[Closed] So my bro got caught speeding

How do you feel driving in Germany? Even at 60 it must be hard not to crash with all that hand wringing.

Hope he never goes to the Isle of Man either.

Everybody speeds. Until recently I was doing a motorway commute by motorbike. I was in no rush and I’d stick to 70 (+/- 2mph) day after day after day. Prior to that I’d done a lot of car mileage at work and used to set the cruise as 65, so I know where he’s coming from. But he breaks speed limits. Everyone does. I really honestly don’t believe ANYONE who says they NEVER EVER break a speed limit. Mostly it’s fine and it’s live and let live IMO. I’d rather someone go a bit quick now and again and pay attention than some of the stupidly and inattention you see every day. 70mph is too low anyway. Most of Europe is higher than that as are some US states these days. Given my choice I’d set it at 90, maybe 100, and crucify anyone that went more than 5-10mph over it. Long bans no matter what they sobbed about.
We’ve not got long left like this anyway. Our kids will see self driving cars that don’t need to speed to get places faster than we do now because nobody will own a car, we’ll just call one up on an app when we need one, so the roads will be a lot quieter.
Anyway. Back to Earth. Dinner time soon.... 🙂

The speed limits were set when we drove these:

[img] [/img]

They set the Mway speed limit to pretty much within 10mph of the maximum speed of that typical family car.

If we did the same today the speed limit on the Mway would be 120mph.

Now, i'm not suggesting that 120mph is a sensible speed at which to set the limit, but i am showing just how arbitrary the number about which the "arbiters of the national limit" get soo frothy about......

(Take a train under, or a boat over just 20 miles of channel, and you can do 85 legally (in the dry) for example)

The only difference between 100mph and 99mm is that one has 3 figures and the other just two. And you can drive dangerously at 20mph and safely at 200mph.

Context, is everything........

OP does your brother drive you to church?

http://www.centralfifetimes.com/news/15811755.speeding-teenager-clocked-at-120mph-escapes-driving-ban/

And you can drive dangerously at 20mph and safely at 200mph.

Context, is everything........

+1

Reminds me of the time I got pulled over doing just over 90mph. The cop asked me if I knew what speed I was doing. "Oh, probably closer to 80 than 70" says I. "Try 90" he snapped back to which I replied "Well it's still closer to 80 than 70". He was not amused.

That's hilarious (-:

I really honestly don’t believe ANYONE who says they NEVER EVER break a speed limit.

Oh, I do. I encounter TCR jam cars on a regular basis. Dribbling along at 50mph in the middle lane of the motorway, or driving around town and dabbing the brakes every time they approach 20mph.

They're a minority though, in terms of speed abusers I see far more monospeeders who think 40mph is the correct speed to be driving at irrespective of whether the posted limit is 30 or 70. They're [i]great[/i] fun to be behind on motorway slip roads.

Incidentally, the UK motorway speed limit was set as a temporary measure by somebody who couldn't even drive.

Oh, and what you'd do in Germany is this:

Drive as fast as you like without being an utter cock.
If you're an utter cock you'll get pulled over.
If it's raining don't be even a slight cock.
If you're in an accident and you're doing over 100mph then you will be assumed to be at fault.
If you're in an accident at over 100mph then 'fault' won't matter anyway.
Move the **** over when you've finished overtaking.
Your car tops out at 155mph? How cute, move over.

I drive a diesel van and know my place.

They set the Mway speed limit to pretty much within 10mph of the maximum speed of that typical family car.

And it was nothing to do with road safety, it was because Jaguar were using the M6 as a test track.

you can drive dangerously at 20mph

As I indicated via the time honored "shaking the beans" symbol yesterday when walking down a singletrack lane (public footpath, private road) as he charged towards me and my scared 7 yo daughter in his SUV.

He didn't take to kindly to my gesticulating, just as I dodn;t take too kindly to his dangerous behaviour.

Respect your opinions chaps, but if it's an empty road, what's the problem? No one to hurt but yourself.

'If a tree falls in the woods' etc...

Oh, and what you'd do in Germany is this:

Out of interest, how do autobahn accident statistics stack up to ours, anyone know? Our motorways are statistically the safest roads we have. And yes, I know there's more to accidents than speed alone; road design, driver training and ability etc. Just curious.

(Yeah, I could Google it, but it's easier to ask on STW and let someone else share their knowledge or do the legwork...)

No idea of stats, but my German info is legit, I've seen a pushy cock in a Porsche bullying cars out of his way, only to be pulled over about 5 miles ahead. The police are very strict and there is even a campaign to reduce what we might call roadhogs, boy racers or Jeremy Clarkson. There's large hoardings by the motorways showing a family in a car being harassed by said cock. I can't remember the wording but it's something like 'Drängeln' which is literally 'jostle'.

PeterPoddy - Member

We’ve not got long left like this anyway. Our kids will see self driving cars that don’t need to speed to get places faster than we do now because nobody will own a car, we’ll just call one up on an app when we need one, so the roads will be a lot quieter.
...

I keep posting this so once more won't hurt, but I think self driving cars will be tiered/taxed based on how fast you're allowed to go. If the speed limits are based on human abilities why would you stop fully autonomous cars from doing 100+ on the motorway?

I think for a time at least prestige/performance models will allow you to zoom past the plebs in their inferior marques, if you pay.

Really odd thread here I think. I don’t think that anyone could defend the OP’s brother who probably (with the way speedo’s under read) was probably showing +100mph in their car. No excuse.

Bikebouy - never do 33mph in a 30mph zone or 45 in a 40?

The M-way speed limits were introduced in the 60’s after AC cars were found to have been road testing their Le Mans Shelby Coupe on the M1 straight near Newport Pagnall. Someone getting that speed ow would make headlines so imagine the impact 50years ago.

tonyg2003 - Member

The M-way speed limits were introduced in the 60’s after AC cars were found to have been road testing their Le Mans Shelby Coupe on the M1 straight near Newport Pagnall. Someone getting that speed ow would make headlines so imagine the impact 50years ago.

[url= https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/motorsport/day-jack-sears-hit-185mph-m1-motorway ]185mph at 4:15 am.[/url]

No one to hurt but yourself.

and the firemen and paramedics that cut you out, and the road that has to be closed for hours for accident investigation and repair, and the copper that has to go to your house and tell your mum, and your mum herself, and.....

probably showing +100mph in their car. No excuse.

Agreed.

Bikebouy - never do 33mph in a 30mph zone or 45 in a 40?

Unless I'm misremembering usernames I very much doubt it going off previous discussions here. Probably best not to push this line of enquiry TBH.

The M-way speed limits were introduced in the 60’s after AC cars were found to have been road testing their Le Mans Shelby Coupe on the M1

Hah, I got both the manufacturer and the road wrong.

If the speed limits are based on human abilities why would you stop fully autonomous cars from doing 100+ on the motorway?

im sure.... the human element wont go away

for example ... will the human check the tires and spot the damage that causes the blow out when the car hits 100 ?

things still fail and like it or not the faster your going when it fails the more severe the consequences

trail_rat - Member

If the speed limits are based on human abilities why would you stop fully autonomous cars from doing 100+ on the motorway?

im sure.... the human element wont go away

for example ... will the human check the tires and spot the damage that causes the blow out when the car hits 100 ?

things still fail and like it or not the faster your going when it fails the more severe the consequences

Tyre temperature and pressure sensors are already a thing - the car could decide whether the tyre pressure, weather and road conditions are safe to go ???mph. At the minute a human can ignore info from their tyre pressure sensors or fail to check them and drive 70+mph. If the car is in control you can't do that.

Anyway the main reason I think this will be a thing is for taxation. If EVs are tax exempt for co2 reasons governments will have to reconsider their taxation models - performance, speed and going faster than others seems like a perfect reason.

so who got harmed? Any victims of these crimes who suffered harm or loss?

[img] [/img]

theotherjonv - Member
No one to hurt but yourself.

and the firemen and paramedics that cut you out, and the road that has to be closed for hours for accident investigation and repair, and the copper that has to go to your house and tell your mum, and your mum herself, and.....

By the same logic, we should say it's morally wrong to participate in anything that could result in a call-out for the emergency services. Cycling for example.

*Wonders if jambourgie will explain what the fast lane is*

*Wonders if bikebouy will explain what the slow lane is*

A few years ago I attended a speed awareness course. Very insightful and gave me plenty of food for thought. I would say I drive progressively but hypeaware in any built-up areas. Dual carriageways/motorways etc and I will consistently speed but if I top 100 it’s seconds only, not worth the risk, too much traffic.

Some comedy gold. Fast lane, slow lane bollocks. Unfortunately there’s always been a speed limit on the Autobahn due to traffic when I’ve been on one.
Those that advocate zero speeding tolerance on the motorway, how do you feel when you cross the channel to an 80mph limit. Is it somehow safe because the sign says so?

Had the parents over during the Christmas break and was informed that my brother was having to go to court as he got caught doing 120mph on the m6 toll road. He doesn’t need to drive for work as he works from home and has enough money to pay the taxi fares to the airports. If he doesn’t get banned then there is something very wrong with our legal system and I have everything crossed that he does get a ban.

For a little bit of context I was informed a good few years ago on a single lane bypass with my mum in the car he was doing 100mph and he frequently and actually always drives at those sorts of speeds with his wife and kids in the car..... utter pr!ck!!!

@golfchick, he’s clearly a Selfish swine of the highest order.

On said course, was also told that traffic accidents with a fatality cost £1m a go on average. Seemed a touch exaggerated but I’m sure all the services attending, investigations, forensics etc., it soon mounts up.

By the same logic, we should say it's morally wrong to participate in anything that could result in a call-out for the emergency services. Cycling for example.

I don't think the same sort of psychological trauma is likely to be involved in treating the average cycling wrist or collarbone as picking someone's body parts out of a crushed car that's hit a tree. And when my mum got the call to come and pick me up because i was in a wrist cast..... i think she was more annoyed at me messing up her timing of the sunday roast than devastated at the loss of her eldest child in an entirely avoidable 'accident'.

But you carry on, it's only yourself you're harming.

[quote=rene59 ][s]this speed is not habitual[/s] I've been lucky not to get caught before as you can see from my relatively clean endorsement history.

refixed

A sobering fact I was told at a speed awareness course on Saturday (caught doing 36 in a 30 which is embarrassing compared to some of the above)...

If two identical cars doing 70mph and 90mph slam on at the same point, at the point where the car doing 70mph stops (potentially avoiding collision), the car doing 90mph is still doing 70mph. Hitting a fixed object at 70mph is going to hurt.

Basically when braking hard a vehicle sheds a huge amount of its initial speed at the end of the braking phase. Speeding kills kids!

Those that advocate zero speeding tolerance on the motorway, how do you feel when you cross the channel to an 80mph limit. Is it somehow safe because the sign says so?

The fact is the French don't really appreciate speed limits.

And 112mph, you deserve a 10yr ban. You should know better

Daft doing that speed, but a ten year ban. Get a grip. It's far more dangerous driving at 30 past a school than it is 120 on a deserted 3 lane motorway (in a high performance car).

Context is everything...

If two identical cars doing 70mph and 90mph slam on at the same point, at the point where the car doing 70mph stops (potentially avoiding collision), the car doing 90mph is still doing 70mph.

That's got to be wrong. So if it takes 5 seconds to stop from 70 then it's gonna be 10 secs from 90? **** I'll have to start braking before I even reach 120!

refixed

If two identical cars doing 70mph and 90mph slam on at the same point, at the point where the car doing 70mph stops (potentially avoiding collision), the car doing 90mph is still doing 70mph. Hitting a fixed object at 70mph is going to hurt.

I'm interested what identical cars they base that on. A performance car brakes from 60-0 in about a third the distance of what it states in the highway code.

 

Where are all these deserted roads we keep hearing about?

By the same logic, we should say it's morally wrong to participate in anything that could result in a call-out for the emergency services. Cycling for example.

theotherjonv - Member - I don't think the same sort of psychological trauma is likely to be involved in treating the average cycling wrist or collarbone as picking someone's body parts out of a crushed car that's hit a tree. And when my mum got the call to come and pick me up because i was in a wrist cast..... i think she was more annoyed at me messing up her timing of the sunday roast than devastated at the loss of her eldest child in an entirely avoidable 'accident'.

But you carry on, it's only yourself you're harming.

Actually, I had in mind the poor commuter who goes up the inside of a truck and gets squished. Absolutely disgraceful these cyclists riding around in traffic... think of the poor fireman that has to scoop her up etc etc

I don't speed anymore I think it's selfish,however I do agree with this

Daft doing that speed, but a ten year ban. Get a grip. It's far more dangerous driving at 30 past a school than it is 120 on a deserted 3 lane motorway (in a high performance car).

Context is everything...

You didn't say that though, you said 'anyone who participates in anything that could result in a call out for emergency services'

FWIW; seeing as you raised it I think people who drive up the inside of trucks and busses are bellends, just the same as those idiots that drive unsafely and who think it's all about them and their rights and choices.

Less crashes on our motorways than other roads. Very true.

However, if involved in a motorway crash you are far more likely to be critically injured or killed...

Simple reason, speed.

The question is, where do you draw the line? If the limit were 150mph there would still be people that feel the need to get to where they are going at 180mph.

There is no definitive "safe speed" for a motorway or any road but if you want less fatalities the lower the limit the better.

Personally, seeing how some drivers can't even park a car properly, 70mph is fine by me.

Am i prefect,no? Have I ever broken speed limits, yes?

In my youth I was an idiot. At 49 I stick to the limits to the best of my ability only going over slightly due to "speed creep" as you simply can't keep your eye on the speedo all the time.

Personally I think that 100mph+ on a motorways should be a mandatory ban, no ifs, no buts.

Also, just to check, this is a biking forum isn't it? Motorways not withstanding we are some of the most likely to get injured/killed by a reckless driver. Whether that recklessness is speeding or negligence the result can be the same.

but we aren't talking about reckless drivers, those are other people.

We're talking about driving GODS 😉

theotherjonv - Member
You didn't say that though, you said 'anyone who participates in anything that could result in a call out for emergency services'

That's why I said 'cycling' rather than 'Mountain Biking'. But fairy muff.

FWIW; seeing as you raised it I think people who drive up the inside of trucks and busses are bellends, just the same as those idiots that drive unsafely and who think it's all about them and their rights and choices.

I wouldn't say they were bellends. Just ignorant. My point being that they are doing something quite dangerous in cycling round a city. Probably more dangerous than driving a car on a deserted motorway at 150mph...

If two identical cars doing 70mph and 90mph slam on at the same point, at the point where the car doing 70mph stops (potentially avoiding collision), the car doing 90mph is still doing 70mph.

I'd like to see a source for that.

Less crashes on our motorways than other roads. Very true.

However, if involved in a motorway crash you are far more likely to be critically injured or killed...

Simple reason, speed.

The question is, where do you draw the line? If the limit were 150mph there would still be people that feel the need to get to where they are going at 180mph.

There is no definitive "safe speed" for a motorway or any road but if you want less fatalities the lower the limit the better.

By that logic, we're into the realms of a man with a red flag walking in front of your car. It's all about acceptable risk. Crossing the road carries a risk.

In my youth I was an idiot. At 49 I stick to the limits to the best of my ability only going over slightly due to "speed creep" as you simply can't keep your eye on the speedo all the time.

I can hold a speed quite easily, and can 'feel' speeds like 30 or 70 without needing to look at the dash. And then there's cruise control.

Depends your definition of recklessness though..

Speeding isn't nesecarily reckless or dangerous.

For disclosure.. Been driving 25 years, never had any points... And never done over a ton that I can ever recall. But that's more because I don't want to be banned, rather than I think it's inherently dangerous.

I've driven at 180mph without incident.
I've also been rear ended whilst stationary, twice.

Makes you think.

😀

Possibly, but cycling in a city had a purpose too, to get places. What's the purpose of driving at 150mph on the public highway that can't be achieved by driving at 70, other than selfish amusement?