View Full Version : What do you reckon the M/way speed limit should be?
Taking into account the standard of driving today, the technological advances in cars, the volume of traffic generally etc.
I was reading an article about this recently and, as all of us seem to be sensible (ish...), I thought I'd get the views of people who have a brain.
Each.;)
I read an article on this in Autocar recently.
They were suggesting M25 style variable speed limits with no maximum:D
Which makes perfect sense when your driving along four lanes of open road at 4am with only your stereo and a too many SSPECS cameras for company:mad:
The problem is Germany have removed most of their Autobahn restrictions and I can't see us introducing it over here:( in the present anti-car political climate. Bloody shame really.
Can you imagine doind 150+ legally without having to keep an eye out for the boys in blue:eek: fantastic!
Alg;)
Agree that variable makes more sense, and if drivers actually buy into the limits they are more likely to stick to what ever limit is posted. At the moment how many people slow down when the motorway signs say 50 but there is no obvious problem :rolleyes:
If we ever had roads with no limit they'd have to sort the road surfaces out first. Much of the Motorway system is appalling - even 70 can feel a bit dodgy on bits of the M42!
Completely derestricted.
In my opinion, the safest drivers match teh speed of the conditions, the speed of the road-users around them and the ultimate speed of the road.
Thats just my opinion though
I've not voted because you have not given an option to leave it at 70. There are so many idiots about that they just do 70 or 80 anyway reagrdless of rain or fog. You can not rely on badly trained sheep to use an uprated limit properly.
Its far better to leave it at 70 and hopefully let a good police force use proper discretion, ie pull someone for 70 in the fog, but perhaps let 90 on a clear empty motorway pass. I think a lot do.
In an ideal world it may be a good idea but I don't think you are being realistic.
I voted for variable but I'm under no illusion that it will ever happen. To make it work you'd have to have speed cameras on every bridge and traffic and weather sensors otherwise the idiots Scottie mentions would take the pi55 like they do now in the fog etc.
Supraman1
14-10-2002, 13:34
Variable. Sometimes 50 is too fast, sometimes . . . well - I've exceeded 160 mph a few times in the small hours when I was on shift work and never saw another car, let alone put them in danger. If I had a faster car I would have gone faster still. Ergo, IMHO there is no one speed where you can draw the line between safe and dangerous, there should be no upper limit.
You wouldn't need a camera on every gantry to get people to obey the limits, you'd just need a few to encourage compliance. Besides, if such a system was used properly with realistic speed limits 95% of people would be inside the limits anyway. They would grow to associate the speed on the signs above them with a speed which was comfortable according to the conditions at the time, and from there it's only a small step to voluntarily complying with them anyway. Also, you move to rewarding motorists for complying with the limits rather than punishing them for breaking them. I wouldn't mind travelling at 40mph on a slippery/busy/roadworks stretch of motorway if I knew I could let rip once I got clear of it and make the time up.
Or how about a system which says "70mph speed limit between 6am and 8pm, after that derestricted (or 100mph)", making exceptions for roads which are genuinely very busy for 24hrs a day.
Instead, the government is planning to spend £3bn (BILLION!) on traffic calming (aka driver enraging) across the nation. Not wishing to turn this thread into a political debate, but the conservatives are making some encouraging noises about ending the war on the motorist, but no-one seems to be listening. Sure, they *might* be lying, but labour are saying exactly the opposite and I just *know* that they're telling the truth :mad: :eek: :rolleyes:
Bean Bandit
14-10-2002, 14:04
Well here in Switzerland the motorway limit is max. ~75mph (120kmh). But it's mostly variable from 30kmh to the mentioned 120.
In Germany they also starting to reintroduce restrictons on certain motorways cause there it atracted a lot of people who are driving like nuts => causing a lot of big crashes (e.g. over 100 cars involved).
So finaly it's a very tricky and expensive thing to end the war - probably never done as it works out fine enough now but as we have so many individuals driving on the same street you have to control the obviously dangerous ones else you'll spend more time in the body shop or hospital than in your car.
Look at it the positive way if you risk it to go definately too fast it's not too often has the blue one are always watching us but that means when something realy unexpected happens(you or someone else) you are probably at a regular speed and therefor be able to prevent damage (e.g. someone else changin lanes suddenly when you are right next to him)
My opinion is delimit all the speed limits, but I will have to agree with the point that their are alot of loones out there.
But isnt there another way round it. introducing a new drivers test and make it more advanced and make the pass mark higher (practical aswell as theory)
but then you have another problem, what about the rest of the drivers who have already passed.
It would take ages to get every1 to re-take their test.
Not sure whether that would be a good idea, but would it be worth a go?
Supraman1
14-10-2002, 15:15
The guidelines used to state that the speed limit should be set at the speed which 85% of the drivers were travelling at or below. ie only the fastest 15% of drivers would be liable for prosecution, so with a bit of discretion on the part of the police only about 5% of people would be seriously targeted - the "most dangerous" five per cent. The loonies, as it were.
In the climate of the last five years, due to lowering speed limits for political rather than road safety reasons, blanket enforcement, and approaching-zero tolerance, this maxim has been discarded - instead more and more of the drivers on a particular stretch of road are criminalised. not because they are driving any more dangerously, or even any faster, just because (on avergae) speed limits are being forced down and enforcement rates are being forced up.
While the government claim to be cracking down on dangerous drivers, all they are really doing is changing the laws so more people break them, and then nicking them. Imagine if all that effort was instead focused against tailgaters, lane hoggers, people who don't indicate, people who are too incompetent to park their car without putting dents in your own p&j, drink drivers, drug drivers, etc etc etc.
I believe I read somewhere that drink drivers killed and injured as many people last year as "speeders" did (even going by the governemnts own mendacious figures). Targetting the 1-2% of motorists who drive under the influence would have been accepted by the community, targetting indiscriminately the 80%+ of drivers who break the posted speed limit is a ridiculous move which brings the whole road safety policy into disrepute and leads to drivers viewing all road safety initiatives in a negative light.
AshT_200
14-10-2002, 16:12
I reckon remove them.
Cos you'd be likely to drive safer, if you weren't having to keep an eye on your RVM for plod.
Originally posted by Supraman
Imagine if all that effort was instead focused against tailgaters, lane hoggers, people who don't indicate, people who are too incompetent to park their car without putting dents in your own p&j, drink drivers, drug drivers, etc etc etc.
I think you'll find that in a test performed by 5th Gear (or Driven), well, by Quentin Wilson and his mates - a stoned bloke (bloke who smoked daily, after being given 1 joint) performed considerably better than a non stoned driver at avoiding dangers - as he drove slower and was more aware of the road around him....
Needless to say old Quentin was a bit shocked. I'm not though - as with drink there should be drug limits - 1 or 2 joints can actually IMPROVE driving in certain conditions... It really does make you drive slower and improve your awareness, as you know you're stoned and compensate by concentrating harder!
It certainly keeps the speeding fines at bay... Only works if you smoke daily tho... :mad:
Drink drivers and generally incompetend twits certainly ought to be locked up.
I still think what causes accidents is plain bad driving. In many cases it probably doesn't involve exceeding the speed limit as the prime cause.
However I fully support sticking to 30 and 40 limits as they tend to be in force for a reason (and I just know everybody will find a bit of 30mph urban dual carriageway with no obvious reason for the restriction!!).
These days I tend not to speed even on the motorway - I'm quite chilled out at 70mph tbh as I feel the risks in getting caught are too high. Driving in a straight line is pretty boring anyway until the speeds get seriously high, so I'd rather just stay within the law. Give me a quiet 'A' road though and I'll crack on a bit as I think you're less likely to be caught.
Following this philosophy, I've never had any points for speeding (or even been stopped) in 13 years and yet for most of that time I've owned some seriously fast sports bikes. Still got a Yam R6.
I voted for variable. I've driven some where a 50 limit would be quite adequate, and others where derestriction would be perfectly acceptable.
Stimpy, I wish you'd either stop posting or change your sig. I'm getting soooo jealous keep looking at your car. Sure you don't want to sell ;)
Sorry back on topic.
p.nicholas
14-10-2002, 23:10
depending on road conditions and other factors
also you should be given fair warning of a speed change well in advance so if there is a problem you have enough time to do something about it(and they wont nick you for speeding while hiding in a bush and waiting for you to go hammering it pass them)40yards before an accident or hazard:( would be the pefect excuse to nick alot of people:mad:
Martin T
15-10-2002, 02:51
I voted variable limits for pretty much the same reasons as most of the people here.
For some reason, everyone thinks they're the bollox at driving their car, when about 95% of driver cant drive for sh1t. This can be solved, but next to nobody would like it.
EVERYONE has to take driving tests every 5 Years, going to every year for the crumblies. Make driving tests more difficult aswell.
Just because the theory test asks people "you are really tired, do you:-
A. Play loud music whilst driving
B. Slap yourself around a bit
C. Have some respect and dont f*cking drive in that state
D. Catch a few zzz's at the wheel"
doesnt't mean the people that answer correctly will do that - they know what is right, but almost everyonew ignors it. (sp?)
Just because most of the country has a car doesn't give them the right to it. If they then sort out the DVLA with a good database (that actually works), toughen laws on vehicle registration, add insurance details to it, then the filth will be able to type in a reg, see that it is taxed, the keepers license details etc, and those dodgy w*nkers with no tax, MOT or insurance will hopefully pi*s off.
On the test thing - if people have to take a special test every 5 years, then most of the absolute worst drivers couldn't keep their licenses for long, and that'd probably half the number of accidents anyway.
Originally posted by Scottie
I've not voted because you have not given an option to leave it at 70. There are so many idiots about that they just do 70 or 80 anyway reagrdless of rain or fog. You can not rely on badly trained sheep to use an uprated limit properly.
Its far better to leave it at 70 and hopefully let a good police force use proper discretion, ie pull someone for 70 in the fog, but perhaps let 90 on a clear empty motorway pass. I think a lot do.
In an ideal world it may be a good idea but I don't think you are being realistic.
Wouldn't a 'variable' vote have covered this?
Originally posted by Ripper
Wouldn't a 'variable' vote have covered this?
Not really, because I think a "variable" limit would be too costly to implement on all the motorways.
Strictly speaking the current motorway limit of 70 is variable, because the limit is the maximum speed you should be travelling at in good conditions.
I like the idea of drivers having to retest every 5 or 10 years, and perhaps after passing your test you should be given 6 months to pass an advanced driving test. The current test does not suffice.
I can see where you are coming from, but if you make the motorway limit 80, most idiots will take it to mean 90 or 100 is the accepted speed, regardless of weather.
I agree that speed doesn't kill, its speed in the wrong place or conditions that kills.
Variable limits with no upper ceiling, depending on road/climate conditions, accompanied by a mandatory retest every 5 years with those not passing first time having to undergo at least three months of retraining before being able to apply for a retest again.
Originally posted by Robbie
Stimpy, I wish you'd either stop posting or change your sig. I'm getting soooo jealous keep looking at your car. Sure you don't want to sell ;)
Sorry Robbie, I'll try not to take pictures just after I've cleaned it next time :D Buy yourself a 2***** and then you won't be jealous. Go on, you know you want to :D :D :D
SX Turbo Chic
15-10-2002, 23:34
My grievance with the current speed limits is, why on a 60mph road, someone is doing 30mph and they don't get pulled for going too slow! This causes frustration and dangerous overtaking. As for the motorways, I think the speed limit should be open, it doesn't matter if you're doing 70 or 100mph. If the idiot up infront can't drive, doesn't know what a rear view mirror is, there's going to be an accident at some point! If you're doing top speeds, keep your distance and always keep an eye on the bugger up front and you should be safe..... unless your tyre decides to go pop!!!!xxx
:D in germany at different times of the day waggons and coaches are restricted to overtake each other in between certain times *granted the majority of M-ways in europe are only 2 lanes but they have a bigger mass to cover so if they applyed the same rule here in England then it would free up two lanes for cars then if you restrict the outside lane to people who have passed a police fast driving course the same one the coppers do they issue you with new reg plates enabeling you to use the outside lane not exceeding 110 mph :D failing that build more roads super fast M-ways only for nissan 200dys :D
Originally posted by SX Turbo Chic
My grievance with the current speed limits is, why on a 60mph road, someone is doing 30mph and they don't get pulled for going too slow! This causes frustration and dangerous overtaking. As for the motorways, I think the speed limit should be open, it doesn't matter if you're doing 70 or 100mph. If the idiot up infront can't drive, doesn't know what a rear view mirror is, there's going to be an accident at some point! If you're doing top speeds, keep your distance and always keep an eye on the bugger up front and you should be safe..... unless your tyre decides to go pop!!!!xxx
Quite right - this especially pi55es me off on curvy roads like in Wales, I want to go round the corners fast but some one in front is going really slowly, even taking into account their car might not corner as fast as a sports car. Then when we get to a straight bit and I can overtake they FECKING SPEED UP!!! I suppose they think they are helping.:mad: :mad: They can surely see me in the mirror, why don't they let me past?? Do they think that if they can't go round that bend quickly then no-one else can??:mad: :mad:
Then there's the procession, 60mph limit, one guy doing 40 then one or more cars behind him, bumper to bumper. These guys have no intention of overtaking but they don't leave enough room between them and the car infront so someone can overtake them one at a timeinstead of having to get past them all.:mad: :mad:
Rant Rant, strayed a bit off topic, sorry:)
I agree with Faster and Chic.
There is a problem with peeps driving too slow as well.
I think that u should sit a second test maybe a year or two after ur original test and have a trained high speed instructor with u, he would then judge what speeds u can competently drive at at u would maybe get a sticker or a plate of some sort to state this.
In this way, the d!ckheads who cant handla a car above 40mph are staying well clear of the good drivers at "reasonable" speeds on the mways.
Although i dunno if a reg plate would work FC, cos i reckon i can competently and safely handle my 200 at 120+, but if my mum or my sis borrowed the car..................................:eek: :eek: :eek:
Kev
Originally posted by Starionman
Completely derestricted.
In my opinion, the safest drivers match teh speed of the conditions, the speed of the road-users around them and the ultimate speed of the road.
Thats just my opinion though
Mmmmm... maybe the safest drivers do, but that covers so few people (but such a large percentage of 200sx drivers, isn't that just plain wierd...? ;) ).
Variable. Definitely. What we need is to not restrict people unneccessarily, but at the same time reel in the w@nkers who always drive far too fast for the conditions, and kill people. And I don't think that it would be that costly to implement - you could have a set rule for quieter A & B roads, and then only need more costly variable signs on busy A roads, and motorways, which could easily be paid for by the revenue from speed cameras. :rolleyes: :mad: . You could even have the signs attached to the Gatsos, just to make the point :)
Originally posted by Wak
Quite right - this especially pi55es me off on curvy roads like in Wales, I want to go round the corners fast but some one in front is going really slowly, even taking into account their car might not corner as fast as a sports car. Then when we get to a straight bit and I can overtake they FECKING SPEED UP!!! I suppose they think they are helping.:mad: :mad: They can surely see me in the mirror, why don't they let me past?? Do they think that if they can't go round that bend quickly then no-one else can??:mad: :mad:
Rant Rant, strayed a bit off topic, sorry:)
Hmm, I can see your point.
However, I have been a corner crawler - when in SW Ireland I don't know the roads at all, and between the road and a 500m plus sheer drop there is a small brick wall (dry stone). If people don't know the roads then you can understand their being over cautious. It is worrying however when you suddenly find a local doing the same corners at 60mph plus, on your side of the road because "they know the road"
Yes I understand anyone wanting to drive at a speed that's appropriate to their skill and the capabilities of their car, what really gets me is the thoughtlessness when they can clearly see you want to go faster than them, they should let you pass where it is safe to do so, (ie on a straight) and not speed up.
Some of the locals in Wales are scary, driving there one night in my Porsche I let a guy in a Cortina pass me:eek: and I wasn't hanging around! I reckon he must have had sixth sense or round-the-corner vision:D
Originally posted by Wak
... I let a guy in a Cortina pass me... I reckon he must have had sixth sense or round-the-corner vision
Nah, guy in a Cortina = Tw@t :D :D
Must have had good car control though, cos as I remember them the back end skipped about a bit :rolleyes:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.9 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.