Ooh those little fibbers at BMW. Supposed to be limited to 155 like wot mine is. I'm not going to try and find out if it really is though. Plenty fast enough for me.
Most of the time
|
>> Ooh those little fibbers at BMW. Supposed to be limited to 155
Report does say it was measured by a 'hand held device' which IIRC have been found to be inaccurate if not used carefully. I'd be interested to know which 5 it was - might find it in another report...
EDIT: Gainsborough Standard helpfully describes it as 'dark coloured' :)
Last edited by: Focusless on Wed 19 Aug 15 at 23:16
|
|
Many of the companies that offer engine remaps will also disable speed limiters. I came across a lot about this in the forums when I was looking for experiences of the 325d that I eventually bought. Don't worry; mine is still at factory settings and will remain there - at least until the two years of warranty and service plan are up.
|
I do recall reading about a case years ago where a Skoda driver got done for 100MPH and the Mags agreed that a Skoda couldn't possible do 100MPH and dismissed the case.
(I've probably made this up - I often recall things like this but when challenged can find no supporting evidence).
|
"found to be inaccurate"
I tried to use this in my defence of a speeding charge 10 years ago, but was obstructed all the way. I was even told by an official that I couldn't see the operating manual for the device because of 'the data protection act' (which is, in fact, excluded from matters of court evidence) but that shows how touchy they are about any suggestion that they might be less than perfect. The magistrates convicted me anyway, even though the police witness identified the bike incorrectly!
|
"To drive at this speed is unbelievably dangerous"
Why? IIRC, the majority of accidents occur at or below 30mph. How many occur at >100mph, I wonder..?
|
Why? IIRC, the majority of accidents occur at or below 30mph. How many occur at >100mph, I wonder..?
I like the logic.
The answer to greater road safety is for everybody travel at greater than 100mph at all times. The accident rate would plummet
|
|
And we'd all get there faster, what's not to like.
|
|
Well for a start, some slow ole duffer in his Yaris is going to be in your way.
|
|
You'll be walking the plank if you're not careful...
|
>> The answer to greater road safety is for everybody travel at greater than 100mph at
>> all times. The accident rate would plummet
Exactly. Surprised 'they' can't see it.
Apparently, almost all shark attacks happen in less than three feet of water. Sensible folk get out to where they are in at least four feet.
|
>>ensible folk get out to where they are in at least four feet.
That's ridiculous and overkill; 3ft 6" would be fine. Actually, you could be modern and manage the immigrant sharks as well by making sure you are in 1 metre - more than 3ft and less effort than 3ft 6in
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 20 Aug 15 at 13:13
|
OK, OK - point taken!
I'm just trying to say that speed, per se, doesn't kill anyone. The 70 limit, IIRC, was originally an economy measure as a result of the Yom Kippur war and subsequent oil crisis in 1973, but (like the originally temporary Income Tax) no-one thought to repeal it when the situation recovered.
I don't drive or ride fast very often, but you can be sure that I'm concentrating harder than usual when I do.
Who was the greater hazard, I wonder - the 43-year old in the BMW doing 157 or the 84-year old in the Nissan Micra doing 100?
Last edited by: J Bonington Jagworth on Thu 20 Aug 15 at 14:33
|
>> I'm just trying to say that speed, per se, doesn't kill anyone. The 70 limit,
>> IIRC, was originally an economy measure as a result of the Yom Kippur war and
>> subsequent oil crisis in 1973
No it was initially an experiment under minister Ernest Marples in the MacMillan/Home govt, hence the words Marples Must Go on an M1 bridge. They still visible when it was demolished in 1981 as part of the Brakespear to Berrygrove widening. Limit was subsequently made permanent by Barbara Castle as transport minister in Wilson's first govt.
There were limits in the post Yom Kippur oil farrago but, at least in so far as M/ways were concerned they were raised again later.
|
"initially an experiment"
There's a surprise. Still, I bow to your wisdom and experience, Bromp - you must be even older than me!
At the time, though, 70mph was quite a decent pace and I recall being impressed, as a boy, by speedometers that went as far as 100mph, let alone cars that could actually do it!
I surmise that the occupants of any modern car are more likely to survive a 100mph crash than the (unbelted) occupants of a 70's model travelling at 70. I just think that the limit could sensibly be raised, and that speed is the bogey-man only because it is easily quantified.
|
>> At the time, though, 70mph was quite a decent pace and I recall being impressed,
>> as a boy, by speedometers that went as far as 100mph, let alone cars that
>> could actually do it!
Posted this a few weeks ago in another thread - interview with guy who took a Le Mans AC Cobra Coupé GT up to 185mph on the M1 back in 1964:
www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/motorsport/day-jack-sears-hit-185mph-m1-motorway
I was told that if I came up behind someone, it was best not to blast past at 180mph — maybe throttle back to about 120mph.
|
|
I met "gentleman" Jack Sears last year...his talents are not much dimmed, he was pulled over on the M4 shortly afterwards driving Nick Mason's 250 GTO.
|
>>Who was the greater hazard, I wonder - the 43-year old in the BMW doing 157 or the 84-year old in the Nissan Micra doing 100?
I don't know, it could go either way.
But how do you factor capability into maximum speed limits?
For me, since I am unable to tell which drivers are safe at 157 and which are not, I would prefer that there was a rule which said nobody could drive that fast and people who get caught doing so will be punished as a form of discouragement to them and others.
Somebody's ability to drive at 157mph is relevant to their success at it on a track. On a road where you have animals, idiots, normal other drives making mistakes, car failures, debris etc. etc. into the equation then it surely must be that OVERALL 70mph is safer than 157mph?
I will say that I drive in different countries quite a lot and Motorway speed limits vary between about 65mph and about 90mph, and motorways with the higher speed limits are a great deal less comfortable to be on.
So much so that it quite put me off wishing speed limits were higher in the UK. Seems to me that about 75/80 is about the right maximum speed, all other factors being equal.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 20 Aug 15 at 14:44
|
>> So much so that it quite put me off wishing speed limits were higher in
>> the UK. Seems to me that about 75/80 is about the right maximum speed, all
>> other factors being equal.
Since most of Europe has limits around 110-130kph I'd suggest you're not alone in thinking max around 80mph is right absolute limit.
|
Speeding in itself is never the problem. Inappropriate speed for the circumstances is the one.
Trouble is we are all different, with different abilities, etc... and... the circumstances for a given road can and do change, sometimes in a short period of time.
...so we are left with limits that are a low mean, to ensure the totally stupid, the criminally negligent and the utterly unaware have half a chance of not killing or injuring people... which can be frustrating for those that can safely grab a bit more.
157mph on a British dual carriageway is too fast for most people to do safely and depending on the exact venue or circumstances, might well have been reckless.
|
I managed 150mph in my bosses AMG on the Thorney (A47) bypass but it was early afternoon, dry, sunny and I only overtook two other vehicles spread at least a mile apart. I also took a look-out with me in the passenger seat, just in case;)
I braked far too early for the roundabout forgetting the brakes would be better to match the speed capabilities of the car, but hey ho, I enjoyed myself, put no-one else at risk and there are times it's good to 'just do it' and make a memory.
Previously the fastest I had been was 127mph on the back straight at Mallory Park riding sidecar in a racing outfit in a practice session.
That shows over the years, I haven't changed one bit!!
Pat
Last edited by: Pat on Thu 20 Aug 15 at 15:53
|
Think the fastest I ever went was an indicated 200kph in a rented Merc C Class in Germany once. I got a bit scared and backed off.
Never broke the ton in the UK. I think 90 is about as fast as I like to go these days.
But the automobile has never really been about speed and thrills for me, more about freedom and appreciation of its form and function. I suppose that's why I've never owned a properly powerful car. The Volvo I'm in the process of buying will be my most powerful ever, at 180bhp. The current Mazda is roughly joint top of my league at the moment at 147bhp, with one of our 2.0TDi Tourans and the Laguna 2.0dCi at about 150bhp each.
|
Highest I have done in UK was 112 GPS speed in my Fabia vrS on the M8.
On the M8 west bound, between Shotts and Newhouse there is a downhill stretch with no bridges, slips, police lookout posts and is always very tempting (or it was until they started the 5 year roadwork program)
|
Fastest I've done was about 1,300 mph. 4 times in fact. It was on a flat bit about 500 miles outside London.
I wasn't driving but the guys who did seemed to know what they were doing.
Its very bumpy at that speed, I actually spilled my G&T at one point.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 20 Aug 15 at 17:19
|
|
Lightweight. I've been doing 66,600 mph all day and not turned a hair.
|
"66,600 mph"
But how fast is our bit of the galaxy travelling - and relative to what..? :-)
|
Seems that this time the traffic plod were talking sense and 160-odd mph was too fast for the road. In fact most cars are going to feel unstable on an old dual carriageway A road. They are often quite bumpy at high speed. And since many cars have odd or underinflated tyres and dodgy old dampers and suspension links they can be unstable at 100-plus even on a usually less bumpy motorway.
None of that will deter a nutter in a hurry though, and I've been one myself in the past. But in the end you stop thinking yee-hah!, So far so good! and adopt a slightly more conservative, life and car preserving approach without, it is hoped, any untoward mimsing.
My present car doesn't really appreciate cruising over about 85 although it is quite capable of maintaining 100-plus, at a price. It doesn't mind bimbling and lolloping through the lanes below the legal limit, and doesn't even mind crawling along behind the odd queue of lady 40mph mimsers. It has learned patience, and appreciates frugality. And so have I, so do I.
I'd still quite like a BMW or similar that can do a very relaxed 100mp cruise with 50 or 60mph and a massive dollop of torque in hand for squirting past ambitious mimsers. But I don't need one unfortunately.
|
|
I think 90 is uncomfortably fast; 100 is terrifyingly fast.
|
I must feel much the same, MM. Given a clear road in either car, I'll set the CC with the needle at or below 80. If it ever nudges towards 90, it's because I'm in lane 3 and trying to get past a knot or out of the way of something behind. Ironic, perhaps, because it would be much safer on an empty road; I just don't want to go that fast.
The 325d is supposedly capable of 150. Certainly at 120 it would be at 3000 rpm and still on peak torque, so I can see how it might work in Gmac country; I just can't see myself trying it.
|
|
Many years ago I suffered a fron wheel puncture at 50mph in a Vauxhall Chevette. I had both of my children on board and it was a frightening experience. The thought of a blow out at 100mph plus is horrifiying.
|
many years ago I had a front week puncture and instant deflation at 75 mph in my capri on the M4.
It was inconvenient because no-one would let me from the fast lane onto the hard shoulder, but nothing more dramatic than that,
|
|
Obviously I am more easily frightened than you Zero but even you surely would not relish a front wheel blow out at 100 mph?
|
>> Obviously I am more easily frightened than you Zero but even you surely would not
>> relish a front wheel blow out at 100 mph?
I wouldn't plan on it every day as a fun diversion, but in my case the effect was merely an attention getter, nothing more.
Slowing down in the fast lane was the scary part!
|
My biggest brown trouser moment was a rear tyre blow out on an Escort on the M4 near Swindon some 25 years back. I was doing about eighty, fortunate that I was in the middle lane having just passed a truck so the umpteen 360 degree spins the car managed it did without hitting anything before ending up on the nearside bank with no damage. Doubly fortunate because it was just after 6am the day after boxing day and there was very little traffic about. The wheels had sunk into the soft earth on the bank and even with Mrs O'Reliant and the overtaken trucker helping me to push we couldn't shift it. A police patrol towed us back onto the road and waited while I changed the wheel.
Apparently a rear blowout is worse that one on the front because you have no way of exerting any control.
|
Mappie, given the right conditions, a quiet dual carriageway, decent viz etc, 100 is quite comfortable, even in my pals lowly Tdi 140 Golf.
On a busy motorway 100mph would be stupid. OTOH I have regularly been a passenger in cars quite recently with three figure speeds on the speedo when conditions were clear , dry & quiet. It didn't seem particularly fast to me, but driving at that speed on a busy motorway/dual in lane three ( or two ) would definitely concern me.
|
>> I think 90 is uncomfortably fast; 100 is terrifyingly fast.
>>
Depends on the car - in my diesel auto Merc, on a quiet motorway, 100 is effortless. The car seems to "settle" at higher speeds, almost as if everything weights up. At 110 I start to notice the speed.
However 75 feels quite fast enough in our Jazz.
|
>> That shows over the years, I haven't changed one bit!!
>>
>> Pat
>>
I'm grinning like a Fool here. Well done that Lady.
|
|
Good for you, Pat. I was beginning to feel outnumbered! :-)
|
|
Your are not allowed to say the immigrant word FM 0:-)
|
>> Your are not allowed to say the immigrant word FM 0:-)
of course you can. You can't however try and make out they are the only bad people in the country.
|
I haven't driven or been driven over 120mph that I can remember. But I could and would given the right machinery.
I agree with others that over about 90 depending on the car - slower for some - you are in a different area and need to shape up in a serious way. Get the tyre pressures right and wheel balance and alignment right before even trying.
The other thing is that at very high speeds a wet surface can catch you out if you lift off even quite gently on a bend. I speak from brown-trouser experience, hell's bells, half a mile nearly of seesawing down a slick M1. Cautious old cat these days.
|
A colleague sold his "classic" Merc soft top (think Hart to Hart) to a buyer from London who took the train up to Glasgow and bought it, and drove back down.
Sale was completed at 10.35 am, paperwork signed etc.
A few days later he received a speeding fine for the M74, doing 95mph at 11.40am !
He admits himself that the car could easily be doing 100mph and you wouldn't notice. Bit of a bummer getting a speeding ticket so early in ownership.
|
That is remarkably near me Dog.
90mph through that particular 30mph limit is indeed 'lunatic'.
|
If I had the power I'd change the rule so that
80 MPH is recommended max speed on motorways (less when wet)
80-100 MPH use judgement and prosecution only if police believes you were driving dangerously
> 105 MPH = prosecution
|
What would you offer for 102, Movi?
};---)
|
|
'specially on a motorbike!
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-55079524
Seriously seriously quick.
What will the outcome be ?
|
|
Pity it wasn't a bridge pillar.
|
|
I'll be surprised if he stays out of prison.
|
Not sure I’d have the courage (stupidity...?) to ride a motorbike at 180mph in a t shirt no matter what the traffic conditions!
I did take the opportunity, on my drive back from Italy through Germany, on very quiet, unrestricted stretch of autobahn shortly after leaving Austria to see what 155mph (the limited top speed of the car) felt like. While it obviously required more concentration the car was perfectly composed. But I was very aware of other traffic that I was approaching and, even at those speeds, that was approaching me so it wasn’t a particularly enjoyable experience and I wouldn’t want to do it for hours on end. In the interests of science I also tried it roof down...it topped out at the same speed, and though noisy I could still hear the stereo :)
As an aside, the active cruise and lane assist worked all the way up to 125mph, but you’re on your own after that. The adaptive cruise reads the road ahead and actively slows the car if it thinks a bend ahead needs a slower speed, or if a speed limit changes. But, even with all the safety gizmos I still think that 120ish is the realistic maximum if you want to stay at it for any length of time. If nothing else you’d lose any time you gained by going flat out in additional fuel stops!
|
I've squeezed just the wrong side of 150MPH out of a 24V Senator once.
I was starting to run out of road it was a relatively short piece of dual carriageway. Although I had it to myself.
My mind was processing the consequences of tyre blowouts or some animal running out infront of me.
As PeterS says 120 is probably more comfortable but still requiring high levels of concentration.
|
|
I'm led to believe my Beemer's top speed is actually 151mph if one were to use the GPS speedo on a mobile.
|
>> Not sure I’d have the courage (stupidity...?) to ride a motorbike at 180mph in a
>> t shirt no matter what the traffic conditions!
>>
>>
At 180mph I doubt it would make any difference what you were wearing.
|
>> >>
>> At 180mph I doubt it would make any difference what you were wearing.
>>
Yes, that’s quite true!!
|
|
Either way, you wouldn't be wearing it for very long.
|
Nicked at 157mph - legacylad
