The winner was the Perelli P7 Centerato (sp) which is their energy saver.

Energy saving tyres are simply tyres with scilica in the rubber. You’ll know from buying high end MTB and road bike tyres that it gives more grip, less rolling resistance and longer life. There’s no reason low RR tyres on cars need to be lower grip.

The Michelins on the front of the Prius are looking a little worn, I think I may keep them on for the summer then change then next spring. They’ve done just under 50k miles now. The rear one (that didn’t get changed due to puncture) is maybe 2/3 worn. Astonishingly long lasting. And no issues with grip at all.

Typing similar stuff at the same time, Molgrips, this is getting worrying. Isn’t there a nutrition thread somewhere we can have a good barny on?

I had a chat on the phone earlier with Madame who is visiting friends in the UK. The car in front of her aquaplaned and span on the motorway in torrential rain today. It blocked the first two lanes so she slowed and went past on the hard shoulder. An excellent lesson in stopping distances and calmly dealing with the unexpected for my son in the passenger seat who is currently doing his “code”.

Speed is a factor in every accident, of course it is. It may not be the most prominent cause in most of them, but it’s always a factor. WHATEVER I do on the road, if I am going slower I have more time to react – and so do the other road users.

Then there’s the question of consequences. Higher speed always means more severe consequences.

Of course it’s a factor. I’ve never yet seen two completely stationary objects collide. Also agree that slower does mean more time and lower consequences. I guess the never ending debate is due to the level of acceptable risk which will be different for all people. No point trying to say its unacceptable, if it’s acceptable to the people doing it, it’ll continue to happen.

Molgrips, I love your dogged determination when it comes to these motoring discussions, however these are the official statistics, calculated by someone far more qualified than us.

Of course speed is a factor in every accident – since cars actually have to move for people to get places. However the stats clearly say that exceeding the speed limit is a contributing factor in just 5.2% of all accidents. This means that for the other 94.8% of accidents, these would have occurred whether or not the car was speeding – breaking the speed limit was not a factor in the accident.

If you really want to keep danger off the roads then according to the statistics you’d be far better switching your argument to ensure that everyone should take a compulsory eye test every year, rather than targeting speeders.

Now that this point has been proved once and for all, hopefully STW can now end the war on the speeder (and those who dare to drive faster, overtake, or own a better car than the ‘self righteous’ among us), and instead sharpen up the pitchforks in preparation to prod those drivers who pay little attention, have little awareness, and show poor levels of driver skill.

I guess the never ending debate is due to the level of acceptable risk which will be different for all people. No point trying to say its unacceptable, if it’s acceptable to the people doing it, it’ll continue to happen.

Yep. There seems to be a consensus speed which most people are expecting and drive at – plus or minus 5mph really. Having a fast car may make this seem slow, so you may be tempted to drive faster. Of course, you can be tempted to drive faster in any car for a variety of reasons.

However my original objection was to people owning fast cars and pushing them hard on public roads. This means you’re going far quicker than everyone else, and it’s dangerous – there is too much outside your control on a public road.

If however you want your S3 and you want to drive it sensibly then that’s fine and dandy*

* actually no it’s not, cos it’s a waste of fuel and needless pollution.

This means that for the other 94.8% of accidents, these would have occurred whether or not the car was speeding

I don’t think it does, necessarily. The wording’s not clear, which is why I questioned it.

Edukator – Troll
Failing to look properly is also a “people in a hurry” issue. In fact speed is an issue in the majority of causes in your link:

Failed to look properly 35%
Failed to judge other persons’s path or speed 18.9%
Careless, reckless or in a hurry 16.2%
Loss of control 14.7%
Poor turn or manoeuvre 14.1%
Travelling too fast for the conditions 10.2%
Slippery road due to weather 10.1%
Pedestrian failed to look properly 7.2%
Sudden braking 7.2%
Following too close 6.7%

Any list like that that fails to put drink driving near the top is well off the mark when there are still 300 drink driving deaths a year..

POSTED 14 MINUTES AGO # REPORT-POST

And with that you’ve proved that you’re unarguable with. Take data like that, assume massively that the data is incorrect and that you know more than the investigators of each accident, and then misunderstand what the data was supporting (number of ACCIDENTS, not DEATHS). Now pointless, I simply don’t believe even you believe what you’re posting. You’re not that thick. I’m out.

Oh, with the exception to say to Molgrips, my P7 comment was also aimed at Edukator who said that the energy saver would result in lower braking performance. Just pointing out that even ex RAC rally champions don’t know all there is to know about cars.

…and joining back in…

instead sharpen up the pitchforks in preparation to prod those drivers who pay little attention, have little awareness, and show poor levels of driver skill.

Yeah, because this never happens on STW.

sharpen up the pitchforks in preparation to prod those drivers who pay little attention, have little awareness, and show poor levels of driver skill.

No-one’s trying to defend those forms of bad driving though.

I’m not an ex-RAC rally champion, there are other forms of motorsport. The best I managed in a rally car was a class win on the Welsh. And I’m pleased to hear that there is now a low rolling resistance tyre that also grips well. Progress.

The brand of tyre fitted to the S3 isn’t stated in Audi’s on-line catalogue or in any of the on-line tests I’ve found. However, the comments in this one have just raised a smile. Feel free to rubbish it, I didn’t write it.

Any list like that that fails to put drink driving near the top is well off the mark when there are still 300 drink driving deaths a year..

Christ. Is there really? God that’s really depressing.

And I’m pleased to hear that there is now a low rolling resistance tyre that also grips well. Progress.

We’ve got (I think, it’s dark now, I’m not going to look) Goodyear Efficient Grip tyres on our car and I’m pretty impressed with them. Lots nicer in use than the normal (rock hard) Michelins I had on the front before, giving better ride and wet grip, whilst it seems they’ll last far longer at the same time. They’re meant to be low rolling resistance tyres but despite tracking every tank of fuel for 40-odd thousand miles I can’t detect any difference in fuel consumption. I’ll buy them again though, because they’re cheaper and last longer whilst being better tyres.
That said, the differences between tyres on cars are, IMO, marginal.
I’ve only had one set on a bike (Bridgestone BT45s) that I felt were much worse than anything else too. Most stuff is pretty evenly matched otherwise as far as I can tell. The Bridgestone BT023s on the Ducati feel pretty much identical to the Michelin Poilot Road 2s on my Honda. Which is odd as the bikes are very different. I’ll try Pilot Road 4s next time as they should last a lot longer, and that matters at £200 ish a pair. I think the current rear should do 8000 miles, so I’m hoping the newer tyre should get nearer 10,000

Just read Edukators link & the part that intrigues me is:

A Haldex four wheel drive Quattro system transmits power to the road

I always thought that the ‘Haldex’ & the ‘Quattro’ four wheel drive systems were two different things. Haldex: 2WD normally & the 4WD as & when the driving conditions demand. Quattro: Permanent 4WD with 50/50 front/rear split drive.

I stand to be corrected though.

That said, the differences between tyres on cars are, IMO, marginal.

On the Prius I was never able to detect much difference, if there was one it was lost in the general noise – we don’t do the same journeys all the time. However both the Nokian WR G2 winters and Nokian H summers on the Passat were noticeably better on fuel than the Dunlop SP Sport they replaced. 2-3mpg easily.

Incidentally in the Prius (which rolls very well) there’s a huge difference between the winters and summers which is noticeable when you are driving, never mind at the fuel pump. For some reason the winters we have for it are very draggy – unlike the Passat ones which are as good as the summers on fuel.

Christ. Is there really? God that’s really depressing.

I’m surprised you are surprised!? What 2 things in this country are a danger to life yet are talked about and indulged without social stigma? And in fact if you don’t indulge you are not an “alpha male” and therefore at risk of polluting the gene pool with gayness?
That’s right, getting shitfaced and driving like a cock in your motor car.
This is GREAT BRITAIN not some namby pamby poofter country that ran away in the war who’s now subjugated population cycle everywhere because they are not man enough.

*please no homophobe accusations this post is full of irony yet sadly an underlying truth about out of date attitudes in this country.

molgrips – Member

Speed is a factor in every accident, of course it is. It may not be the most prominent cause in most of them, but it’s always a factor. WHATEVER I do on the road, if I am going slower I have more time to react – and so do the other road users.

Yup. So however fast you’re going, you should always go slower. Or, not. You’ve done a little reduction ad absurdum to yourself there.

Here’s another:

molgrips – Member

actually no it’s not, cos it’s a waste of fuel and needless pollution.

Driving anything but the most efficient car in the world, at its most efficient pace, is a waste of fuel. Doing any nonessential driving- which lets be honest, is most of it- is needless pollution. Mine does 55mpg in most conditions, but there’s other cars that’ll beat it, so by the same logic it’s not fine and dandy for me to drive it.

So however fast you’re going, you should always go slower. Or, not. You’ve done a little reduction ad absurdum to yourself there.

Not really, you did that. I never said drive as slowly as you can. If you bother to read back I said drive at the generally agreed sensible pace that most people seem to have agreed upon. Not significantly faster.

Here’s another:

From you, yes. My comment was a throwaway line referring to another debate we could have on another thread. But I believe most things that could have been said on that already have been.

Gary C

You are correct the Haldex system is a viscous coupling where as the Quattro system as fitted to real quattros, ( the old ones) was a direct differential similar to subarus etc.
Used to own the mk1 S3 great car

molgrips – Member

If you bother to read back I said drive at the generally agreed sensible pace that most people seem to have agreed upon.

Regardless of vehicle and driver. You’re not actually making a safety argument at all, despite dressing it up in safety language. Instead you’ve made controlling speed the end in itself, rather than the means to an end, and you’ve ended up divorcing that from safety. Which is where i came in, funnily enough.

molgrips – Member

I never said drive as slowly as you can.

No, you made an argument for doing so, then tried to use it as an argument for driving at an arbitrary speed. Then you did the same with fuel economy.

I am making a safety argument, you just appear not to be following it!

Likewise, if I send a text message or look for a CD and crash, then that’s the cause of the accident. But if I’d been going slower perhaps I’d have covered less ground in the time I’d had my eyes off the road, and I’d have noticed sooner that I was veering out of my lane.

Now I know you’re trolling. The person doing over the speed limit but not changing his CD or sending a text message would be far less likely to have the accident in the first place. Not least, because they’re concentrating on driving, not what time they’re meeting their mate in the pub.

But, of course, speed kills, mmmkay 🙄

I am making a safety argument, you just appear not to be following it!

No Molgrips, everyone is governed by their own limitations whether high or low, yet you are suggesting that everyone should do as you do, to drive a slow and unexciting car, driven to your limitation, to your perceived level of risk, to your level of acceptable CO2 emissions, but why should they?

Why should this be so important as you suggest when exceeding the speed limit is a contributary factor in just 5.2% of accidents. When buying an 12-8 year old RS4 that’s already been manufactured is now far less poluting than buying a new Toyota Prius that still needs to be manufactured.

There are plenty of serious accidents and collisions on ski slopes, surprise surprise, the majority I suspect down to poor observation, poor judgement skills of other traffic or difficult slope conditions, but do you also believe that speed limits or forcing everyone to ski at roughly the same speed should apply here too? Should the speed of expert skiers on fast, capable carving skis be reduced to comply with the lowest common denominator?

I understand that it’s important that deaths and injuries be cut wherever possible, however wrapping people up in cotton wool and forcing them to conform to everyone else as you are suggesting (under a thinly veiled anti ‘any one doing any better than me’ campaign) means that people may not be dying, true, but they are also not able to live and enjoy life too.

Don’t forget that the only certainty in life is death – it will get us all at some point, so there’s no need to be scared of the inevitable and you may as well enjoy life whilst you’re here.

**** yeah, lets make the roads into race tracks it’ll be carnage but lots of tiny cocked men will have fun….

**** yeah, lets make the roads into race tracks it’ll be carnage but lots of tiny cocked men will have fun….

Haha, thanks for your concern Agagallis but I’ve been told by many ladies, on many occasions that my member is one of the bigger ones that they have experienced 😉 Not quite sure how this relates to my driving style or choice of vehicle though? If you could enlighten me though then that would be great. Perhaps we could compare? Show and tell?

I’ve been told by many ladies, on many occasions that my member is one of the bigger ones that they have experienced

I get the feeling from reading your posts that you probably asked them the question first.

This is GREAT BRITAIN not some namby pamby poofter country that ran away in the war who’s now subjugated population cycle everywhere because they are not man enough.

I’ve often wondered why the people of the Netherlands cycle everywhere but i think you’ve just nailed it, thankyou!

Must try harder to get my point across, seems like none of you speedyheads are getting it. I guess you need it spelling out.

Oh, also I read and autocar test the other day about braking distance test for tyres. The winner was the Perelli P7 Centerato (sp) which is their energy saver.

These tests seem dubious to me – I have swapped out Pirelli P7 and P-ZeroNeros a couple of times now as they felt dodgy on wet/slightly wet roads, and the Goodyears and Dunlops that have replaced them have been far superior. The highly rated Bridgestones I tried as well didn’t seem much cop.

Must try harder to get my point across, seems like none of you speedyheads are getting it. I guess you need it spelling out.

Do go on. Will it involve the words “queue”, “overtake”, “pushing in”, and “casting aspersions about my driving ability” at any point?

its a sign of a poor debate when someone constantly has to refer back to a previous debate. You really do come across as a spoilt child zokes.

You really do come across as a spoilt child zokes.

Sorry, am I oppressing you?

I’m yet to see one sentence of constructive debate from you here, or on your other pet thread of vitriol at the moment. Has the rugby finished then?

With 800hp this S3 must be really safe….

I’m yet to see one sentence of constructive debate from you here, or on your other pet thread of vitriol at the moment. Has the rugby finished then?

that’s just because your childish little brain cant cope with it. Do you know what vitriol means?

Do you know what vitriol means?

Yes, it has two meanings:

1) Archaic name for sulphuric acid, which isn’t really relevant here, and;

2) Bitter criticism or malice, which accurately describes a lot of your postings on this thread, and the one about the royals.

As a teacher, I would have thought you would know that…

Girlfight!!!!!

I actually didn’t know it was the name for sulphuric acid thanks for showing me you can use google

I actually didn’t know it was the name for sulphuric acid thanks for showing me you can use google

I also listened at school. Good job you don’t…. Oh, hang on, Sorry…

Bitter criticism or malice, which accurately describes a lot of your postings on this thread, and the one about the royals.

you should report them to the mods when you find them

Well, at least one of them’s been deleted…

your obsession is paying off then, one post obviously meant “a lot” when your were at school.

I saw all these pages and thought Wow….how much can be written about an Audi S3 and then quickly realised it’s reverted to the typical STW car/speed/ handbags thread!

#Yawns#