I had a woman try this on with me at a large roundabout and am firmly in the camp that anyone could be sucked in.

. . . if you’re not paying attention.

Seriously, it’s very unlikely (not saying impossible), but very unlikely that anyone could get taken in by this if they’re paying attention and leaving sufficient room to the vehicle infront. I pay just as much attention to the rear view mirrors when I’m driving as whats infront or to the side of me. That way if something like this happens I’ll know exactly where other vehicles are around me and can take appropriate avoiding action, whether that’s braking, swerving, or accelerating sharply as second nature and without even thinking about it – the plan has been thought about already. If you’re not confident you could avoid this sort of situation, then I’m sorry but you should really consider taking some more training.

Now’t wrong with men appreciating the female form on page 3 by looking at some boobies. It’s what god intended for havens sake! You people celebrating the end of Page 3 really sound like you have some major hang ups in life. If you don’t like page 3 , don’t buy the Sun – simple 😉

Q5 is a great car..

to deal drugs from, or if you’re a wanna be WAG but cant quite stretch to a proper Range Rover 😉

I enjoy driving all too much, which is why I drive a Passat. Think about it.

So driving a car such as a Passat is the only way to control your animal urges not to go for the 5 car overtake? A self enforced neutering of the urge to make progress? Understand now, and how that must make watching the actions of those selfish t**ssers indulging in the antisocial behaviour of actually wanting to get somewhere (by overtaking safely) even harder to swallow.

Bugger, and I thought this thread (before I opened it) was about the unfortunate end of car number 6 in a 6 car overtake!

If I keep it for 20 years and it only shits its pants once, I’ll be happy. It’s worth it for the driving pleasure.

Driving pleasure, Passat???? That’s the first time I’ve ever heard that mentioned before in one statement 😀 Still, I guess if you don’t actually enjoy driving then the Passat is the perfect vehicle since it insulates you so well from the sensation of actually driving, which might then make it enjoyable I suppose.

Most fun car I drove recently was a ridiculously slow 3cyl Clio. Good handling and ride, naff all power meant on country roads I thrashed its nuts off (it was hired) to barely break 50mph. I’d have had to back off completely in the Passat.

Did you manage to pull of an overtake in it?

NO mainstream manufacturers…thems the rules.

Oh right, so looks like a supercar, performs like a supercar, sounds like a supercar, expensive as a supercar, more exclusive than lots of other supercars, but according to your rules, not a supercar 🙄

Wouldn’t class an NSX as a supercar, too sensible looking and a v6… don’t think so.

Okay so all those motoring journalists, magazines, TV appearances, etc, etc who’ve been calling describing the NSX as a ‘Supercar’ for years are wrong then? Are Honda perhaps breaking advertising standards by describing it themselves as a Supercar?

Honda badge on it, it just simply won’t do…If your johnny in the street can have a Honda….

So the fact that Honda have an F1 pedigree second to none doesn’t count then? Or that a Honda NSX was in the supercar parade at Goodwood FOS a few years back? Or the fact that Lamborghini has very little motorsport pedigree and also makes tractors?

Looks like a Supercar to me[/url]

I think you could define a supercar as simply:

2 seats (Maclaren F1 excepted).
Engine to the middle or rear of car.
Very expensive.
Very fast.
Radical looking.
Low, wide, impractical, and noisy.
Use of advanced and/or motor race technology.

Judging by this criteria, the Audi R8, Honda NSX, Ford GT40 are all supercars. The Ferrari 550, Jaguar XK8, Aston Martin DB9 etc are classed as GT cars.

For anyone saying that Supercars can’t be made by mainstream manufacturers let me just say that Ferrari is owned and controlled by Fiat, and Lamborghini and Bugatti are owned by the VAG group. Honda also has a fantastic pedigree in motorsport and F1, as does Ford, as does Audi.

Riding mate of mine has one, shat it’s gearbox 2 months after her bought it and cost him 3 grand to fix – perhaps they’re supercars after all

Sounds unlucky. Better than loosing 3-4 grand in depreciation during the first year of ownership on say a new Mondeo or Passat though.

Apart from the straight-line grunt, they’re actually pretty dull to drive compared to even modest sportscars.

Oh I don’t know, have driven one and it’s docile when you’re not in the mood and a raging animal when you are. Does understeer a little but nothing that can’t be easily sorted with a few suspension tweaks. Appreciate not quite as lively as a TVR or other RWD stuff, but it’s unlikely to send you heading for the undergrowth at the merest hint of rain. You couldn’t use most super cars every day now could you?

A friend of mine owned a TVR Chimera and a Mini Cooper S. The TVR was his dream car, but which did he enjoy driving most – yep, the Cooper S as the performance was far more useable day to day.

Would far rather have THIS than a Ferrari or any other Supercar, Ferrari performance with room for 2-3 bikes in the back. In fact I’d rather have one of these over almost any other car. Absolute bargain too, and £14k buys you a good one.

The definition of a Supercar changes as things progress. 50 years ago, 6 secs to 60mph and 150mph was enough to gain entry to the Supercar club. Now there’s practical family cars than can match those speeds.

Careful now though boys, the Fun Police will be along no doubt any time soon to say that all you need to get from A to B is a Diesel Passat and that to enjoy driving a powerful car ‘briskly’ on the road is more irresponsible, dangerous and unpredictable than encouraging a small child to prod a sleeping leopard with a pointy stick!

Edukator competing a couple of years back 😉

Quite possible, several hundred per weekend when competing, obviously not on the public road. Not many in recent years. “Subjective” just means that I didn’t get out and measure the black lines each time I braked.

Just when I thought it couldn’t get better it does! Competing? Black lines? Surely you know that the most effective way to brake with maximum force (whether competing or not) isn’t to induce a skid?

Sorry I’ll stop now, as don’t think you or I can take any more 😆

My own subjective experience confirms the Autoplus results

Haha, it gets better – there’s nothing SUBJECTIVE about vehicle stopping distances. Sounds like you must have performed far more emergency stops than me in your driving career and in far more types of vehicles? In nearly 20 years since passing my test and probably 500,000 miles driven I’ve yet to perform a true emergency stop on UK roads where I’ve needed to use 100% braking. Guess I’m just leaving too much space between me and the car infront? Knew I was doing something wrong!

Yup, a grippy track for the performance cars but not the Panda.

Nice try but nope I’m afraid not, these are Autocar and Auto Express tests performed in the UK and these two magazines are known to be pretty consistent in their testing standards. Still, you go ahead and believe what you like 🙄

That Grande Picasso you quote does have a good stopping distance from 70-0 (due to it’s amazing lightweight construction when compared against its peers). The heavier VW and Renault people carriers of similar spec both have 70-0 stopping distances of 56m plus. There’s always the odd low performance vehicle you can find that has an amazing set of brakes and no doubt you’ve used this to skew the trend to win your argument. Vast majority of time though the higher performance the vehicle, the better it’s brakes.

If you Google hard enough perhaps there’s an obscure Albanian vehicle braking test you can dig up somewhere to prove your point?

Same road, same conditions those cars you quote can’t beat boring cars by anything like that. The amazing figures often come from American tests performed on high-grip racing circuits.

Okay a very quick google of some 70-0mph distances for you:

Nissan GTR (532hp), 70-0 in a distance of 40.9m
Lotus Elise (190hp), 70-0 in a distance of 41.8m
BMW 135M (320hp), 70-0 in a distance of 45.9m
Toyota Gt86 (197hp), 70-0 in a distance of 48.8m
Renault Megane 2009 (138hp), 70-0 in a distance of 53.7m
Fiat Panda (60hp), 70-0 in a distance of 56.1m

All Autocar or Auto Express data performed in the UK on a dry surface. This is a single stop only from cold. If there was any residual heat in the brakes from previous use (as per normal road driving) then it’s likely that the results would show a greater variation with the braking distances of the higher performing cars remaining fairly stable, but the lower performing cars braking distances increasing as their braking systems are more prone to fade with as they can’t dissipate heat as effectively.

The basic fact though even with the single stop test is that in the Nissan GTR performing an emergency stop you’d be stationary from 70mph in 40.9m. At a distance of 40.9m in the Megane you’d still be traveling at 35mph and the Panda would still be travelling at 40mph!

Alarming, and food for thought.

No, it’s a fact. The 60-0 stopping distance for most average cars is about 140ft. Something like a Porsche Boxster or a WRX STI is about 112ft. A Nissan GTR 99ft. Some serious exotica can do it in around 90ft.

Quite, and the difference is even more pronounced in real world scenarios, e.g. say braking from 80mph to 40mph.

okay whatever, I must be a shit driver then. Can live with that.

Fair enough, I couldn’t.

I hope I’m never riding my bike (remember those) on the road while some of you are trying to overtake 5 cars on the same stretch.

For what reason? We have eyes!

It’s all about risk and exposure. If you try something a bit risky enough times eventually you will run out of luck.

Sorry but it’s got nothing to do with ‘risk’ or ‘luck’. If you genuinely believe this then you can’t be a very perceptive or proactive driver?

A well planned overtake should keep the risks to an absolute minimum and should not require any degree of ‘luck’ to perform in perfect safety. Okay you could argue that you don’t have to overtake do you, but this is the real world we live in, not some driving utopia where everyone is happy to drive to the lowest common denominator.

Fast cars are not just about driving quickly. Any decent fast car even when traveling slowly will have better steering feel, better balance and better responsiveness. It will also feel more special and lets face it, not everyone in life is satisfied with mediocrity, driving the same jelly mould car as every other person or being sensible all the time. Why would you settle for eating basic porridge all your life when you can add some honey and fruit to make it taste so much better?

Driving fast is more dangerous than driving sensibly, and you can do it in any car. Fast cars are for driving fast. If you’re not going to drive fast don’t buy a fast car. If you are, then it’s dangerous so don’t. Therefore you don’t need a fast car.

Even if you don’t drive fast, a more capable car is still safer at the slower speed you’re driving at than a less capable car.

Where I live, away from the congested south, plenty of places where a 5 car overtake is both frequently possible and safe. If another driver in the queue ahead pulls out unexpectedly I’m ready for that and will overtake appropriately with this in mind from the outset. Sometimes this means overtaking slower initially, giving the vehicles ahead more room and more a chance to see me, and then when alongside the final vehicle in the queue (often a truck which others won’t overtake) giving it more power to get back on to the correct side of the road more quickly.

In a less powerful car you don’t have these options which means that you frequently see rushed, badly thought through overtakes with little margin for error performed by drivers in TDi repmobiles etc. With a powerful car you have much more time to access the situation correctly whilst still performing the same overtake in less time and in a more relaxed fashion, with a greater margin of safety than you can in an averagely powered car.

Can’t see anything wrong with that?

He claims 100% safety whilst doing it? That’s utter naivety speaking. No one can be so cocksure, no one has any idea whatsoever what will happen in the 10 seconds (say) or so it takes from committing to overtaking the 5 vehicles in front of you to pulling back in onto the correct side of the road. No idea.

Why is that naive, yes things can happen, the situation in front of you can change but with enough forward planning and observation then (barring a meteorite storm) you can predict all of these things. These are skills that an Advanced driving course can help you with. If you expect and allow for the unexpected then even overtaking 5 cars can be completely safe (or just as safe as any other driving situation – maybe 100% was the wrong choice of phrase).

Going back to fast cars, when overtaking having over 300hp on tap means that I can use say 80% power and still overtake briskly, yet if the situation changes infront then I still have a further 20% to get me out of trouble (say in Educators example if someone making progress comes round a corner in the opposite direction ahead – although when planning an overtake you should have already considered this possibility and already made allowances). You just don’t have those reserves of power or those options available in your average Eurobox.

You can try and justify the fallacy that slow cars are safer all you want but the fact is, a car that accelerates, brakes and handles better will be safer at any given speed or in any given road situation when compared with a lesser model. It’s low standards of driving that are the problem, not the cars themselves and in the hands of someone who’s unskilled, a 1 litre city car has just the same potential to cause damage and injury as a high powered sports car, perhaps more potential if it’s going to be driven at higher speeds since a lesser car will have poor reserves of safety when it comes to handling, braking, acceleration etc.

Fast cars are not essential, but if you can afford one then hell, why not. Maybe the reason why so many on here don’t like driving and see it as just getting from A to B is that they drive a bland, lifeless, inert Eurobox. I can understand why you’d not enjoy driving and would become pretty negative if that was the case.

For people who drive ordinary cars, then there’s no appreciation how much more better a fast car which handles well really is. The difference in performance can be mindblowing and opens up a whole new load of options. Still, greater power does require greater responsibility.

Yet a 300bhp + car can easily be used to it’s full potential in many situations on the road these days. I’m not talking about ragging a car around at 100% and beyond (although if you’ve ever done this as a teenager and suffered an accident as a consequence it does teach you a lot about driving and the limits of vehicle performance). I mean that it’s perfectly possible to use 100% of the power in many driving situations, or sometimes 80%, knowing you have a further 20% to get you out of trouble if required.

I guess that’s why when I do a 5 car overtake on a clear road I occasionally get flashed aggressively. To the other drivers eyes (judging from their own experience in their own car) it probably looks dangerous, but for me, having 2-3 times the power of their cars, the overtake and margin for error left in reserve makes it 100% safe.

But you are again ignoring my question – if the evidence from Scotland shows it does reduce casualties will you change your stance for the rUK?

Nope, cause the evidence won’t show that. All it will show is that more previously law abiding people are now loose their licence’s and their liveley hoods.

rebel12: my own driving qualifications are not really relevant to the debate are they?

It just proves my point that you seem to like the sound of your own voice more than you actually give a rats arse about road safety. If you did care then you’d have got the extra training. At the end of the day actions speak louder than words don’t they.

FWIW I am unconvinced that Advanced Driver training is the road safety panacea you seem to think it is

How come insurance companies offer you a discount on your policy then if you’ve passed the IAM/Rospa course. Are you really THAT ignorant?

But if you feel strongly that everyone should sit Advanced Driver courses to improve road safety then why not campaign about that, instead of criticising measures that will also improve road safety?

Because there is absolutely zero evidence that lowering the limit to 50mg will make any difference to road safety, or that the problem drinkers will obay the 50mg limit any more than they do the current 80mg limit. If police now have their time stretched prosecuting the many more people who would likely exceed the new 50mg limit, then their resources are even further diverted away from tackling those with the biggest problem and those who pose the greatest danger. I’m sure that more police on the road conducting random testing of the current 80mg limit would yield a far better return than hitting everyone with this kneejerk reduction in drink drive limits dreamt up by the ‘scared to do anything’ brigade.

Ok. So how do you respond to the advanced drivers calling for the same thing then

I’m happy for them to say what they like, but it stinks of hypocrisy for you to come on here, try to tell us what we all should and shouldn’t do whilst pretending you’re concerned in any way about road safety when you can’t yourself even be bothered to get of your own lazy arse and get some extra driver training.

A splendid point – you’re right I haven’t taken my advanced driver so I should be comfortable with people driving tipsy. Maybe the solution is to only allow the responsible Advanced Drivers to drive pissed?

Don’t be a di*k, that’s not what I said was it. If you were actually concerned at all about road safety then what I’m saying is that you should at the very least do some advanced driver training. If you’re not concerned enough to at least make an effort yourself to be safer then you should not really come on here procrastinating about the behavior of others.

For all those people behind their keyboards on their moral high horses saying ‘anything that makes the roads safer is good’ – have you actually taken an advanced driving test or any further driver training yourself to make you a safer driver since passing your test? I suspect most of you are complete hypocrite’s I’m afraid.

Reminds me of sir Bob, procrastinating about how terrible Ebola is and demanding all our money, yet he himself is not prepared to forgo his private jet flights for it or actually go to Sierra Leone himself to help with the task at hand.

Maybe the local pubs need to diversify into more non-alcoholic alternatives?

Maybe, or maybe they’ve already been trying alternatives for many years since the smoking ban, recession etc. Real shame but suspect this will just be the final nail in the coffin for yet another ‘local’ we used to know and love. Another small community left without a place where young and old can meet, a hollow shell of it’s former self. I know, I’ve seen it happen in my parents village when the local closed. Yes everyone’s probably more sober but there’s not the same sense of community in the village any more and people seem to no longer care for each other as was once the case. It’s now just a small village of houses, each keeping themselves to themselves, a real shame.

or, in other words, “I’m an awesome driver after a couple of pints, it’s other people that are the problem”.

Nope, never ever had more than one pint before driving, but I’ve probably unwittingly and unintentionally been in the 50-80mg range the next morning after a night out or work social event.

According to medical experts the effects of alcohol and the time it takes to disperse from the body are not linear and that the last smaller residual amount of alcohol takes far longer to dissipate from the bloodstream than when your blood alcohol level are much higher.

As a result are you aware that you could be over the 50mg limit on next mornings commute after just 3-4 pints of beer the night before. Yet you’ll feel absolutely fine, completely alert and fit to drive.

3-4 social beers is hardly a big session is it, yet with a lower 50mg limit all those who pop to the pub for a few with their mates after work risk loosing their licenses and jobs if a lower limit was introduced.

Is this what we really need to be concentrating on to make our roads safer? Perhaps the government should simply put a ban on fun, and to avoid offending those of a sensitive nature, instead of supporting our local rural pubs and communities, we should all head down instead to the local retail park to a branch of whichever tax avoiding, Luxembourg based coffee shop chain is in fashion at the moment.

Our of interest if in 3-5 yrs time the “Scottish experiment” shows a reduction in KSI stats v’s rUK would you be open to changing your view?

Not likely, 80mg seems a sensible limit and people drinking one pint before driving really are not the problem, it’s people drinking 3,4,5 etc who need catching. If we lower it to 50mg then I suspect half the nation who’ve been out to an Xmas party or social function the night before will now be over the lower limit and risk criminalization for participating in what would seem to be a normal part of social and festive cuture.

In addition, after the damage already done by the smoking ban, how many more remote country pubs would close down if people couldn’t have a pint or two any more and then drive home. These are pubs that are often at the heart of a small community and rely on this sort of trade to make ends meet. Do we really want that or should we actually be targeting the people who are habitual drink drivers? It smacks of punishing everyone rather than the few who actually are the problem.

What next, will we have to prove we’ve had a set number of hours sleep the night before we drive, because we all know that tired driving can be as dangerous as drink driving. No more staying up late if we have to drive in the morning!

Yes people will still die on the roads, however safe we try to make them but to engineer all the fun out of life through increasingly restrictive laws and social legislation, all in the name of safety – well that’s stopping people living in the first place.

By the way, I bet that a compulsorary eyesight test for drivers would bring about a far bigger benefit to road safety than lowering speed limits or drink drive limits. Guess the government wouldn’t make so much money from eye tests as speed cameras though!

For gods sake when will this obsession with the nanny state and safety end? 80mg is fine but they just need more police on the road to enforce it. Before long we’ll not be able to breathe without filling in a risk assessment. Accidents happen and are a part of human existance. Let us enjoy life, live free and push back at he state who are ever increasingly trying to control and regulate our lives.

Would rebel have been laughing it off if it had been a bloke about to give him a seeing to?

We’ll I wouldn’t have enjoyed it very much that’s for sure, but laugh it off I still probably would have. Might not have told my mates though.

There’s a world away between these drunken antics and something like rape. 9 Months sounds very harsh for what was little more than a joke gone wrong. When you watch Traffic Cops or similar, some of the scrotes you see getting caught stealing cars and putting everyone’s life in danger when they drive at 80mph through a city centre seem to get let off with just a caution, a fine, a ban or similar?

rebel – the fact is she took a gamble doing it

Not really, she’d probably heard about my reputation 😉

Sounds harsh considering some of the pranks students get up to. I awoke once (drunk and bleary eyed) at a party to find a female student on top of me and she was completely naked and in the process of undoing my belt to no doubt ‘cough, ahem’ run a heist on the old crown jewels. Sexual assault? Perhaps? Did I think about reporting it? Did I bu**er, but I did tell all my mates who thought it was hilarious. She didn’t make a video though so that could have been different 😉

No you’re not getting pics I’m afraid but she’s a 9 out of 10 with a sexual appetite to match the best of them. Hence why I’m asking on here. If she was a 7 out of 10 with an average sex drive then I’d have made my own decision and got shot without giving it a second thought. Might try the crisps thing though, perhaps a troblerone for dessert, if she’s lucky. Look on her face I expect would be priceless 😉

Hmm need to chat to her about this as her comment at the time was along the lines of ‘if you can’t afford to keep a lady’. Yep I earn more than her and I want to treat her now and again and generally pay a little more. But I don’t want to feel like a mug either and it would be nice if she sometimes offered to pay. Not providing photos but yes she is hot and yes she’s very generous in other ways ;). Still, if she’s totally closed to the idea then it’s auf wiedersehn I’d say.

Any ladies please feel free to add your thoughts as would be very useful to hear it from the other side of the fence.

Bono, who has been nominated for the Nobel peace prize and was given an honorary knighthood by the Queen in 2007 in recognition of his work campaigning against extreme poverty

Whilst flying the world, sipping expensive champagne in his private jet 😕

RMT have done themselves no favours with all their selfish tube strikes in London. Driverless trains can’t come soon enough to stop the bas****s holding us all to rand some once more.