tinyurl.com/3bvklhw
links to AOL - the Daily M speculates!
Last edited by: devonite on Sun 25 Sep 11 at 03:41
|
Not sure if this such a good idea, imagine how hard it would be join with 54bhp and traffic doing 80mph on the left.
At the moment many people are happy to cruise at 60mph, but if the limit is 80 this may rise to 70mph. It all results in more fuel usage, and of course HGVs are limited to 56mph making it even more dangerous for truck drivers.
At the moment you can cruise at 80mph and not be prosecuted anyway, so I don't see what the problem is. After all there are plenty of old laws, e.g copying VHS is also illegal but who gets done for that?
Also 20mph zones need be sensible enforced, do 20mph in a lot of 20 zones at the moment and it feels dangerous. 25mph would be far more sensible, is a much more comfortable speed for the engine, and is safer than 30 in residential zones. Where as 20 is too fast for 2nd, but too slow for 3rd. So you end up revving too much or pinking.
|
Since it is being done when fuel price has gone through roof, only very few non economy conscious drivers will celebrate it.
If it were done few years back public would have appreciated it better.
I hardly see people driving over 80 MPH nowadays.
|
>>
>> I hardly see people driving over 80 MPH nowadays.
>>
I hardly see cars driving under 80 MPH nowadays.
|
>> Not sure if this such a good idea, imagine how hard it would be join
>> with 54bhp and traffic doing 80mph on the left.
You're not driving it right. My first car was a 1993 clapped out Rover Metro 1.3 litre unaspirated diesel, and they don't come any more clappter-out than a 1993 Rover Metro 1.3 litre diesel. It used to wind itself up to motorway speeds without any problem, and besides, you've only got to hit about 50 mph in the length of the slip road, after all, how do you think lorries do it?
Other cars on motorways aren't there to force people off the road when they try to join. Is this why you're afraid of them, 'cos it's a needless worry. :-)
Last edited by: Alfa Floor on Sun 25 Sep 11 at 12:32
|
>> >> Not sure if this such a good idea, imagine how hard it would be
>> join
>> >> with 54bhp and traffic doing 80mph on the left.
>>
>> You're not driving it right.
Agreed - I could get an honest 90 out of a 39 bhp, 899cc Fiat Cinquecento, and once had a very noisy ton out a 54 bhp 1.1 Punto (and that was genuinely in Germany). Just got to boot it hard enough.
|
>> Agreed.
+1
Rattle, start driving it like you stole it or it'll always be a snail.
|
>> >> Agreed.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> Rattle, start driving it like you stole it or it'll always be a snail.
>>
Let's start a volunteer group to take Ratts's motor out for him every so often and give it the righteous flogging that small Italian cars need periodically in order to keep on their game. Who's with me? :-)
|
>>Rover Metro 1.3 litre unaspirated diesel
Yes, they didn't aspire to much. ;>)
|
|
People tend to move out of the way of lorries more though. It is not a problem at all at the moment, but if traffic was all moving at 80-90mph it could be a problem. It would be a problem for lorries too, as I mentioned in my original post.
|
|
I thought we all drove at 80MPH anyway :)
|
|
I remember talk of an 80mph limit being discussed in these sort of terms some years ago - 10? - but it just didn't happen. Can't see it happening this time either.
|
|
I'd be happy to take the limits to 100MPH if people remembered to leave 2 seconds to the car ahead. Even where there are chevrons and signs telling people to keep two chevrons apart I see the majority of vehicles driving too close. Prats.
|
Good point, Tigger, and I'd add lane discipline. Enforce those two and the traffic will flow faster when it is moving, and grind to a halt less often when something minor causes a driver to dab the brakes.
One for the Audi drivers - not here, of course - to consider: we'll know you want to drive faster, and we'll let you, but we're also going to make you drive better.
|
|
I believe it is speed differentials that are dangerous. You would get the idiot who can't plan further ahead than his windscreen wipers driving at 85 into a situation of two HGV's in lane one and two, with some one overtaking in lane three at 65. People have been killed on a local NSL dual carriageway in similar circumstances, tractor in lane one, HGV saw it late, fast traffic in lane two, the truck went off to the left and into a obscured 50 foot drop.
|
Lane discipline!!!!
It is now faster to drive in lanes 1 and 2 on the southern clockwise section of the M25 than it is to drive in lanes 3 and 4!
I have also noticed a few cars come off and back on at a junctions!
|
|
Think this is a fantastic idea. They should combine this with much tougher enforcement of lane discipline.
|
I`ve never been to Germany and never even seen an Autobhan (except in pictures) but I never hear of regular pile-ups on them on the news. I think speed is unrestricted? with many vehicles going over 100mph?
I remember (when i used to drive) that 70 on a motorway was a "nasty" speed, it was too easy to get too comfortable, and to start losing concentration! a bit more speed might just heighten the senses and make folk concentrate more.
Dont forget that Automobile safety/reliability has improved a lot since the 70mph was first introduced, and maybe we do need to move with the times.
If 70 is the national maximum, why do they make cars unlimited? wagons are governed to comply with speed limits!
|
|
That's right - the thing with the unrestricted stretches (which I understand get fewer by the year) is that it doesn't half make you pay attention, particularly when you're overtaking - from personal experience you can be doing 120 mph past a line of vehicles and then have to nip in out of the way of something coming up behind doing 150-odd.
|
Cars are fine, it is the drivers that are the problem. On my driving test for example the highest speed I reached would have been 40mph. Then that some how qualifies you to do 80mph on the motorway?
I do however think in certain stretches 80mph is fine, the M180 comes to mind, always empty and always full of speed traps. 80mph down there would be very safe. 80mph on the m60 or 25 is not such a good idea.
|
>> 80mph on the m60 or 25 is not such a good idea.
It may or may not be a good idea Sheikha, but it is certainly standard practice. There are quite busy five-lane segments of the M25 where the two outer lanes often wind up to 80 or 90 at certain times of day. Almost as good as the autostrada round Milan in rush hour.
|
>>I remember (when i used to drive) that 70 on a motorway was a "nasty" speed, it was too easy to get too comfortable, and to start losing concentration! a bit more speed might just heighten the senses and make folk concentrate more<<
S'funny you should say that devonike, when I lived in England I used to fly down the motorways at 90-95MPH most of the time, if I drove at 70MPH I would start feeling drowsy, at 95MPH I was 'on the ball' as it were.
I have driven in Germany and not all sections of the Autobahn are un-restricted.
|
|
Cousing was warning me driving in Holland in a few weeks speed camaras everywhere.Plenty of mobile units.Watch the 100km near citys and 120km out of town.
|
>> Cousing was warning me driving in Holland in a few weeks speed camaras everywhere.Plenty of mobile units.Watch the 100km near citys and 120km out of town.
Tell me about it Dutchie, blanket surveillance, automated justice computer say no, Big Brother is watching you, it's more of a minefield out there every day and I imagine with my dim old reflexes the carphounds will get me again sooner or later... just have to hope it won't be a ban.
|
|
We will all be chipped soon A.C. I've tried to be a mimser I'm struggling.>:)
|
>> >> Cousing was warning me driving in Holland in a few weeks speed camaras everywhere.Plenty
>> of mobile units.Watch the 100km near citys and 120km out of town.
Means nothing, they have to catch you. I have plenty of Dutch flashes against my name, nowt has ever come of it.
|
You want to be careful with that flashing malarky. Even if you do choose to do it off your own manor...
:-)
Clogging it were we?
Last edited by: Humph D'Bout on Sun 25 Sep 11 at 19:01
|
Blah blah blah .. we're raising the speed limit to 80mph to help the motorists etc blah blah blah.
Revenue raising exercise - faster cars = more fuel used = more £££££.
|
>>
>> Revenue raising exercise - faster cars = more fuel used = more £££££.
>>
Got it in one, another stealth tax. With the 20% VAT on the fuel and the fuel tax the government will be coining it. At least it is an increase you don't have to pay, just like speeding taxes.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Sun 25 Sep 11 at 21:38
|
>> Revenue raising exercise - faster cars = more fuel used = more £££££.
>>
>> Got it in one, another stealth tax.
Oh my sainted aunt.
So mimsing is a political duty now is it, just to deprive the pinkoes Cameron and Osborne of their undeserved tax revenue?
Soon the entire country will waddle to a sour and resentful standstill and we can all get fat and shapeless on the spot. So relaxing.
|
>> Oh my sainted aunt.
>>
:-)))))))
|
|
look on the bright side! if this Neutrino thingy is workable and bears fruit, you will be able to get to work and back before you even set off! think of the fuel you1ll save then!
|
To save fuel do as the US did and introduce a national 50mph limit. And as some cities have done, no entry on alternate days for odd numbered cars on one day and even numbered the next.
£ billions saved in fuel imports, deaths reduced, congestion halved. Simples.
Government goes bust. but doubles VAT...:-(
PS The 80mph story is from teh Daily Make it up Wail... It's just a slow day story...
Last edited by: madf on Mon 26 Sep 11 at 15:33
|
>> To save fuel do as the US did and introduce a national 50mph limit.
the US doesn't have a national 50mph speed limit
the odd and even days was to reduce pollution. not fuel use.
|
|
Driving back once from Miami,the majority of drivers where humbling along at a steady 80mph.
|
>> Driving back once from Miami,the majority of drivers where humbling along at a steady 80mph.
>>
You drove back from Miami? You should get that story into the "Long journey" thread. :-)
|
>> >> To save fuel do as the US did and introduce a national 50mph limit.
>>
>> the US doesn't have a national 50mph speed limit
Not now, but presumably he means the 55mph one they introduced back in 1974, fully repealed in 1995:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Maximum_Speed_Law
Reckoned to only have reduced consumption by 1% though.
|
>> no entry on alternate days for odd numbered cars on one day and even numbered the next.
I seem to recall this plan to reduce smog in Athens (40C summer heat).
Fail. Many motorists simply bought a cheap banger with the oppoiste reg to their usual car and commuted in what was likely to be a much worse emitter.
With respect to AC, I was simply suggesting the political motivation for raising the speed limit.
It did not say it would not be taken advantage of.
And as an aside, driving fast doesn't burn up more calories than driving slowly, so the relative fatness/waddling of the population won't really change.
|
...driving fast doesn't burn up more calories than driving slowly...
True, but it is harder to eat a pork pie, so there may be a health benefit.
|
|
I'd rather be an eater of Pork Pies, as a motorist, than a teller of pork pies, as a politician.
|
|
Looks like it IS going to happen.. Says Guardian and Independent
|
So... 80mph limit, roughly 90 indicated, hopefully plenty of cameras to catch the rep-mobiles doing over a ton.
Thumbs up from me. :-)
|
Frankly, I'm amazed. 90 will be the new 80, of course. Even if they suggest that 80mph will actually be enforced....
I don't know whether to be pleased or disappointed. I sometimes travel very long distances on the motorway, but I stick to the limit, so 80mph will save me time. However, I'm a tight wad, so my wallet prefers me to stick to 70mph.
It seems now, you will have a choice of doing 55-60 to drive economically (and thus cruise with the HGVs and spend all day getting to where you're going) or do 80-85 to avoid being hounded by Audi drivers in lanes 2 and 3...
I think on the whole that I liked doing 70 for the best combination of speed *and* economy.
|
So you will have lorries doing 55
Careful and frugal folk like me dong 65
And when I am overtaking a lorry overtaking another lorry there will be greater risk of accidents behind me - why shoudl I do 85 just to overtake?
The minimum speed would still be 30mph, some motorways are only 2 lanes (including the M6 in a couple of places) and there is generally so much traffic you can't achieve 70. Not going to happen.
Read Damon Hill's article about it in the telegraph - If I recall he is famous for driving very very fast.
|
So he is. The Tories will, of course, have to persuade the Lib Dems first - although given what they've rolled over for in the last year I don't suppose that'll take long.
Will it make any practical difference? At an indicated 80 (true 74) on the M4 mid-morning today, only one vehicle - a Range Rover - passed me going significantly faster. It may be different in less congested parts than Berkshire but my impression here is that drivers aren't going much above 70, and that this is prompted by fuel costs rather than social conscience or fear of enforcement.
A cynic might say that the Tories know this and are proposing the change now in the confidence that it will make little difference, while raising their stock among the one-eyed 'persecuted motorist' lobby. But only a cynic could think that.
|
All true Mr Toads will drink a decorous noggin to this progressive relaxation of an irksome restriction, before firing up their snorting steeds for a quick blast round the country lanes not exceeding 110mph probably.
Naturally those who mimse on motorways, even in the outside lane, will continue to do so while whinging about the reckless lunatics overtaking them at 50 or even 60 mph. Their driving will become even more lethally headless-chicken in response to the Speeding Charter.
Watch out for the carphounds, Toad brethren!
Poop-poop!
|
>> Looks like it IS going to happen.. Says Guardian and Independent
>>
and the DT
www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/8797217/Speed-limit-on-motorways-to-rise-to-80mph.html
The speed limit on motorways will rise to 80mph, it will be announced tomorrow.
"Britain’s speed limits are lower than many other countries in Europe, with France and Italy both imposing a maximum of 81mph, while Germany has no restriction at all. "
|
|
Neither of those statements tells the whole truth, Henry. France's 130 km/h limit applies only in good weather and drops to 110 km/h (68 mph) in the rain; unrestricted motorways in Germany are, these days, the exception rather than the rule.
|
>>unrestricted motorways in Germany are, these days, the exception rather than the rule.
Even then (I can't remember the German phrase) 140KPH (85MPH) is considered 'enough'.
Have an accident and be shown you were in excess of that speed, you're in serious doo-doo.
|
BBC story here:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15116064
'The consultation begins this year with a view to raising the limit in 2013'.
So I guess it's not a done deal yet.
|
I'm in favour with certain caveats.
In the instance of a quiet motorway in good visibility and weather I don't see why 80 mph should be a problem. I regularly drive in countries with similar limits and it works well enough. I'm also in favour of some 20 mph restrictions. There are many residential streets where this would make a lot of sense. Perhaps it would be preferable to the wretched speed humps?
However, I'd be keen to see weather / traffic density / visibility variations imposed upon the maximum limits. Use of the existing matrix signs to inform drivers would be a sensible use of them.
In addition, a combination of an educative campaign and indeed enforcement of an anti tailgating legislation would be of real benefit in the event of a rise in the motorway limits.
I use motorways extensively and it seems to me as a layman that most "accidents" on them are a result of drivers being unable to stop in time in the event of hard braking by vehicles in front of them. Almost always curable by leaving sensible gaps variable by weather conditions.
On the downside. "Weaver Bird" lane changers would be even more of a danger at higher speeds.
On balance though, provided a balance is achieved, I think it's a good move and to be encouraged. All we need now is to find sections of motorway south of Preston and north of Dover where it's possible to try it out !
:-)
|
In truth, the speed limit on UK motorways has been 80mph for some time. Unless there are aggravating factors, I don't know of anyone who has been ticketed for less than 80. It clips in nicely with the 130kmh limit.
Speed differential is a problem tho. It was a really bad problem in Sicily. The Autostrada there had a limit of 130kmh, universally ignored. However, unlike the rest of Italy, there were mimsers about
For example I was bowling along at 140 = 145 kmh, had a clear view behind for about 1/2 a mile. and saw a mimser ahead, doing about 90kmh. Checked mirror, nothing. Get closer to mimser, just about to overtake, check mirror and WOOOOOOOOOOSH. An Audi A8 tanks past me as if standing still. He must have been close to his 155mph /250kph limiter.
The mimser were a strange breed, not easily identified by car type. Not unusual to see a merc S class mimsing at 80-90 kmh being overtaken at 150km by a punto or the other way round.
you needed your wits about you there.
|
|
Noticed though that it's only for England and Wales, remember to brake at the Scottish border........
|
>> Noticed though that it's only for England and Wales, remember to brake at the Scottish
>> border........
>>
Is that because they can't afford to change the 70 signs on the slip-roads up there? ;)
|
>> Is that because they can't afford to change the 70 signs on the slip-roads up
>> there? ;)
>>
Don't have to afford it, you lot down there will pay for it, like most other things. :-)
|
>>I'm also in favour of some 20 mph restrictions. There are many residential streets where this would make a lot of sense. Perhaps it would be preferable to the wretched speed humps?<<
Agreed, but they wont keep to the 20MPH limit will they, so the wretched humps will have to stay.
|
|
We're better off as we are. 80mph will never be enacted without an agreement to much more rigid enforcement, especially after the M5 pile up.
|
>>>80mph will never be enacted
Probably true but I think I'm like many where I self limit to 80-85mph and a higher limit would not increase my speed.
|
>>
>> keep two chevrons apart I see the majority of vehicles driving too close. Prats.
>>
Wouldn't the chevrons need to be further apart if the speed limit were increased?
|
The M5 crash and 80 MPH limit are unrelated. People are just trying to link two events which are purely coincident.
High fuel price already encouraged people to drive slowly anyway. Some people often drive over 80 MPH anyway. So nothing as such will change if limit is raised to 80 MPH.
|
>> The M5 crash and 80 MPH limit are unrelated. People are just trying to link
>> two events which are purely coincident.
Not much anyway, that there is any evidence of. Though who knows? The point is there are plenty of lobby group types saying that the pile up shows the stupidity of raising the speed limit.
>> So nothing as such will change if limit is raised to 80
Except the rigid enforcement that will be the quid pro quo for enacting it.
|
Why do you think it will be more rigidly enforced at 80MPH as opposed to 70MPH?
The resources for policing the motorways won't increase along with the speed limit.
Pat
|
The line taken by public/media will have a big influence on whether 80 happens or not. The last thing the Minister wants is a headline, with suitable pictures of grieving wives/orphaned kids, saying it's all down to her decision to up the limit.
Facts will play little part.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 9 Nov 11 at 09:48
|
|
Doesn't matter what speed limit is applied, people will drive beyond it, as they do now.
|
I accept that there's an ignorant minority of drivers that set their speed by taking the legal limit and adding n mph for luck, but most of us select a speed for the conditions and our mood and cap it if necessary according to the limit.
I read an absurd comment recently in our local paper. There's a rural road near me (A4155 to Shiplake) that has a few twists and one blind crest but nothing to justify its 30 limit, at least until it reaches the village itself. A recent proposal to raise this to a more sensible, though still over-prescriptive, 40 was dropped by the County Council.
Parish Council Chairman Richard Dean is quoted as saying:
"We have had some tests done and the majority of motorists travel at between 34 and 37 mph. If the limit was raised to 40 mph, drivers would go between 44 and 47 mph."
|
>> Why do you think it will be more rigidly enforced at 80MPH as opposed to
>> 70MPH?
Because it is politically unacceptable to raise the limit and continue tacitly to allow people to drive 15-20mph beyond it; and also politically difficult to argue with the environmental objections.
The resource issue only means that the enforcement will be done on a cheap or self-liquidating basis to save money - so expect SPECS or lots of cameras.
The best way to get journey times down is probably variable speed limits and part time lanes as per the M42.
|
80 mph on Motorways - RattleandSmoke
