspect of having run flats become void. The main positive thing about run flats is that your tyres don't burst at high speed if somrthing goes wrong. Remember this thread is about speed and safety not how long you can drive on tyre after the puncture. The information you have cut and pasted is about how long tyres last after something has gone wrong not if the safety aspect can withstand high speed.

 

You are right on one thing though, the garage could have made a mistake but if you start thinking like that then where do you draw the line, stop flying just incase the planes engine fails?. Its a managed risk based on following correct procedures on servicing and maintaining my car, you must admit I can't do more than I've been doing from a servicing and maintaining prospective.

 

Someone could suddenly pullout, if you read the thread you will see that I keep mentioning traffic conditions, you would drive not at high speeds past cars in the middle lane, yould wait untill you are well past them and then put your foot down its called common sense. Also one tactic I use to improve safety and reduce my chance of getting pulled over is to find a berk in Porcshe or like car and follow them from about 15-20 seconds back, this great if there is a problem up head they will put their brake lights on so you will have longer to react and also they stand more chance of being pulled over. Very good at night on the M40, so you have the porsche in the middle lane doing lets say 110-115 then your a good distance back but can still see their rear lights, this is nice and safe.