I'm sure most of you already know this, but a cautionary tale for those who don't.
Speed limits on vans (other than car-derived vans like Astras) are NOT the same as cars.
They are limited to 50 mph on single-carriageway roads, 60 mph on dual carriageways and 70 mph on motorways.
Friend of mine hired a 3.5 tonne GVW van to move house and got caught twice by a scamera on the same day, one for exceeding 50 mph on a SC road and one for exceeding 60 mph on a DC. Ignorance of the law being no excuse for non-compliance (as he readily accepts) he does not want others to be caught out in the same way so asked me to pass it on.
|
I take it he got caught by those mobile vans then, cause the fixed cameras can't differentiate.
Must be fairly common, most of the vans we hire have a sticker on the sun visor advising limits.
|
What is the reason?
Is a van that is safe at 70mph on a motorway unsafe at that speed on a dual carriageway?
And why are they different from cars?
|
>> What is the reason?
>> Is a van that is safe at 70mph on a motorway unsafe at that speed
>> on a dual carriageway?
>> And why are they different from cars?
It's a long standing law going back to when vans were things like Thames Traders and equivalent Bedford etc equivalents. Ideally, with the modern trend to cars derived from vans it needs reform.
Change however is unlikely to satisfy everybody......
|
>>
>> It's a long standing law going back to when vans were things like Thames Traders
>> and equivalent Bedford etc equivalents. Ideally, with the modern trend to cars derived from vans
>> it needs reform.
>>
>> Change however is unlikely to satisfy everybody......
>>
CDV's (Astra, Renault Kangoo etc) which weigh less than two tonnes are exempt Bromp. Have to be based on a car chassis though.
I think you're essentially right about the reasons; most vans of that era would struggle to top 50 mph anyway!
Yes it was a mobile camera that caught him; it should not be taken as read, though, that fixed cameras cannot differentiate. It was in North Scotland BTW, an area notoriously harsh on speeding penalties.
|
IIRC the Transit Connect is just over one of the limits.
Not quite sure why Ford did not make it a little lighter.
|
|
There was a van driver on my speed awareness course who did not know that the van limits were lower.
|
>> There was a van driver on my speed awareness course who did not know that
>> the van limits were lower.
>>
Same on the one my daughter was on - she was astonished, but said he genuinely didn't seem to know.
Mind you, that's a general theme of these courses. It's said the best thing about them is that they make you realise just how little most other drivers know.
|
|
It'll be a little lighter by about 4 years old.
|
>> CDV's (Astra, Renault Kangoo etc) which weigh less than two tonnes are exempt Bromp. Have
>> to be based on a car chassis though.
I knew about the CDV/two tonnes issue. The based on a car chassis bit seems a bit remote in this day of common platforms with vastly different bodyshells. The original Berlingo/Partner was loosely derived from the ZX/306 and IIRC the current version is on the same 'platform' as the C4.
More a VDC than CDV!!
The 'lingo and Partner have big brothers also available in Teepee/Multispace (and taxi) form.
These presumably take car speed limits?
|
There was a van driver on my speed awareness course who did not know that the van limits were lower......
There was one on mine who called himself a professional driver .... he was aware but still got caught coming off M23 Motorway onto A23 which is dual carriageway....
|
>> >> What is the reason?
>> >> Is a van that is safe at 70mph on a motorway unsafe at that
>> speed
>> >> on a dual carriageway?
>> >> And why are they different from cars?
>>
>> It's a long standing law going back to when vans were things like Thames Traders
>> and equivalent Bedford etc equivalents. Ideally, with the modern trend to cars derived from vans
>> it needs reform.
>>
>> Change however is unlikely to satisfy everybody......
>>
If you go back that far,ALL commercial vehicles(including car-derived vans) were subject to 30 mph. limit!-I,and many others,bought car-derived vans because they were not subject to purchase tax.Now many commercials are not subject to VAT!
|
|
Its all to do with the central driving mirror.
|
|
So why do MB sprinters only travel at 80mph everywhere?
|
Stupid law.
It would be safer for universal speed limits to be posted by the road, rather than some carte blanche, obtuse combination of class of vehicle, class of road and posted limit.
|
>> Its all to do with the central driving mirror.
What, as in not having one? Wrong.
Our current pool van at work is a Citroen Berlingo. It doesn't have a interior central mirror, but is a car derived van and therefore the same speed limits as a car apply.
Our previous van however, a Ford Transit Connect also didn't have an interior central mirror, but van speed limits applied to it.
It is a ridiculous law. For starters, the Transit Connect handled and drove far better than the Berlingo does, and it was also more comfortable.
|
>> It is a ridiculous law. >>
>>
Could it be linked to laden braking distances? Maybe historical ones.
|
|
When I was young heavy long-distance lorries were governed at 38mph. The more sporting drivers would freewheel down decent hills and re-engage top gear when the truck slowed to 38 again. Felt quite hairy sometimes especially in East Anglia where villages tend to be in depressions, with a steepish hill in and out. Even in the middle of the night something could have come out of a side turning just as the truck came barrelling through at 60 or 70, pretty quietly too with the engine idling...
|
Aaaagh yes, I remember Aberdeen overdrive and Fraddon Hill:)
Pat
|
|
This may be a really daft question........but where does Mrs B's Vito fit into this?
|
>> where does Mrs B's Vito fit into this?
>>
I would assume that, since it's not derived from a car, and has a GVW of 2.75 tonnes, it's classed as a van and therefore subject to the reduced limit.
|
|
And I question Harleyman's opening post. I thought that on a single carriage way it was in fact 40mph, but stand to be corrected.
|
|
No, Harleyman was correct, 50 on a single carriage way national limit.
|
I thought that on a single carriage way it
>> was in fact 40mph, but stand to be corrected.
>>
The 40 mph limit applies to goods vehicles with a GVW exceeding 7.5 tonnes.
Incidentally you'll find more and more companies adhering to this; my own included. Research has shown that the saving in fuel (and of course insurance, since drivers are less likely to have points for speeding) outweighs the extra time taken to make deliveries. Our company, in line with many others (Tesco probably being the most prominent) penalise drivers who persistently ignore the national limits, and we have trackers fitted so that any speeding is recorded; tachographs record speed too of course but at this moment in time are not generally linked to a GPS to define the speed limit in a particular place. I expect that to be the next move.
Takes a bit of getting used to at first; and makes for some very tedious journeys in this part of the world, where there is very little dual carriageway. Good job the scenery's nice. On the positive side, not only am I protected from the risk of getting points on my licence whilst at work, but planners can no longer encourage me to "get back a bit quicker" and I'm still paid the same no matter what.
|
>> >> where does Mrs B's Vito fit into this?
>> >>
>>
>> I would assume that, since it's not derived from a car, and has a GVW
>> of 2.75 tonnes, it's classed as a van and therefore subject to the reduced limit.
>>
Gross weight appears to be a little over 3 tonnes. Forgot, hers is called a Viano and not Vito - I wonder if this gets around it, as Merc class it as a people carrier - the Vito is also available as a traveliner (van with seats)
Think further investigation is required.
|
>>
>> Think further investigation is required.
>>
I'd do that. Seems more like a van-derived car than t'other way round.
|
>> >> where does Mrs B's Vito fit into this?
>> >>
>>
>> I would assume that, since it's not derived from a car, and has a GVW
>> of 2.75 tonnes, it's classed as a van and therefore subject to the reduced limit.
As a panel van yes.
As a 'van derived car' provided it has fewer than 8 seats (at which point it becomes a minibus) then I think car limits apply.
Mrs B might want to check carefully.
|
>> What is the reason?
>> Is a van that is safe at 70mph on a motorway unsafe at that speed
>> on a dual carriageway?
>> And why are they different from cars?
>>
Why
Dual carriageways have a central reservation, motorways have different junction design. All of these reduce the risk and severity of accidents over single carriage way roads where most accidents and most deaths occur.
|
>>
>> Dual carriageways have a central reservation, motorways have different junction design. All of these reduce
>> the risk and severity of accidents over single carriage way roads where most accidents and
>> most deaths occur.
>>
But why are vans uniquely more susceptible to these risks than cars?
|
>> But why are vans uniquely more susceptible to these risks than cars?
>>
As said earlier in the thread, the basic reasons are probably historic and date back to the days when vans were slow, with poor brakes and suspect handling. There's also the inescapable fact that they're heavier and therefore need a greater stopping distance; admittedly modern technology has narrowed the gap but I'd think it's still a factor.
Of course, the constant carping about "white van man" by both journalists and the general public does nothing for the chances of van speed limits ever becoming the same as those for a car.
Last edited by: Harleyman on Wed 19 Feb 14 at 20:34
|
>>the inescapable fact that they're heavier and therefore need a greater stopping distance
That does not necessarilly follow.
|
>> >>the inescapable fact that they're heavier and therefore need a greater stopping distance
>>
>> That does not necessarilly follow.
>>
I'm sure you're right; I don't think it's an unreasonable generalisation to follow though.
|
The issue is more likely to be that the weight of the vehicle can vary significantly and the driver has no formal training other than that necessary for a car license so the speeds are limited more.
|
>> The issue is more likely to be that the weight of the vehicle can vary
>> significantly and the driver has no formal training other than that necessary for a car
>> license so the speeds are limited more.
>>
>>
>> I'd agree with that. It was one of the reasons for the removal of the C1 entitlement on "ordinary" licences back in 1997.
|
Good find CG... nothing in there that one would wish to argue against.
Interesting point regarding the CDV's, that both criteria must be satisfied; which means that the MB Vito referred to above would in any shape or form (unless registered as a bus) be restricted to van speeds.
|
>> Good find CG... nothing in there that one would wish to argue against.
>>
>> Interesting point regarding the CDV's, that both criteria must be satisfied; which means that the
>> MB Vito referred to above would in any shape or form (unless registered as a
>> bus) be restricted to van speeds.
>>
I must admit that I didn't realise the CDV list was so limited.
|
>> >> Good find CG... nothing in there that one would wish to argue against.
>> >>
>> >> Interesting point regarding the CDV's, that both criteria must be satisfied; which means that
>> the
>> >> MB Vito referred to above would in any shape or form (unless registered as
>> a
>> >> bus) be restricted to van speeds.
>> >>
>>
>> I must admit that I didn't realise the CDV list was so limited.
Ditto, I knew that a Tranny or T5 was affected by the lower limits, but I assumed that say, a SWB Caddy or Connect, was in the CDV except list. Clearly it aint, and I have been lucky in the past to have got away with it.
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 20 Feb 14 at 10:32
|
>> ... but
>> I assumed that say, a SWB Caddy or Connect, was in the CDV except list.
>> Clearly it aint, and I have been lucky in the past to have got away
>> with it.
>>
I've just Googled those vehicles and an awful lot of people think they are CDVs until the weight limit is pointed out - they're both marginally over.
It looks like a lot of the confusion is that they are CDVs for tax purposes but not for speed limits.
|
>> Good find CG... nothing in there that one would wish to argue against.
>>
>> Interesting point regarding the CDV's, that both criteria must be satisfied; which means that the
>> MB Vito referred to above would in any shape or form (unless registered as a
>> bus) be restricted to van speeds.
How do you infer that?
It might be true, but it's not a van, is it? (I mean a Vito passenger vehicle, not a van). That's the first criterion.
Then follows "is it <2 tonne GVW?" and "is it car derived?"
This www.sussexsaferroads.gov.uk/costs/car-derived-vans.html burbles on about car derived vans, but has nothing to say about about van-derived cars.
For example, a Berlingo van is not car derived because the van existed before the car, and the van is therefore subject to the lower limits - but that doesn't mean it will apply to the Berlingo car, because that's not a van...
Last edited by: Manatee on Thu 20 Feb 14 at 10:48
|
That Manatee is where the CDV thing has failed to keep up. The current Berlingo shares a platform (chassis) with the C4 and is therefore, at least arguably, car based.
The original version and its facelift was based on the 306 so definitely car derived.
|
>> How do you infer that?
>>
>> It might be true, but it's not a van, is it? (I mean a Vito
>> passenger vehicle, not a van). That's the first criterion.
>>
>> Then follows "is it <2 tonne GVW?" and "is it car derived?"
>>
>> This www.sussexsaferroads.gov.uk/costs/car-derived-vans.html burbles on about car derived vans, but has nothing to say about about
>> van-derived cars.
>>
>> For example, a Berlingo van is not car derived because the van existed before the
>> car, and the van is therefore subject to the lower limits - but that doesn't
>> mean it will apply to the Berlingo car, because that's not a van...
>>
The Berlingo is based on the Peugeot 306 estate floorpan and running gear. Therefore, I'd guess, it can be legitimately classed as car-derived.
The Vito, on the other hand, fails on both counts; not only is it a van design from new, but it also weighs in at over 2 tonnes. However, according to Wikipedia, the Viano design was patented before the Vito was launched; but is it a car? Trouble is the lines have been blurred by the advent of the MPV, and I daresay the only way it'll ever get sorted is in court with a test case.
Meanwhile, the confusion continues.
Last edited by: Harleyman on Thu 20 Feb 14 at 12:20
|
>>The Vito, on the other hand, fails on both counts; not only is it a van design from new, but it also weighs in at over 2 tonnes.
I agree it's confusing.
But my point is that it's not a van/goods vehicle. SO whether it's car-derived, or over 2 tonnes, is irrelevant as far as that goes.
For another example - a motorhome or motor caravan up to 3.05 tonnes in weight, has the same speed limits as a car or car-derived van - presumably because it isn't a van (i.e. a goods vehicle).
www.gov.uk/speed-limits - the van limits follow from "Goods vehicles (not more than 7.5 tonnes maximum laden weight)" subject to the CDV+<2t exceptions.
Using that logic, a Vito passenger vehicle (with 8 or fewer total seats, otherwise it's a minibus) or for that matter a Berlingo car may not be caught at all.
|
>> For another example - a motorhome or motor caravan up to 3.05 tonnes in weight,
>> has the same speed limits as a car or car-derived van - presumably because it
>> isn't a van (i.e. a goods vehicle).
>>
Motorhomes have their own separate criteria to follow. There's a specific page about 'em on the DVLA site somewhere; have to have a FITTED cooker and bed IIRC. Speed-limit wise I think they're as per cars; though people stuck behind them down here may be excused for thinking differently.
|
>>Motorhomes have their own separate criteria to follow
Exactly my point. So do cars. Even if van-derived, like the motorhomes.
There seem to be lots of discussions on the web and some conclude that a Berlingo Multispace for example with a GVW over 2 tonnes is caught because it is van derived.
I don't think it is, because it's a car - whether it's van derived is irrelevant, because the limits apply to goods vehicles under 7.5 tonnes, with exceptions. It's not a goods vehicle.
|
>> There seem to be lots of discussions on the web and some conclude that a
>> Berlingo Multispace for example with a GVW over 2 tonnes is caught because it is
>> van derived.
I hadn't read my handbook carefully enough. Thought mine was under 2 tonnes max auw but in fact it's 2065. The 7 seat version adds another 100k to that.
As you say though it's academic because it's a car, albeit derived from a van sharing a common platform with a car.
Berlingo vans are complicated. Physically identical models fall either side if 2 tonnes depending on engine. The Hdi 75 625L1 is just under at 1935kg while the 850L1 with an HDi 90 is 2165kg. The extended L2 version is over 2tonnes as are the crew bus ans plat/cab versions.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 20 Feb 14 at 17:35
|
>> I take it he got caught by those mobile vans then, cause the fixed cameras
>> can't differentiate.
>>
Yes they can - the ones on the A556 in Cheshire from Northwich to the M6 catch a lot of vans / trucks as its a 4 lane road but not a dual carriageway so even lower limits apply.
They look like standard Gatso's but there are weight sensors built into the road.
|
>> >> I take it he got caught by those mobile vans then, cause the fixed
>> cameras
>> >> can't differentiate.
>> >>
>> Yes they can - the ones on the A556 in Cheshire from Northwich to the
>> M6 catch a lot of vans / trucks as its a 4 lane road but
>> not a dual carriageway so even lower limits apply.
>>
>> They look like standard Gatso's but there are weight sensors built into the road.
>>
If it is a camera I would think the person who issues the NIP can tell the difference between the various classes of vehicle from the photo when he reads the number plate, and can check with DVLA if necessary. Why would the camera need weight detectors?
|
Why would the camera need
>> weight detectors?
>>
To trigger the flash at a lower speed limit. ISTR that bit of road's normally restricted to 50 mph, but it'd be 40 for HGV's. Buses would trip it too of course but I would presume that would be sorted by checking registrations.
|
>> >> Why would the camera need weight detectors?
>> To trigger the flash at a lower speed limit.
I saw this in action on the single carriageway stretch of A1 north of Morpeth on Saturday. A stream of oncoming cars and a Luton van passed a camera in steady convoy; only the van triggered two flashes.
>> you'll find more and more companies adhering to [lower goods vehicle limits], my own included
Mine too. I simply don't speed at all at work, and increasingly rarely in my car. Apart from anything else, a clean licence is my passport to the occasional very special driving job :)
>> tachographs record speed too of course but at this moment in time are not generally linked to a GPS to define
>> the speed limit in a particular place. I expect that to be the next move.
Yes that's coming, as is bluetooth/NFC-enabled tachographs which will enable an HGV driver's infringement record to be interrogated from a following DVSA vehicle without stopping the HGV first. The GPS functionality will also allow the unit to record precise journey start/finish locations, rather than the current system where only the country of start/end of duty is entered.
Last edited by: Dave_C220CDI on Tue 18 Feb 14 at 23:32
|
The GPS
>> functionality will also allow the unit to record precise journey start/finish locations, rather than the
>> current system where only the country of start/end of duty is entered.
>>
Always thought that was a retrograde step Dave. At least with the old paper tachos an officer could get an idea of a driver and vehicle's journey plan throughout the week, although with ANPR that may nowadays be superfluous.
Last edited by: Harleyman on Tue 18 Feb 14 at 23:49
|
>> Yes that's coming, as is bluetooth/NFC-enabled tachographs which will enable an HGV driver's infringement record
>> to be interrogated from a following DVSA vehicle without stopping the HGV first. The GPS
>> functionality will also allow the unit to record precise journey start/finish locations, rather than the
>> current system where only the country of start/end of duty is entered.
>>
NFC doesn't work over those distances, bluetooth does but generally needs pairing and how do they know which tachograph they are reading?
|
All tachographs fitted since October 2012 are already equipped for this, but as I understand it some new laws need to be passed for it to be used fully yet.
>>The Inland Transport directorate of the EU has been involved in consultations on the development of in-vehicle technology and the increasing requirement for Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) for commercial vehicles. The Inland Transport directorate envisages the development in the near future of open in-vehicle platform architecture.
Such an open platform would prevent the proliferation of “black boxes” in the driver’s cab as new technology is being introduced for preventing driver distraction, monitoring driver behaviour, fleet management systems, telematics, surveillance, e-call, GPS etc. The platform is referred to as “open” to infer that it should be independent of alternative manufacturers of such equipment. The same platform could therefore be used for whatever options and compulsory equipment that is required.
An advanced communication module would be the core element of the platform to facilitate the variety of signals coming to and emanating from the vehicle. These could include Blue-tooth, GPS, GNSS (GLONASS) and wireless signals for vehicle-to-infrastructure (v2x) connectivity for the deployment of safety related ITS technology.<<
General consensus of opinion within the haulage industry is that VOSA will be able to monitor and fine all HGV's from behind a desk in a control centre in the very near future.
Sorry about the copy and paste ISJW, but it's a bit technologically beyond me!
Pat
|
you don't need all that advanced communication technology. All that needs to be done is for a GPS to be fitted to the Tacho. Each driver at the end of the shift would be required to upload his digicard data to VOSA using a chip and pin type terminal, and all the driver has to do is wait for the summons to arrive in the post if he has transgressed.
The driver, would in effect, be tried by computer. You could actually do away with VOSA.
|
Simpler to do it from a registration database with ANPR, if the vehicle is registered as an LGV/HGV then the camera enforces a lower limit.
|
>> If it is a camera I would think the person who issues the NIP can
>> tell the difference between the various classes of vehicle from the photo when he reads
>> the number plate, and can check with DVLA if necessary. Why would the camera need
>> weight detectors?
>>
In addition to Harleyman's comments, if it didn't have weight detectors but was set to catch vans / trucks according to the speed limit, then it would take a snap of pretty well every car that went past too, so person issuing the NIP would have to look through thousands of pictures per day.
|
>> Yes they can - the ones on the A556 in Cheshire from Northwich to the
>> M6 catch a lot of vans / trucks as its a 4 lane road but
>> not a dual carriageway so even lower limits apply.
>>
>> They look like standard Gatso's but there are weight sensors built into the road.
>>
OK, thanks. Learn something new every day!
I wonder what weight they are set to trigger then? Maybe only going to catch laden vans, otherwise I would imaging they would be flashing a lot of Range Rovers etc, and I don't imagine for a minute they have someone checking all the photographs?
And where do things like the Mitsubishi L200 / Toyota Hilux fit in?
Last edited by: ToMoCo on Wed 19 Feb 14 at 07:52
|
>> >> I take it he got caught by those mobile vans then, cause the fixed
>> cameras
>> >> can't differentiate.
>> >>
>> Yes they can - the ones on the A556 in Cheshire from Northwich to the
>> M6 catch a lot of vans / trucks as its a 4 lane road but
>> not a dual carriageway so even lower limits apply.
>>
>> They look like standard Gatso's but there are weight sensors built into the road.
There are no cameras in use on any uk road that have weight sensors built into the road. Stand alone speed cameras such as Gatsos are unable to to identify the difference between a van and a car so can not, does not and will not trigger at a different speed.
However some Gatso DO have the ability to differentiate between a car/van and a HGV and may trigger accordingly. Thats nothing to do with weight sensing technology.
|
Isn't this a weight/speed combined thing?
"Tower Bridge is now successfully operating a unique combined speed
and weight enforcement system, supplied and installed by Speed
Check Services Ltd. "
www.speedcheck.co.uk/images/Tower_Bridge_Case_Study.pdf
|
|
As the phrase says, its unique.
|
>> As the phrase says, its unique.
Ah, yes, as opposed to "none" :)
|
>> >> As the phrase says, its unique.
>>
>> Ah, yes, as opposed to "none" :)
Surely you mean " it's a bridge as opposed to a road "?
|
|
That made me laugh, zero.
|
>> There are no cameras in use on any uk road that have weight sensors built
>> into the road. Stand alone speed cameras such as Gatsos are unable to to identify
>> the difference between a van and a car so can not, does not and will
>> not trigger at a different speed.
>>
>> However some Gatso DO have the ability to differentiate between a car/van and a HGV
>> and may trigger accordingly. Thats nothing to do with weight sensing technology.
>>
Hmmm...well I live near the A556 and when it was resurfaced a few years ago it was said one of the "improvements" was fitting weight sensors into the road surface.
However a quick Google suggests that Gatso camera can have a rough idea of the weight of the vehicle by the strength of the radar return, and that's certainly bourne out by complaints from truck drivers of being ticketed for over 40MPH when their vehicle is less than 7.5 tons.
|
I know that one well BP, but whether it's height or weight, I can vouch for the fact they can detect a lorry on a single carriageway doing over 40MPH.
Pat
|
>> However a quick Google suggests that Gatso camera can have a rough idea of the
>> weight of the vehicle by the strength of the radar return,
Size/bulk/volume, not weight. Thats why it can't tell a car from a van, but it can tell a Lorry from a car. I guess the 7.5 toner is about the tipping point, or a Luton from a SWB tranny.
I know the Gatso at Elton on the A605 can differentiate between Lorry and car, but there is nothing in the road.
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 19 Feb 14 at 16:27
|
>>I know the Gatso at Elton on the A605 can differentiate between Lorry and car, but there is nothing in the road.<<
That's true, and it's such a shame too. It's a brilliant road to drive hard in a fully freighted lorry in the early hours!
Pat
|
|
Where does all of this control end? Tacho this and tacho that and trackers and cctv. Is it still permissible to f art in one's own vehicle without incurring a fine and a record for life?
|
The dash cams also record sound...even when you're in the cab in your own time in the evening talking on the phone to the better half.
I make sure my lads know where the mute button is:)
Pat
|
|
It occured to me in the passing once that farting while driving a vehicle equipped with leather seats was probably what first inspired Sir Christopher Cockerell.
|
|
There was a wheeze the lorry drivers of my youth got up to with the governors... they would open them up and put a sixpence coin in somewhere to raise the governed speed a few mph. It was highly illegal and they used to have to replace the lead-and-wire seal on the governor box. Never saw it done but one or two drivers let on cautiously that they knew how. Others seemed to be in some sort of denial though and said it was just an urban myth. Perhaps it was.
|
|
We got them fitted Pat; thanks for the heads-up.
|
HM, they only record with the ignition switched on but most windows are now electric on lorries so we tend to leave the ignition on for that.
The button marked M ( for mute) is the one you want but it defaults back to record once you start up again.
Pat
|
Right, not sure if this is definitive, but I came across a bit of of info on the go compare site
www.gocompare.com/van-insurance/is-my-vehicle-a-car-or-van/
Having just checked the V5 shows vehicle type as M1 which is car so I "think" we are OK in the Viano
|
>> Size/bulk/volume
There's a GATSO on the A5 near Nuneaton that I used to pass every day in an 11'9" high 7.5 tonne curtainsider with barn doors. My speed limit on that road was 50mph but it was 40 for the big boys. I was generally doing a GPS 48-49mph as I went by the camera, and on wet days the flash would trigger twice. In the dry it never flashed - I reckon the back doors were too encrusted with grime to reflect enough of the radar, but getting them wet had the effect of making them more efficient reflectors.
I never got a ticket for it.
|
The answer as to the vehicle's speed limit is in the V5 'vehicle taxclass'. M1 = car limits, N1 = van limits. It is down to what the manufacturer decides, because pre-face lift VW Transporter Kombis (like my old one) are rated M1 and hence benefit from car speed limits, whereas the newer Kombis are N1 and have van speed limits.
I replaced my Kombi with a Transporter Shuttle, partly because it retains the M1 rating, even though the same body, engine, transmission, but with fewer seats is limited to lower speed limits!
Of course, car speed limits means car tax rates (higher than commercial rates). A real case of swings and roundabouts. Personally, I would rather pay the money and benefit from higher speed limits.
|
That's useful to know, BB, about the M1 N1 tax class distinction.
Unfortunately your experience with the Transporter Kombi shows what a minefield it is for many fleet drivers out there; you've had the benefit of seeing your V5, for most large fleet drivers they never get anywhere near seeing a V5 for the vehicle they're driving. Doesn't excuse them from asking the question, I know, but when I was given a Transit Connect to drive and I asked for confirmation on what the limits were it took the fleet admin office over three weeks to get back to me with an answer....
|
You can check the class on the dvla website.
www.taxdisc.direct.gov.uk/EvlPortalApp/app/home/intro?skin=directgov
Follow the vehicle enquiry link, and you just need the the reg and make
|
Van speed limits..... beware!! - ToMoCo
