Speed Limit

[Phil Pascoe]

Am I meant to side with the 50 people doing 20-30mph over the speed limit or the lady doing 20mph lower (assuming your guess was correct) than the lowest speed limit (60mph for lorries/caravans etc)? Lucky it wasn't a stationary object that had fallen off a lorry I guess.

at 70mph you are doing 31.29m/s
at 90mph you are doing 40.23m/s

In 1 sec you would have had 9m more to react if you were doing the maximum legal speed. Quite a chunk of the 21m of thinking distance https://begin-motorcycling.co.uk/the-5-elements-of-cbt/element-c/braking/

If 100 bikes were doing 70mph the woman would still be in the wrong.

There used to be regular moans in the Telegraph motoring supplement (which used to be excellent) from people upset at being undertaken on motorways, the answer was always the same - if you were undertaken, you were in the wrong lane.

 

[MikeJhn]

for miles ... the stupidity of restricting their engines.

To put it another way, the stupidity of the lorry drivers just sitting there with their foot nailed to the floor at half a mile an hour more than the lorry on the inside and take ten miles to overtake.

 

[stuart little]

Don't forget the bends where there is a 'Max speed 35' (e.g.) when cars nowadays can comfortably take said bend at 50. When were these speeds set? 50 years ago and never changed?

There was one time when I was driving a HGV on the elevated section of the M5 inW.Mids, where a bend had a recommended HGV top speed of 45/ 50, which my vehicle was quite capable of negotiating at 60, which is what I was doing, until I came up to a 'centre lane hogger' sticking to that limit in a car, who refused to move over. I very much thought he had no idea HGVs were banned from lane 3. After a few flashes & hoots & seeing 'AINACS' IN HIS MIRROR, he did shift.

 

[stuart little]

If 100 bikes were doing 70mph the woman would still be in the wrong.

There used to be regular moans in the Telegraph motoring supplement (which used to be excellent) from people upset at being undertaken on motorways, the answer was always the same - if you were undertaken, you were in the wrong lane.

Made me wonder once in my HGV days, when ascending the M5 bank just past the new toll section junction, when it was 2 lanes, being in the lh lane I had a surprise to see a tanker 'bombing' up the hard shoulder & undertaking me! I just wished a polis car had been sat on it's 'look-out' point.

 

[stuart little]

for miles ... the stupidity of restricting their engines.

Been there - done that!

 

[stuart little]

Yebbut...pedestrians are not supposed to be on motorways

Then again, pedestrians shouldn't be on lorries!

 

[jim1950]

This thread was about whether it was right to sell cars capable of 150mph in a country where the maximum legal speed is 70mph. How does that equate with banning everything that can harm?
Knives, scooters, painkillers etc. all have legitimate uses. Cars that can do 150mph do not.

my standard car legally purchased in the UK will top 170mph yes not legal in the uk but I can drive to Germany wear it is so why ban it?

 

[Blackswanwood]

IMO there ought to be legislation on how loud you can talk in a public place.

And the stocks should be brought back for people who use their phone on loudspeaker in public …

 

[Agent_zed]

my standard car legally purchased in the UK will top 170mph yes not legal in the uk but I can drive to Germany wear it is so why ban it?

It doesn't need to be banned outright. IMO cars need a limiter set at say 80mph that needs to be manually turned off by the driver if they wish to exceed that. If you want to turn it off when you drive to Germany fine, but then it is entirely on you if you decide to turn it off so you can drive at 90mph on UK motorways. If you have an accident that speed is a factor and you have turned it off then penalties should be even higher. That is then your personal choice and responsibility.

Even Germany has speed limits on 30% of the autobahn and additional variable limits on more. How many times do UK drivers actually drive to Germany though? I would guess very infrequently.

 

[jim1950]

It doesn't need to be banned outright. IMO cars need a limiter set at say 80mph that needs to be manually turned off by the driver if they wish to exceed that. If you want to turn it off when you drive to Germany fine, but then it is entirely on you if you decide to turn it off so you can drive at 90mph on UK motorways. If you have an accident that speed is a factor and you have turned it off then penalties should be even higher. That is then your personal choice and responsibility.

Even Germany has speed limits on 30% of the autobahn and additional variable limits on more. How many times do UK drivers actually drive to Germany though? I would guess very infrequently.

check out how many drive cars to the Nurburgring, don't ban the tool when its the tool driving it

 

[Phil Pascoe]

don't ban the tool when its the tool driving it ...

I wonder if this logic applies to knives? I've always carried a knife since I was eight years old. I shouldn't carry one now, apparently, because some people stab other people.

 

[Agent_zed]

check out how many drive cars to the Nurburgring, don't ban the tool when its the tool driving it

but it wouldn't be banned in what I've suggested. It would be entirely optional to turn off the limiter. It's an interesting psychological barrier where people are happy enough to drive at 90mph as it's personal choice and responsibility, but I'm sure if they had to push a button to say you acknowledge that you are doing that they would suddenly seem to change their mind.

If it stops ridiculous speeds on the UK roads where me and my family live then that is what matters to me. If Germany wants to allow people to drive at ridiculous speeds that is there issue.

Sure it wouldn't stop all accidents but if you reduce some of the most serious ones then that is a good thing. There will of course be the arguement that 'well why don't we all drive at 5mph if safety is the most important thing' to which I counter - the only thing I am advocating for is to have a limit 10mph faster than the current fastest limit in our country, you are not even legally allowed to drive above 70mph so it should make no difference to anybody whatsoever, except those that actively want to break the current laws.

 

[Agent_zed]

don't ban the tool when its the tool driving it ...

I wonder if this logic applies to knives? I've always carried a knife since I was eight years old. I shouldn't carry one now, apparently, because some people stab other people.

You are legally allowed to carry a folding blade that is less than 3 inches and non-lockable (as I do) without any reason needed. You are not allowed to carry a sword or a zombie knife because they are far beyond the reasonable needs of most people. You can in certain circumstances carry blades if you have a very specific reason e.g. a Chef.

https://www.gov.uk/buying-carrying-knives

If you advocate personal responsibility over sensible limits, then surely everyone should be allowed to carry whatever they like whilst they drive cars capable of more than 2x the legal limit?

 

[selectortone]

Discussion of knives might be a little inappropriate given what happened in Southport yesterday.

 

[Sideways]

If he had gone in with two gallons of petrol and a zippo instead, would we be talking about closing down filling stations and telling smokers they can only light up with matches ?
It's not the tool. It's the people, but people are hard to fix so the clamour for action gets met with gesture politics.This always fails. Repeating the same thing time and again and expecting a different outcome is the definition of (stupidity ? insanity ?).

That was indulgent of me because it won't make the slightest difference to anything.
Please let's get back to speed limits.

 

[Agent_zed]

Discussion of knives might be a little inappropriate given what happened in Southport yesterday.

Both cars and knives are deadly weapons in the wrong hands. This discussion started due to a driver doing 123mph and killing a pregnant lady and another driver killing 6 people (inc 2 children).

Both are horrific and need changes to the laws and society to limit the chances of any of these events happening again.

 

[John Brown]

my standard car legally purchased in the UK will top 170mph yes not legal in the uk but I can drive to Germany wear it is so why ban it?

I'm not suggesting it should be banned.

 

[paulrbarnard]

my standard car legally purchased in the UK will top 170mph yes not legal in the uk but I can drive to Germany wear it is so why ban it?

Ironically in Germany ISA is mandatory since June of this year. So in Germany your 170mph car will ping or vibrate when you exceed the limit or more likely reduce engine power to prevent you exceeding the speed limit unless you actively deactivate ISA or forcefully override the speed limiter by pressing harder on the accelerator. The vehicle will also record that you have done that so if you are involved in an accident good luck to you in the courts. This very rightly needs to come to the U.K. as well. No one is saying to ban your super car only that you actively acknowledge that YOU are fully responsible for any adverse impacts of you using it beyond the lawful limits imposed by the road authority/council.

 

[AJB Temple]

You guys collectively appear to be big brother. Freedoms are hard come by and once surrendered even harder to recover.

 

[paulrbarnard]

You guys collectively appear to be big brother. Freedoms are hard come by and once surrendered even harder to recover.

Who’s freedom? I want my grandchildren to live to become adults without someone with small **** syndrome ‘accidentally’ killing them.

Just adding to offset my frustration reply above. I am so weary of the vehicular man slaughter findings in cases where someone in a vehicle kills a vulnerable road user. If ISA is mandatory and over ridden by the driver they are taking full responsibility so should then be charged with murder as they have pre meditated to remove the safety measures designed to protect others. I get frustrated in the extreme with the notion that people should be free to place others at risk.