Exactly, so time to increase the speed limits now we are all in safer cars
speed limits will never increase. they can't if government policy is to reduce road deaths.
There's a world of difference between driving and 30 and redlining your Scooby at 60mph.
True, but tyre noise certainly becomes predominant at between 20 and 30mph. Something I only realised when I started using electric vehicles!
fifeAndy that limit is to slow you om the approach to the built up area. It will help the slow of reaction to be in the vicinity of 30mph by the time they get to the junction just past the limit change. Has the town/village grown in the last 20 years? What's the accident stats like for that first part of the 30mph limit?
There is no built up area (or 30 limit close by). I don't have accident stats (nor do I know where to find them), but in 30yrs, really not that many. Nothing has changed except the addition of the golf course maybe 15yrs ago.
The reality is that a 40 limit doesn't really make a huge difference as the road ultimately leads to StAndrews, and all traffic heading to StAndrews more or less always has a top speed of 40 anyway (why? who knows, its weird). But there really is no reason at all for a 40 limit to be imposed.
Most excellent link, cheersCheck out this website:
I've just got my first car with cruise control and take great pleasure in donning a trilby and setting it at 31mph in built up areas.
I'm not disagreeing as I don't know for certain, but if there's a vast difference between road noise at 20mph and 30mph sufficient to wake people sleeping behind their double-glazing I'd be very surprised.
Not to be callous, but it will make a difference to the chance of prosecution when somebody is injured / killed.
Yes, a slap on the wrist. I'm not going to put up the bunting.
I'm not disagreeing as I don't know for certain, but if there's a vast difference between road noise at 20mph and 30mph sufficient to wake people sleeping behind their double-glazing I'd be very surprised.
Fair do's.
It depends on other factors of course, like road surface, tyre materials, vehicle type. As well as engine notes, exhaust etc. Plus I suppose if the residents don't want to have their windows closed all the time that may need to be taken into account. Or maybe they can't afford double glazing, or live in a conservation area...
...my god I hate my work.
Haha!
This used to be NSL when I was a kid. no-one did in fact die IIRC.
So what, wait until people die before lowering the speed limit?
FFS.
This is why we need speed limits. Because people apparently really are that stupid.
The only downside to speed limits is that you get irritated. Well get over yourself, and the problem goes away.
Cougar - ModeratorI'm not disagreeing as I don't know for certain, but if there's a vast difference between road noise at 20mph and 30mph sufficient to wake people sleeping behind their double-glazing I'd be very surprised.
me too.
imho, there's a net balance of the human experience to consider here.
in the case of raising urban speed limits at night (near schools, whatever):
1 person (the driver) benefits slightly from a high(er) speed limit, hundreds/thousands of people are slightly inconvenienced by increased noise as the person in a car drives by.
all i'm trying to say, is that there's more benefit from speed limits than a simple reduction in crash statistics.
(let's pretend that somehow, cars were magically rendered incapable of killing/hurting people, speed limits would still have significant benefits)
People seem to be ignoring things like the increase in noise pollution when speeding. The difference of 20 mph to 40 mph is massive.
Oops just seen this is the last subject!
And air pollution.
I've just got my first car with cruise control and take great pleasure in donning a trilby and setting it at 31mph in built up areas.
Is it a Honda Jazz? It is isn't it.
You seriously just wrote that?So what, wait until people die before lowering the speed limit?FFS.
This is why we need speed limits. Because people apparently really are that stupid.
So following that line of thought, we should reduce all speed limits on all roads to 20mph because someone may at some time in the future have an accident?
You seriously just wrote that?
I can't believe you wrote that!
We keep speed limits to a sensible level. Theya re what they are, they've been simlar for years, plenty of time to get used to them. You are just pissing and moaning because you want to speed. Tough shit.
residents don't want to have their windows closed all the time that may need to be taken into account. Or maybe they can't afford double glazing, or live in a conservation area...
All three here, and an old house that would look chuffing stupid with double glazing in it.
Have we had the "I drive a super awesome car that I keep keep in super awesome condition so I should be able to do what the hell I like" argument yet?
I've very nearly got Speed Limit Bingo.
In my experience, cruise control is far more dangerous than nudging the needle a few mph over the speed limit.
I have it on both my vehicles and I rarely use it unless there are average speed cameras. I firmly believe it increases reaction times by a significant amount.
Under normal driving, you have the instant benefit of engine braking, and the fact that your braking foot/leg/muscles are in use, primed and ready to instantly switch to the brake pedal when needed.
Cruise control takes all that away.
Speaking from experience, braking distance doesn't matter around town. If you hit someone, there's a good chance you won't have time to reactBecause you are too close or going too fast?
Er, I thought I made it clear, because they ran out directly into my path from a hidden location (whilst I was possibly distracted by another hazard). It's unlikely I was speeding as I was on a push bike.
I've had many near misses with pedestrians stepping out in front of me (And cars pulling out in front of me etc.) on the bike, and when I've been able to react at all I've been able to avoid them, but the one time I couldn't it was at the speed I was going. All you can do is go slower so you're less likely to kill someone if you do hit them.
I firmly believe it increases reaction times by a significant amount.
I don't. At least, not for me.
Cruise control takes all that away.
No it doesn't. I cover brakes when there's any chance a situation might develop, or disengage. It would only increase reaction times if you weren't paying attention, and if you aren't paying attention it makes no difference if you are using cruise or not. Perfectly possible not to pay attention with your foot plonked in place.
why is it always 3am when we hypothetically drive past schools?
Because that's my favourite time to drive home from the local night spot after a few relaxing drinks and half a gram of chonce.
Except we don't, that's the point. That section I linked was NSL for years and years, it was a sensible limit when cars were less good, it would still be a sensible limit now.We keep speed limits to a sensible level. Theya re what they are, they've been simlar for years, plenty of time to get used to them.
And thanks to the handy link to crashmap up there it shows that whilst there were indeed some accidents on that stretch, no more so than on other stretches.
Not at all, I just want to be able to do the speed i've been doing safely for the previous 15 years, in a car that's more capable than the one i was driving 15 years ago.You are just pissing and moaning because you want to speed. Tough shit.
I actually think Fife Council just mess with the roads to use up some budget some of the time. For example: [url= https://www.google.co.uk/maps/ @56.416184,-2.9757274,3a,75y,312.44h,70.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2OruUSt_PsA1dkQ4XMMz0g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en]Fake speed bumps....[/url]
Exactly what they are supposed to achieve I have no idea
For the last 3 years I had a telematics box fitted to my car for insurance purposes. That taught me to drive sensibly with regards to speed limits, braking and acceleration forces and what time of day I drove. Now that I no longer have it I still drive to the same thought process. It's amazing how many people sit inches off my rear end (which is usually a steel bike carrier...) in residential areas, flash me to speed up when doing the limit and do stupid overtakes just to get to the next junction 20m in front of me.
A car is a dangerous weapon when used incorrectly. A vehicle on it's own is harmless just sitting there but put a person behind the wheel and it can be turned into a dangerous weapon capable of killing one or more people. The sooner people realise this (you would have thought the recent terror attacks would switch on a light in some people..) the safer the roads will be.
You are just pissing and moaning because you want to speed.
No, they're pissing and moaning because they want inappropriate limits reviewing.
Under normal driving, you have the instant benefit of engine braking, and the fact that your braking foot/leg/muscles are in use, primed and ready to instantly switch to the brake pedal when needed.Cruise control takes all that away.
Only if you can't drive.
I thought I made it clear, because they ran out directly into my path from a hidden location (whilst I was possibly distracted by another hazard). It's unlikely I was speeding as I was on a push bike.
You may not have been speeding but you were still riding too fast for the conditions. People don't just teleport in front of you, if there are "hidden locations" then you need to be giving them a wider berth and / or slowing so you can stop in time.
Do you not agree to the rules of the road when you get your licence? They are clear for all to when you first start driving.If you don't liek them cut up your licence and send it back to the DVLA. You'll probably be doing us all a favour.
Exactly what they are supposed to achieve I have no idea
Same as the "dragons teeth" and "tiger stripes" approaching roundabouts on dual carriageways. They slow people down! Okay so locals will get used to them and ignore them, but that's evolution for you.
I think the intention is that emergency vehicles can still go fast without scrapping their sumps. Or it may be that it is cheaper than proper speed humps, or quicker to install, or there may be engineering reasons that a raised carriageway is inappropriate (dodgy sub base or base materials). Your best bet is to speak to the local Highways Dept.
It's doubtful they do it just for fun. Highways Engineers aren't really known for that particular human trait.
Only if you can't drive.
OK, you know best...
Oh, hang on, so why is cruise control listed in [url= http://www.brake.org.uk/rsw/15-facts-a-resources/facts/1131-distractionfacts ]this[/url] study about contributing factors in accidents?
Or what about [url= https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/motr/cruise-control-may-prevent-speeding-but-slow-reaction-times.html ]this[/url]one that specifically discusses reaction times?
No, they're pissing and moaning because they want inappropriate limits reviewing.
BTW It's not too difficult to get these looked at, even if the council doesn't actually have the resources to change them (bureaucracy and consultations are v. resource intensive), there's no reason someone in local highways/road safety police can't give you five mins to explain, particularly if they have local knowledge of the area. Most local councils have a form you can fill in online.
Try driving with adaptive cruise control 🙄
It's sooooooo tiring.
How about another one Cougar?
[url= http://www.bbc.com/autos/story/20130808-is-cruise-control-dangerous ](another one)[/url]
In my experience, cruise control is far more dangerous than nudging the needle a few mph over the speed limit.I have it on both my vehicles and I rarely use it unless there are average speed cameras. I firmly believe it increases reaction times by a significant amount.
Under normal driving, you have the instant benefit of engine braking, and the fact that your braking foot/leg/muscles are in use, primed and ready to instantly switch to the brake pedal when needed.
Cruise control takes all that away.
This is BS. As an avid cruise control user it highlights to me that those who don't use cruise control are incapable of maintaining a constant speed and speed will vary by plus or minus 10mph for no reason whatsoever. This helps create the caterpillar effect which can lead to multiple pile ups. If everyone used cruise control more and set it to the same speed then motorways would be a much safer place.
The stuff on not covering the brake??? Seriously? Engine braking? you stuck in the 1950's? engine braking no longer has any place in modern driving. It used to back when my grandad drove, but modern braking systems are in a different league and orders of magnitude better than they used to be when brakes had to be supplemented by engine braking. Brakes are used for stopping, engines for going. Never the twain shall be mixed up - apart from in hybrids and EV's and even then the system sorts all that out. You just concentrate on hitting the middle peddle if you want to reduce speed.
Really, it is so much easier and safer for everyone if people stop thinking and just obey the rules of the road. What's the problem? If you think it is boring and miss the adrenaline rush of 'flooring it in every gear' then you really need to think about handing in your driving licence before you cause an accident. Really, you're not that good a driver. Nobody is.
Oh, hang on, so why is cruise control listed in this study about contributing factors in accidents?Or what about thisone that specifically discusses reaction times?
Because the majority of people can't drive worth a shit. If they could, we wouldn't need speed limits.
Is it a Honda Jazz? It is isn't it.
So close, I sold the Honda and bought a Yaris. Better cup holders.
... former motoring editor with experience driving all major performance marques would help too.
Only just seen this thread and had to respond, so allow me to join what I imagine the majority of posters on pages 2 and 3 have said by saying that neither of those two things mean f***-all when it comes to your ability to safely speed.
Try driving with adaptive cruise controlIt's sooooooo tiring.
I've managed to get door-to-door on a 300 mile journey without disengaging the cruise control (mostly good luck, had a lead car to follow at traffic lights).
Would never have another car without it. With lane assist wound to maximum sensitivity, I can shift my gaze right the way down the road and start slowing down (or increase the time interval) long before the car in front has started braking or even noticed that traffic ahead is slowing.
But that's a different thing - most drivers on the motorway are looking at the 10 feet of road in front of their bonnet. You see them rocketing up on a slower car or a lorry and then have to jump on the brakes before they sit behind with their indicator flashing plaintively.
The stuff on not covering the brake??? Seriously? Engine braking? you stuck in the 1950's? engine braking no longer has any place in modern driving. It used to back when my grandad drove, but modern braking systems are in a different league and orders of magnitude better than they used to be when brakes had to be supplemented by engine braking. Brakes are used for stopping, engines for going. Never the twain shall be mixed up - apart from in hybrids and EV's and even then the system sorts all that out. You just concentrate on hitting the middle peddle if you want to reduce speed.
Have you ever driven a car?
So, for those who find some speed limits inappropriately slow on a given road at a given time what is your reaction to the driver in front who does decide to stay at around the speed limit +/- 1 or2 mph?
I speed & I dont care as long as I dont die.
Everyone who disagrees with me is a dawdler & bellend.
Thats how it works on here isnt it? Throw insults around to those who have a different viewpoint?
Those canoeists have a point it seems.
So, for those who find some speed limits inappropriately slow on a given road at a given time what is your reaction to the driver in front who does decide to stay at around the speed limit +/- 1 or2 mph?
Overtake when it's safe to do so. It's not rocket surgery.
I'm quite surprised that almost no one mentions the effects of those people who routinely speed in urban areas. I live in west London, I usually commute and get about by bike (I also own 2 vehicles). I also walk a lot because we have really good public transport, and there are shops and things within 5-10 minutes walk so why would you drive all the time?
Where I live the road speed limits have been reduced to 20mph, which "some" people abide by. Crossing the road can be a Russian Roulette activity as one particular road is on a slight curve, and those driving at 20mph are visible far enough away so that there's a level of confidence of being able to get across the road once they appear. However, those doing 50mph (quite common) cause pedestrians to have to run across the road, drivers coming out of side roads to accelerate hard, everyone else to drive like complete dicks, because you have to because of the few who don't believe that speed limits apply to them because they're "driving gods", or they drive to the conditions, or worse still "according to their experience".
Oh, and when I drive, I consider that pretty much every time I get behind the wheels there's at least one moment when I think, "hmmm I shouldn't have done that".
I find some speed limits inappropriately slow. I still obey them.
I find some speed limits inappropriately high. I drive slower then I am legally allowed, at a speed I feel comfortable and safe at.
Not hard is it?
Overtake when it's safe to do so. It's not rocket surgery.
Fair enough, but in the time between coming up behind the driver and the safe overtake.......?
Oh, and when I drive, I consider that pretty much every time I get behind the wheels there's at least one moment when I think, "hmmm I shouldn't have done that".
May I recommend the Institute of Advanced Motorists, or perhaps spend some time being coached by a skilled driver? 😉
Fair enough, but in the time between coming up behind the driver and the safe overtake.......?
As long as it takes to be safe....
Or is it a trick question.
I feel the need, the need for speed!
Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools.
Fair enough, but in the time between coming up behind the driver and the safe overtake.......?
One would simply drive according to the conditions, ie. as you would when there's another car in front.
I can see exactly where you're going, you'd like to suggest that I'd be up their arse, flashing my lights and being an aggressive dick.
The best way to overtake safely is to start from far enough back that you can see down both sides of the car in front. One of the most useful views of the road ahead is underneath the car, so being close is counterproductive.
The best way to predict what another driver might do is to assess his driving over a distance WITHOUT letting your road stance influence the way he drives. That way you know if he cuts corners, moves out for left-handers etc.
And by beginning an overtaking manouvre from further back, you have more time to abort if a hazard materialises.
All basic stuff in the Advanced Driver training, I think overtaking should be covered in more detail in the standard driving test - it's not something one should be afraid of.
[i][b]Internet troll[/b]
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"In Internet slang, a troll (/?tro?l/, /?tr?l/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion,[3] often for the troll's amusement"[/i]
rossburton - MemberIt's Friday and I'm going away for the weekend so this could be fun.
Why do some people think that speeding (in a car) isn't really wrong? And get annoyed with speed cameras?
Nice work op. Nice work.
put me behind the wheel of a lively, enthusiastic vehicle on an open, sweeping, undulating B road and I become alive: my reflexes sharpen, I become more aware. I choose my line, my braking points, look ahead for hazards, and general enjoy the "roadcraft" of "making progress".Put me in a line of traffic dawdling along at 25mph and I just become another zombie, far more likely to be saying "Sorry mate, I didn't see you"...
Couldn't have put it better myself but you don't have to speed to do that, well not much anyway.
put me behind the wheel of a lively, enthusiastic vehicle on an open, sweeping, undulating B road and I become alive: my reflexes sharpen, I become more aware. I choose my line, my braking points, look ahead for hazards, and general enjoy the "roadcraft" of "making progress".
Couldn't have put it better myself but you don't have to speed to do that, well not much anyway.
Indeed. I do all that in an ageing, overweight estate car, within the speed limit. Probably comes from my first car being a Hillman Imp (fun below 30mph).
I agree with both those points, and I don't habitually set out to deliberately break the speed limit. But I simply don't mind at all if I do.
By the same token, there are times when I wouldn't dream of driving anywhere near the speed limit because conditions dictate that it's not safe to do so.
My first car was a 20-year old Triumph Spitfire 1500, top speed around 75mph, so I agree, you can get your kicks at relatively low speeds if you choose the right vehicle.
One of the best in this regard was the Smart Roadster, felt like you were caning it all the time! Test drove the Brabus version which was genuinely rapid and it was terrifying!
We have the technology to install GPS trackers in every vehicle. These could be set to upload data whenever a speed limit is exceeded. If we're already talking about phasing out petrol/diesel cars then this should just be adopted as a new C&U standard.
I have taken recently to watching 'epic fail' / bad driving videos on YouTube, they're a real eye opener for me as I don't drive. The vast majority of accidents are caused by people speeding. The only people who then do not also become involved in further secondary collisions are not only paying attention, but also driving slowly. ( Those who are also speeding, often becoming involved in the crash too).
Flaperon - Member
Try driving with adaptive cruise control
It's sooooooo tiring.I've managed to get door-to-door on a 300 mile journey without disengaging the cruise control (mostly good luck, had a lead car to follow at traffic lights).
What else did you do then when not driving? Play Mindcraft on yer phone ?
Turned mine off, the constant pitch and yaw as the traffic flow ebbed and flowed was making me sick.
Take back control 😆
The best way to overtake safely is to start from far enough back that you can see down both sides of the car in front
...
And by beginning an overtaking manouvre from further back, you have more time to abort if a hazard materialises.
That may be the [s]first[/s] most sensible thing you've said on this thread. Also, being further back means you can plan an overtake in advance and be travelling faster than the car in front when you reach them rather than at the same speed.
TBH though, in that scenario I'd probably just sit patiently behind them, unless their driving suggested that they were going to carry on at 30mph when they reached an NSL further ahead. I very rarely break 30mph limits these days.
I don't drive. The vast majority of accidents are caused by people speeding.
The former statement arguably invalidates the latter.
Can you give an example?
I don't drive. The vast majority of accidents are caused by people speeding.
The former statement arguably invalidates the latter.
Sounds like a poorly reasoned argument to me. As I said, this was an observation made from watching several crashes on video.
Can't believe so many people have bothered to respond to the OP.....what a shite thread!
Where's the 'thumbs down' emoticon when you need it?
@Cougar: apologies, that came across rather pishy- it's been a long week.
's absolutely fine mate. I didn't think you were, I was probably being pishy myself. My doctor tells me I have an overactive sarcasm gland.
A bloody overactive ban-hammer more like...
I'm awesome and a great driver is basically what some seem to think. The thing is, you can be the best driver of all time, but you can't control or account fort the behaviour of other motorists, pedestrians, cyclists, horses, dogs etc. Hence the awesome skillz are worth two things, jack and shit. That's why lower speed limits are a good thing. They help to lessen the seriousness of an incident.
I always promise myself I won't look at or post on speeding threads. I can't help it though. Hands up how many of you have lost somebody very close due to a driver thinking speed limits don't matter. I have and it's shit. My brother was killed crossing the street. According to the investigators three miles an hour makes a big ****ing difference.
Three miles an hour less and I'd have been celebrating my brothers 46th birthday with him a couple of weeks ago. Instead I had to sit in a corridor in intensive care eleven years ago and explain to an eight year old boy that we were turning off the machines that were keeping his father alive.
A bloody overactive ban-hammer more like...
It's underactive if anything. Bans are always a last resort.
I'm awesome and a great driver is basically what some seem to think. The thing is, you can be the best driver of all time, but you can't control or account fort the behaviour of other motorists, pedestrians, cyclists, horses, dogs etc.
Of course you can't. But you can look and think ahead, forward-plan your driving and mitigate a lot of the risks. Driving at a speed appropriate to the conditions is an important part of that but only a part of it, and as you say will also reduce the severity of the outcome should a collision occur (though I'd rather try and avoid a collision in the first place). Speeding through a built-up area when there's likely to be people about is bellendery. Doing 75 on an empty motorway, not so much.
And I've said it before but it's probably worth repeating if only so that people don't think I've had an empathy bypass; I'm sincerely sorry for your loss.
Unrealistic speed limits in a lot of instances. Roads that used to be national, now 40 or 50. I didnt die 20 years ago when they were national, I have no intention of slowing down on them now.
Please for the sake of yourself and others you share the road with, go on a speed awareness course. Or if you've been on one, go again but this time listen. Things have changed somewhat over the last 20 years.If there is a stretch of road that has had the speed limit reduced it is because people have died. And on these accident blackspot stretches of road where speed limits have been reduced it is proved to be an effective way to reduce the accident rate. So that sort of disproves your point of view about lower speed limits being introduced as an annoyance to road users - they are introduced very deliberately backed up with evidence to support them being changed.
There have been a number of local roads to me which had limits lowered just because there were a couple of accidents, only one of which involved a fatality, and all were caused by inattention at speeds below what was originally set, i.e. 60mph.
The fatal accident was on a bypass, which has a housing estate built inside it, a woman was killed when she turned around to berate one of her children, and drifted across the road into the path of a large truck. Neither vehicle was doing more than 40mph on a 60mph road.
The other one on the same stretch was at a junction where a woman was waiting to pull out onto the bypass, a motorist turning left into the road she was on flashed her to say she could pull out, and she was hit by a car overtaking the one turning. Nobody was seriously injured, no vehicle was doing more than 35 mph.
They installed roundabouts on all the junctions and dropped the limit to 50, on the grounds that it's "an estate road".
It is not, it's a road bypassing a road into town that's heavily built up, narrow, and has a school nearby, and it happens to have an estate built inside it after it was put in place, as nearly always happens when developers get a chance to do 'infill'.
Another limit was imposed on the A4 near Box after a collision where a car pulled out from a garage into the path of another vehicle without looking, again neither vehicle was travelling more than 40mph, as established by accident investigators.
The classic is the Batheaston bypass, put in place to avoid the accident blackspot that is Batheaston; it's a dual-carriageway that sweeps around the watermeadow below the village, and it had a speed-camera installed and a 50mph limit imposed, [i]before it was even opened![/i]
Why? Because the rules state that a speed camera can be set up within 2km of an accident black-spot, so as Batheaston is within the 2km limit, a camera was installed on the road built to avoid the black-spot; a clear and blatant case of using a camera for making money, not to avoid accidents that had never ever happened on that road.
It doesn't even need to be 50mph, it's a dual carriageway with no other roads accessing it, except for assess ramps.
But you can look and think ahead, forward-plan your driving and mitigate a lot of the risks.
You can, but I don't think a lot of people do. I'm with you on the motorway thing though. All traffic flowing one way, no pedestrians, cyclists etc. I know I shouldn't post and you don't come across as having no empathy.
It's the people that think speeding is okay and act like children when they receive a fine that piss me off. Don't like it, don't speed. It's selfish, entitled behaviour at the end of the day.
I speed occasionally because I want to. And I've decided that it is safe to do so. So there.
My theory, as in life as well as driving. Is that one should always give way/help to the weaker/more vulnerable. So when driving, pedestrians and cyclists are ALWAYS given priority. What I cannot stand, is people who don't do this and use there cars to bully people. See it a lot when I'm out and about on foot. I'm talking about those speeding in busy built up areas, those revving to shoot off from the lights at a pedestrian crossing when I'm half way across "THE LIGHT CHANGED I HAVE RIGHT OF WAY!", those who park on the pavement blocking access etc...
Like all laws, they are for the guidance of the wise, and the obedience of the fool.
Edit: and I don't/won't moan if/when I get a ticket. What will be, will be. Only ever had one ticket for speeding, and I speed pretty much all the time (when appropriate) which just shows that my speeding is (mostly) appropriate.
They should bring back all those public information films
I'll happily speed on open roads so as to overtake all of those morons who are dead from the neck up and travel at a constant 40 mph regardless of the speed limits.
Given the inability of so many motorists to be able to maintain road speed I suspect all road will be 40 mph max within 10 years.
Takes me 45 mins to travel 19 miles here in rural Dorset,
Like all laws, they are for the guidance of the wise, and the obedience of the fool.
Eh?
I've not read the thread as life is to short, but in my opinion things that should of been said by now are (in order of importance )
1, Where is surf matt?
2, My car is NCAP 1 billion so it won't affect me or my victims
3, We live in a nanny state
4, I am better than the majority of drivers on the road
5, All motorised road users are killers.
May I also say that I have absolutely no respect for the posted limits of the road, sometimes I drive faster, sometimes slower, I refer you to point 4 😉
I treat 30 and 40 limits as sacrosanct but empty open country roads have places where I'm quite happy to go over the national.
I'm going to start advanced driver training soon so I can feel superior, I mean be a better, safer driver.
Off topic a bit but one of the types of driver that get me are the ones you overtake between villages because they're rolling along at 45. Then at the next village you slow to the 30 but they catch up and get right up your chuff because they want to do 45 through the village as well. Fools.
+1 Come to Dorset. It's full of them!Off topic a bit but one of the types of driver that get me are the ones you overtake between villages because they're rolling along at 45. Then at the next village you slow to the 30 but they catch up and get right up your chuff because they want to do 45 through the village as well. Fools.
While we're having an off-thread moan about driving habits...
Those people who really make a meal of turning off a main road into a side road causing you to unnecessarily slow to a halt and wait for them to complete the whole tedious manoeuvre. Watching them slowly feed the wheel through their hands whilst cars are screeching to a stop behind you in a tailback on the dual carriageway ring-road. Just fuggingeddinthere! Slow down one you're in and off the main drag!
The worst type are the bastards who travel at 30 on a national speed limit road and then speed up when they reach a 30. I swear to god that there are a small number of drivers that think signs work in reverse. You are now leaving a 30 limit 🙄
Some really disappointing stuff on this thread from people who spend time on the roads on bicycles and might not get killed/injured if more people drove according to the highway code. I know someone who killed a pedestrian who wouldn't have done with a little more care and respect for the law. You don't want to have to live with that, or do you?
Just a couple of thoughts:
Use your limiter rather than cruise control. If you start to doze off you'll slow down which might bring you to your senses and if you do crash you'll be going slower. If you have to brake you'll find the pedal faster from the accelerator than from wherever you're resting your foot. A Swiss study concluded cruise controls to be a significant contributor to motorway accidents.
Engine braking is still very useful, especially in the mountains. A British coach driver was hailed as a hero for the way he crashed his coach to save lives. A driver familiar with driving in the mountains wouldn't have cooked the brakes to failure in the first place.
To support countzero, a road I use was until fairly recently was a NSL of 60 as it was rural, it then went to 40/30/60, it then further went 40/30/20/60, I still drive the road the same as I always did, just because a few idiots thought they could take a blind 100degree plus bend at 60mph in the snow doesn't mean I should adjust the way I drive.
For funkmasterp, those are the ****s that can't see well enough to go fast on unlit roads that then try to make ground when they can see in a lit (urban ) area 🙁
Use your limiter rather than cruise control. If you start to doze off you'll slow down which might bring you to your senses and if you do crash you'll be going slower. If you have to brake you'll find the pedal faster from the accelerator than from wherever you're resting your foot. A Swiss study concluded cruise controls to be a significant contributor to motorway accidents.Engine braking is still very useful, especially in the mountains. A British coach driver was hailed as a hero for the way he crashed his coach to save lives. A driver familiar with driving in the mountains wouldn't have cooked the brakes to failure in the first place.
Apparently this is all BS... even the moderator says so!
(For the record, nail on the head)
I was going to post something balanced, conciliatory and thoughtful.
And then I thought better of it and had another biscuit.
Dark chocolate digestive, proper McVities one.
What else did you do then when not driving? Play Mindcraft on yer phone ?
Didnt know you can get Minecraft on a phone, so no. Finished the "Fiendish" level Sudoku in The Times though.
I'm awesome and a great driver is basically what some seem to think. The thing is, you can be the best driver of all time, but you can't control or account fort the behaviour of other motorists, pedestrians, cyclists, horses, dogs etc. Hence the awesome skillz are worth two things, jack and shit.
Exactly this. The law is to protect the vulnerable from the incompetent and/or idiotic. You awesome drivers out there are clearly no problem, but the law is written to protect us from those less competent. There is a certain amount of irony there.
Top and bottom of it is if you want to drive at competitive speeds, go and compete in something. get it out of your system.
You can [think ahead], but I don't think a lot of people do.
I don't disagree, that was kind of my point TBH.
you don't come across as having no empathy.
That's kind of you to say. Mostly I was preempting a mauling from the great unwashed. (-: