Not if you drive properly there isn’t. Leaving proper distance between vehicles and remaining observant.

Not if you drive properly there isn’t. Leaving proper distance between vehicles and remaining observant.

Not always the option though is there – leave a safe gap infront and some muppet instantly fills it, so drop back and same again happens.

If I’m driving at 100+ and there’s traffic ahead then it’s really easy to maintain an good safety margin by slowing down to pass this then speed up once road is clear again.

RE: Leaving / Joining Motorway – I agree. It increases risk to join slowly, or slow way before slip.

However that is a limited example of where speed *benefits* safety – except it is not speed, it is *matching* speed to flow of traffic.

I doubt ‘making progress’ near village or on single carriageway A-roads has much of a benefit to overall safety in the way the Motorway example does.

If I’m driving at 100+ and there’s traffic ahead then it’s really easy to maintain an good safety margin by slowing down to pass this then speed up once road is clear again.

you’re awesome.

agent007 aka surf-mat?

In the interests of keeping it going…

Also, do people really join/leave motorways at 70mph?

Yes.

I live (and drive) in the SE so most of my experience is M25, M3, M4 and M40 all of which tend to have artics using the inside lane. I thought these were restricted to 52mph, so joining around that speed would be sensible no?

Like ANY driving, speed to suit the conditions, get up to 70, see a lorry and no gap in front, slow down. Commonbleedinsense, I believe it’s called.

Lived in Aldershot, short journey to M3 motorway…blast to M25 junction…another motorway blast on M25 to M1 junction, blast up M1 to Milton Keynes exit…short journey to sister’s house…it was actually dead easy and I reckon I could’ve done it faster if properly unscrewed my head.

Bikes at the time were a 1996 Kawasaki ZX7R then latterly a brand new (for the time) Kawasaki ZX6R….both would easily hit indicated 150mph+ speeds with more to come before I would bottle it.

Believe it or don’t, makes no odds to me….was just countering the poster who ludicrously tried to claim that going fast doesn’t get you anywhere quicker.
Re. the other points in my post for Edukator, they are car based examples, I haven’t had a road bike for a few years now.

Like ANY driving, speed to suit the conditions, get up to 70, see a lorry and no gap in front, slow down. Commonbleedinsense, I believe it’s called.

So, razz it up/down the slip road (not sure if we’re talking grade separations here) to 70mph, see a lorry, slow down and filter into the line?

What’s the point in razzing it? Surely there aren’t that many slip roads that are 500m long too make it worth zooming up to that speed then slowing down?

I don’t know maybe my experience doesn’t match yours, but it’s very rare I join a motorway that doesn’t have a lot of traffic on it.

Ultimately I suppose it’s more about the speed differential, rather than absolute speed. Of course, when you hitting potholes on poorly maintained motorways I’d rather do it at 70mph than at 100mph anyway!

Peyote

I don’t know maybe my experience doesn’t match yours, but it’s very rare I join a motorway that doesn’t have a lot of traffic on it.

Define a lot?

Ultimately I suppose it’s more about the speed differential, rather than absolute speed.

Exactly. Much easier to merge safely if your speed matches that of the traffic you are joining. So about 85mph.

Certainly bull on the 100mph average then. Its only just over 70 miles. Now to do that in an hour is possible assuming a lot of time spent at 120 mph to make up for the time spent in speed limits

…hey, it’s dangerous out there on the roads. I keep this danger to a minimum by spending as little time on them as possible, by doing the A to B stuff as fast as possible. I have points to prove this, and we all know what points mean?

I don’t know maybe my experience doesn’t match yours

Sounds like it, but I think you missed the : Commonbleedinsense bit, which is the crucial thing.

merge safely if your speed matches that of the traffic you are joining. So about 85mph. .. in the slow lane? Or are you one of those that has to jump straight across to lane 3? 😉

Define a lot?

Well, I’m not going to start going off on AADT, or peak periods or stuff like that. I have to do enough of that in my job! Suffice to say typically I need to filter into a row of traffic travelling around 50 odd mph. I really can’t remember the last time I had free reign to choose my own speed.

Sounds like it, but I think you missed the : Commonbleedinsense bit

Nope, I chose to ignore it. It’s so often used to justify stuff that isn’t justifiable on closer inspection (that wasn’t a dig, just one of my own bugbears).

Bikes at the time were a 1996 Kawasaki ZX7R then latterly a brand new (for the time) Kawasaki ZX6R….both would easily hit indicated 150mph+ speeds with more to come before I would bottle it.[/I]

Ah, slow ones.

zx9r c1 😀

If we’re Willy waving, last two bikes were an R1 and a GSXR-750….both of which I’m sure would decimate an old, heavy Kwakker 900cc….even my Gixxer 750, which I’m convinced was the perfect blend of weight, power and handling for the road and put up a genuine 170mph+ as tested so many times by various mags, internet sites etc.

Merging onto a 70mph motorway stuck behind someone doing 40 is my favouritest thing ever. Totally safe. If it happens I’ll drop right back to give myself a big gap, then use that gap to get up to the speed of the traffic flow before merging.

So, razz it up/down the slip road (not sure if we’re talking grade separations here) to 70mph, see a lorry, slow down and filter into the line?

What’s the point in razzing it? Surely there aren’t that many slip roads that are 500m long too make it worth zooming up to that speed then slowing down?

Wind up to 70mph, and start assessing road conditions as soon as you can see the main carriageway so you can adjust accordingly. Obviously depends on the sliproad but you usually have quite a lot of visibility before you actually have to merge (y’know, if you actually look rather than fixating on the taillights in front of you). It’s a lot easier in most cars to go from 70 to 50 than it is from 50 to 70. Often you’ll find you’re alongside another vehicle doing the same speed, so you’ve got plenty of leeway to slow down for a moment so you can pull out behind it.

Aside from people who only ever see perma-clogged motorways like the M25 at commuter times and are excused as they know nothing else, I can’t believe I’m having to explain this stuff. There really should be a motorway section on the driving test.

Round Nottinghamshire the trick seems to be to reduce the speed limit for no reason and then get the speed cameras out in force.

Some of the examples are single carriageway roads reduced from NSL to 40 for no reason. There isnt even a building within a mile let alone anything else, the speed limit hadnt changed in 20 years in either case. It all just seems to be about raising revenue.

It’s so often used to justify stuff that isn’t justifiable on closer inspection

It wsan’t to justify the bit I typed. It was in addition to it to save having to explain a load like what cougar just dun. 🙄
There ain’t enough commonbleedinsense on the forum let alone on the roads!

Thanks for the explanation Cougar, it wasn’t necessary though!

Like I said Dez, it wasn’t a dig…

There ain’t enough commonbleedinsense on the forum let alone on the roads!

Indeed. And this is why we have to have speed limits.

My OH is learning to ride a bike (well, a beast of a scooter) at the moment. I’ve told her, the single most important skill on the roads is awareness. If you’re looking around you, scanning, seeking, thinking ahead, anticipating what potential erratic stupidity might occur next, reading the road conditions, looking ahead, then anything else is gravy. If everyone did this, we wouldn’t have collisions.

The problem is that we’re not in an ideal world. Almost 50% of the population are of below average intelligence. So we have to design roads to work both for competent drivers and for shitwits. I don’t envy that task, frankly.

“Speed kills” is an easy (and inefficient) solution to a complex problem. In the event of a collision speed absolutely increases the severity of the outcome of course, but if people left adequate braking distances for the conditions of the traffic and of the road and looked where they were bloody going rather than fannying about on Facebook or eating a bowl of cereal then speed would make very little difference to the incidence of collisions.

Surely it should be readily apparent that rather than focusing all our efforts on “oh, you’ve done 45 in a 40 zone despite it actually being perfectly safe, here’s a £100 fine and three points,” our time would be better spent teaching people how to drive in a straight line without ****ing hitting anything in the first place?

Thanks for the explanation Cougar, it wasn’t necessary though!

Well, you did ask! (-:

Aside from people who only ever see perma-clogged motorways like the M25 at commuter times and are excused as they know nothing else, I can’t believe I’m having to explain this stuff. There really should be a motorway section on the driving test.

I agree 100 % but unfortunately testing on Motorways is very unlikely to happen under the current driving test.

Simply as some parts of the U.K. don’t have Motorways and the test has to be a ” level playing field ” nation wide. I’ve put level playing field in quotes as the Test is definatly not a level playing field now anyway. Some test centres have routes that don’t take the candidate over 30 mph, other test centres go straight out onto 70 mph Dual Carraigeways.

Even on my instructor test, I only went 1 junction on a motorway.

Surely it should be readily apparent that rather than focusing all our efforts on “oh, you’ve done 45 in a 40 zone despite it actually being perfectly safe, here’s a £100 fine and three points,” our time would be better spent teaching people how to drive in a straight line without ****ing hitting anything in the first place?

Are all our efforts focused on speed reduction though? Or is it just the one aspect that gets peoples backs up*?

There’s lots of other road safety initiatives going on, as well as road efficiency projects. Reducing speed limits/reducing speeding (two separate things) are just another tool in the box.

*Incidentally taking road space for cycle lanes seems to come with similar ire from our motorist kin in a lot of urban areas.

I think this thread might start going places now that the parking racist thread got shut, thanks to some choice phrasing by agent007.

Peyote – anything governments do to try to control the behaviour of car drivers, make them pay their way or to make them stick to the law is immediately greeted by a huge backlash with ” war on motorist” headlines in the Daily Wail etc. So governments shy away from doing anything.

A car driver obeying the highway code is a very rare thing indeed. Even the best most considerate driver I have been with still didn’t get it all right.

What broomstick for speeding ?

I think this thread might start going places now that the parking racist thread got shut, thanks to some choice phrasing by agent007.

Yet It seems that I was the one who had breached rules

unfortunately testing on Motorways is very unlikely to happen under the current driving test.

Testing, sure, but that doesn’t prevent teaching if only in theory.

Are all our efforts focused on speed reduction though?

“All,” maybe not, but it’s surely the most prominent.

anything governments do to try to control the behaviour of car drivers, make them pay their way or to make them stick to the law is immediately greeted by a huge backlash with ” war on motorist” headlines in the Daily Wail etc. So governments shy away from doing anything.

That may be part of it, but I’d hazard that the main reason is it’s cheap and easy. Policing (as a random example) mobile phone usage requires, well, policing, and that’s expensive. Speed is easy, slap up a camera and wait for the money to come rolling in.

To sort out this mess (and many others) we need bobbies on the beat, patrol cars on the roads, who can make sensible decisions and spot dangers. And no-one wants to pay for that.

no-one wants to pay for that.

We could increase speeding fines ten-fold. That should generate some extra income.

We could increase speeding fines ten-fold. That should generate some extra income.

Going by the lengths people go to avoid bans it more points that are needed not bigger fines.

So make any speeding offence 6pts.

Abolish all special pleading/defences. If your job depends on your licence don’t get caught speeding.

The biggest change I’ve seen in a person’s driving was when a speeding/tailgating colleague got a speeding ticket and a mobile phone ticket in the same month. The realisation that she was one similar month away from a ban had her driving at the speed limit without a phone.

The rarity of this can be judged by the way I heard a defence lawyer told his client he’d need to “drive like an angel” for the next 3 years after getting his 3rd 3pts.

Going by the lengths people go to avoid bans it more points that are needed not bigger fines.

I’d agree with that too but I was suggesting a way to afford more policing. Fines shoukd be proportionate to wealth too.

£1000 fines are never going to happen. For an offence causing potential danger? People get fined far less than that when their bad driving has actually seriously injured or killed someone.

He ran over and killed 78-year-old Sylvia Roach after mounting the pavement as she walked a friend’s dog along Guildford Road in March, the court heard.

Farooqi was fined £560 and had six penalty points added to his licence which already carried six points for separate speeding offences.

http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/local-news/anger-mounting-over-killer-driver-4836818

Peyote – anything governments do to try to control the behaviour of car drivers, make them pay their way or to make them stick to the law is immediately greeted by a huge backlash with ” war on motorist” headlines in the Daily Wail etc. So governments shy away from doing anything.

All true I’m afraid TJ. The motor lobby is a powerful force and it’s backed up by a significant (majority) population of the country, so anything that penalises them is frowned on. “There but for the grace of god” and all that.

Only when we appreciate the negative impact of motoring (KSIs, pollution, social segregation etc.) fully will we start to recognise the responsibility associated with it and then start to control the negative aspects properly.

Behaviour modifcation with points worse. I collected 6 last summer. ( go onhave a good laugh at me) any more and no more hire cars for me. so no more speeding either. Not even an MPH

Both speeding tickets unfortunate but no one but myself to blame. My foot on the pedal

I’d go for immediate bans for mobile usage – just a 3 month, Immediate jail for drink drivers ( maybe only if significantly over the limit?)- no excuse. 3 pts for illegal parking, 4 for speeding

More significantly I would leke to see much more eforcement – a dedicated traffic police with it being cost neutral IE the money made in fines pays for the cops. Fines should be much bigger say £250 for speeding or if you cant pay you can accept a ban instead or have your car crushed

both of which I’m sure would decimate an old, heavy Kwakker 900cc….[/I]

It wasn’t a B model.

About 1 min in, all you speed haterz ignore the vid 🙂

Sounds like it, but I think you missed the : Commonbleedinsense bit
Nope, I chose to ignore it. It’s so often used to justify stuff that isn’t justifiable on closer inspection (that wasn’t a dig, just one of my own bugbears).

Interesting, I’m pretty convinced there’s no such thing as ‘common sense’. You only ever seem to hear people complain that others don’t have common sense from people in my experience, who have a very narrow way of thinking.

@Cougar:

, but if people left adequate braking distances for the conditions of the traffic and of the road and looked where they were bloody going rather than fannying about on Facebook or eating a bowl of cereal then speed would make very little difference to the incidence of collisions.

A lot of ifs, but what do you base this on?

So make any speeding offence 6pts.

And what’s the point in that? A demonstration that one needs one’s car to earn a living and they can build up a healthy total.

A lot of ifs, but what do you base this on?

I managed a good 200 miles on the motorway yesterday at technically illegal speed with hardly a touch on the brake. The cars in front were, at times, braking every couple of seconds as the traffic concertinaed. I’d be basing my agreement with cougar on experience.

I’d be basing my agreement with cougar on experience.

Anecdotal evidence, nothing better?

Anecdotal evidence, nothing better?

Yep, and I can’t be arsed playing citation Top Trumps. My experience is extensive though and of more value than yours.
The second thing is that I don’t actually care for your opinion on the matter either.