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?