Now those damn truckers know what it's like to be held up ;-)
I didn't think it'd be long before this sort of asinine comment cropped up.
On the one hand I think these micro-cars SHOULD be prohibited from motorways, but on the other we can guarantee that it won't just be them that gets banned but the whole taxation class which would screw things up for a lot of others, including trikes I think.
Anyone remember when they limited mopeds to 30 mph maximum? Road deaths actually increased IIRC, because thre darn things didn't have any extra speed to get OUT of trouble, equally as important as having too much.
Problem is that to the driver behind these little cars just look like any other car and of course some of us don't EXPECT a car to be travelling that slowly on a motorway. True there are often "old pink fluffy dice" who stick to 50 but usually in cars that are at least capable of faster speeds.
The Reliants mentioned by a previous poster, depite their oft-mocked naff-ness, were at least capable of a decent turn of speed. I hate to say it though but I still get the giggles on the rare occasions when one overtakes my truck; believe me they look really comical from above!
Edited by Webmaster on 16/02/2008 at 12:20
|
>I hate to say it though but I still get the giggles on the rare occasions when one overtakes my truck; believe me they look really comical from above!<
I used to find amusement from the passenger seat on account of the perception about how fast they were. The amount of times I left the traffic behind from the lights with ease on account of low weight giving what was actually a very good power to weight ratio, meaning great pace off the line. I think it was more than 80 bhp/1000kg which is in line with some reasonably nippy small cars.
The perception of them being slow is more to do with the type of people who drive them than the cars themselves.
As you say, if you ban cars based on speed ability, you ban far more than micro-cars and anyone would argue if its ok for one vehicle, its ok for any.
I think the issue here is that every driver out there with any sense does know that there is a possibility of a slow moving vehicle - it may be rare, but it exists much in the same way that on any rural A-road, you could happen upon a tractor at 25 mph while your doing 60, which is roughly the same scenario as approaching a 40 mph car on the M-way, the difference being that on the M-way, you simply switch lanes and pass.
|
I may have missed something in this thread, but are people allowed to drive Aixams and similar vehicles without a licence of any kind? I'd always thought you needed at least a motorcycle licence. Can any Backroomer enlighten me?
P.
|
|
You need a B1 license if I remember correctly. In this country you cannot drive them without a license.
|
|
|
I may have missed something in this thread but are people allowed to drive Aixams and similar vehicles without a licence of any kind?
Not in the UK, you need a minimum of FULL motorcycle licence. I believe that in certain other countries the law allows young teenagers to drive the 50cc powered versions without a licence.
Out of interest, does anyone know the criteria for driving these as a learner? Would you need a qualified passenger as with a car, or could you in theory train as per Direct Access motorcycling, being followed by an instructor on a motorcycle?
I know it's daft and improbable but I'd be intrigued to know the answer.
Edited by Harleyman on 16/02/2008 at 19:39
|
the driver only had to put his foot down to get up to 65mph but he would have been thrashing it - I drive an Aixam 500 and use A and M roads - regularly overtake larger slower vehicles - the max is 70 but there is no SET minimum -you can drive an Aixam with a full motorcycle or car licence but from April with a provisional as well - but that would make you a learner and you would not be allowed on motorway - but if any of the complaining drivers of gas guzzlers would like to buy me a larger automatic I would consider the offer - mine does70mpg - Honest Harry
|
|
maybe this should be in 'unusual sightings' but yesterday I saw one of these in Fife with shiny alloys, big bore tail-pipe, dark tinted windows and fancy decals - maybe done for a bet?
|
No - some Jock thought it was cool!
|
"Many are driven by people who have never held any sort of licence, hence have never taken a test and have no idea of road rules. Many others are driven by people who have lost their licences for drink/driving offences, or because of health problems."
As just posted, you have to have at least a motorcycle license to drive these vehicles - I think they are mostly driven by elderly drivers moving from Reliants or those looking for a very small economical car. This just sounds like prejudice against these sort of drivers. Okay, it is maybe a bit annoying to be stuck behind one on the motorway, but the same goes for HGV's, caravans etc.
|
|
Hear, hear! Unfortunately this thread - like some others in recent times - has degenerated into the airing of prejudices and even the odd racist remark. It seems some forum users have forgotten that the purpose of motorways is to get vehicles, passengers and goods efficiently from A to B. There are some necessary rules regarding the most unsuitable forms of vehicle but outside those rules the rights are the same for the driver of a Lamborghini Gallardo as for an Austin 7 or Aixam 500 driver.
|
|
As I once travelled the length of the M62 in a Bond Bug which had blown its head gasket, and couldn't exceed 25mph, I'm saying nothing ..... apart from I would never do it again. terrifying.
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 14/03/2008 at 10:25
|
I agree that it is dangerous to drive a this speed on a motorway.
BUT. . . .
What makes it dangerous is those idiots closing from behind so quickly that they cannot react in sufficient time. If the cap fits . . . . .
IIRC the minimum speed on a motorway is 30mph. The maximum is 70 - but only where it is safe to do 70. If another vehicle is travelling slowly, it is no longer safe to do 70.
About time some people remembered that they do not have a god given right to drive as fast as they like without any regard for the law or other road users.
|
Given that at any time there could be an accident requiring other traffic to come to a halt quickly, it seems rather worrying that many people find it difficult to react to a car doing 40 mph. Stopping distances and anticipation are all that is required to get by safely with variable speed traffic.
I doubt the minimum speed on the M25 is 30 since everytime ive travelled on it, 30 is about as much as you could hope for!
|
Given that at any time there could be an accident requiring other traffic to come to a halt quickly it seems rather worrying that many people find it difficult to react to a car doing 40 mph. Stopping distances and anticipation are all that is required to get by safely with variable speed traffic.
Given that all drivers, even the ones who post in this forum, are only human, it doesn't surprise me that any situation where motorway traffic does something unusual (suddenly slowing from 70 mph to 40 mph with no cues visible at distance, for example) is more likely to lead to an accident than a situation where motorway traffic doesn't do something unusual.
It is very easy and quite right to say that unusual events *should* not surprise drivers. It is extremely naive to think that unusual events *will* not surprise drivers. Choosing to drive at 40mph when your vehicle is capable of 70 and 70 is not inappropriate for the conditions is recklessly irresponsible. But motorways permit vehicles that can only achieve 40mph. Driving one of those vehicles on the motorway is allowed. If the vehicle is a something like a crane, or a flatbed truck with a portacabin on the back (i.e. big, with placards and flashing lights, that other drivers can see from miles away and whose slow speed will not be a surprise to everyone else) is one thing. Driving a small car that can only do that sort of speed is asking for trouble. Worse, you might not even be involved in the accident you precipitate. You might get away clean, seeing the carnage in your rear view mirror. It may be this concern that prompted the post early in the thread questioning whether it is appropriate that this sort of vehicle is allowed on a motorway.
|
IIRC the minimum speed on a motorway is 30mph.
Is it, by Jove!
|
IIRC the minimum speed on a motorway is 30mph. The maximum is 70 - but only where it is safe to do 70. If another vehicle is travelling slowly it is no longer safe to do 70.
There is NO minimum speed on the motorway, I've been on the M25 once and done 20mph (the variable speed limit signs said 20 and there are loads of speed cameras above them and I ain't getting a fine and 3 points on my licence), however this was extremely dangerous as everyone else was overtaking me ignoring the signs (and the fact that the speed cameras were flashing at everyone!).
There are no minimum speeds anywhere anymore, there used to be a minimum speed limit sign which was a blue circle with a white number on it, but this has been removed now. I think the main reason they've removed this is because it's dangerous to have a minimum speed limit. What are you suppossed to do in a minimum speed limit area if your coming up to something that is travelling slower than the minimum speed? hit it and cause and accident or slow down and break the law?
On the driving test you are taught to try and keep up to the speed limit so as not to cause problems for other drivers, but not to exceed it. There is one road near where I live in Warrington which has a very dangerous speed limit, it is a country road with 30mph speed limit signs (not in a built up area or anything - the main reason for it being 30 I think is to try and force the traffic on to the M62 at Winwick and off at Ikea, either that or the speed limit was just set years ago and has never been reviewed). The road eventually ends in a built up area but what makes it so dangerous is the amount of people that go down there at about 40-50mph as all the other roads around there are 40mph. I have seen a few accidents where cars have gone in the back of other cars on that road that have only been doing 30. In case anyone is wondering where the road is, it's from LA Bowl in Warrington round to Gemini retail park, when you reach the traffic lights there are big 30 signs hidden behind the lights, and then very small reminder stickers on the lamp posts and signs (I presume it's designed as well so that the police can sit at the roundabouts in Gemini and make money!)
I think it would be fun to try and take one of those Aixams on a driving test (I've passed my test now so I can't!) to see whether the examiner would let you take your test in one, although I suppose you'd end up with a Quadricycle/Motorbike licence at the end of it and not a car!!
|
|
I thought the driving examiner's term was "failing to make adequate progress".In other words, as long as it is safe,you dive at 28/29 in a "30" zone and so on.
|
A colleague of mine was driving her van at 40 mph on a good day at A1(M). She was not going faster as her fuel gauge was in reserve mode, so was rying to save fuel.
Cops pulled her up and advised to use country roads instead. They said one is not supposed to drive on motorways below 50 mph unless traffic is going slow.
Fair enough, motorways are for fast moving traffic. One shouldn't be doing 30-40 mph there unless there is emergency.
Edited by movilogo on 16/07/2008 at 15:42
|
Cops ... said one is not supposed to drive on motorways below 50 mph unless traffic is going slow.
(raises eyebrow) Pah.
|
I'd have thought it dangerous as well, but I wonder what our tame policemen posters think?
When I was a kid I remember one of the local Ribble buses getting done for going too slow down the Preston Southport dual carriageway as it was ahead of its timetable....
|
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/7171154.stm
10mph motorway driver given ban (4 January 2008 )
|
10mph motorway driver given ban (4 January 2008 )
Well, yes. She was also, as far as I remember, swerving about between the hard shoulder and L1 on a busy motorway. Rather different from, for instance, driving at (say) 40MPH in a controlled manner. There is, however still no minimum speed on the motorway. Perhaps she should have called the police and asked for an escort.
|
L1 on M'ways already reserved for trucks. Now if someone starts driving at 40 mph then trucks will come to middle lane. So it is reduced to single lane effectively.
Purpose of motorway is to allow traffic move fast and efficient manner. What's the point of doing 40 mph on motorway? If someone is not comfortable in driving at 60-70 mph on motorway, he should take other roads.
|
L1 on M'ways already reserved for trucks.
No, it isn't.
Now if someone starts driving at 40 mph then trucks will come to middle lane. So it is reduced to single lane effectively.
Lorries already overtake each other, using L1 & L2. What are you going to do, try to ban them? People should overtake appropriately. If they aren't capable of doing that, then they shouldn't just not be on the motorway - they should not be driving.
Purpose of motorway is to allow traffic move fast and efficient manner. What's the point of doing 40 mph on motorway?
Who knows? I am not saying that it's ideal - just that it is possible, and a competent driver will realise this, and be able to deal with it.
|
Quote:...""L1 on M'ways already reserved for trucks. ""
As the above reply says....no it's not. Even crawler lanes up hills are not usually specifically reserved for trucks. We are all advised to drive in L1 whenever it's clear and only move to L2, L3 or L4 when traffic conditions warrant doing so.
One sees old Land Rovers doing 45 mph on the motorways - is that any different?
I'm all for small, economical cars like the Aixam for local use, but it's a brave person who takes one on a motorway!
Edited by Sofa Spud on 16/07/2008 at 17:59
|
I am not saying that it's ideal, just that it is possible and a competent driver will realise this and be able to deal with it.
Can you trust every other driver on the motorway to be competent? I dont think so.
If I had to drive a vehicle that was not capable of keeping up with the majority of motorway traffic, ie. at least maintain HGV speeds, I would not use the motorway.
A few weeks ago I saw an old 1930s lorry meandering down the M1 at about 40mph - at the point I passed him he was actually driving down the hard shoulder. Not ideal but at least he was not impeding the progress of other road users.
|
Can you trust every other driver on the motorway to be competent? I dont think so.
The same goes for all roads. Expecting incompetence is one of the hallmarks of a competent driver.
|
As this post has been re-generated its worth mentioning the actual Axiam 500 that I wrote about in the original post.
Have seen it about locally, power output is apparently 12.5bhp and it shows as it diesels its way slowly up hills sounding similar to a cement mixer.
Great for a French village, maybe, but where`s the limit of common sense regarding motorways, regardless of the actual allowed speed limits?
Allegedly, `sit on` garden lawnmowers can challenge them for power and it seems a guy on the web was suggesting a chain drive and Briggs and Stratton conversion for more power.
Motorways?
|
Of course, if you rule that 40 is too slow for the motorway, you must also rule that as a percentage, the 25 that a tractor does on a national speed limit country road is also too slow and so should be banned also.
The point is, that occasionally you will come across a slow vehicle, its just a fact of life and aslong as they dont try to get in your way, I cant see what they are doing wrong.
Should you arrest someone who's car is having to run on a spacesaver at 40?
Some give and take is often required in life, but its a shame its often the generation before mine that still havent learnt that one.
|
"Some give and take is often required in life, but its a shame its often the generation before mine that still havent learnt that one."
Nice one on `give and take`. Especially since you wrote the following 2 days ago to a fellow forum member who was seeking advice in a friendly manner...... ;)
"Do hope shes not planning on crashing it. Why people buy a car with a known safety issue is beyond me. Did she not think of perhaps just making a car outta tin foil instead?"
tinyurl.com/6kpdg2
Edited by oilrag on 16/07/2008 at 22:31
|
I dont feel much friendliness towards any parent who willingly chooses a car known to be rather unsafe over many others which are somewhat better, to carry supposed loved ones.
Not the posters fault though, feel for them having to witness ignorance of such things. Im lucky my sister does now listen and quizz me at length when she changes her car, even if she is a chore to place with cars anyway.
Note on the older commecials - we had a show down the road recently and many of the older commercials did indeed have a single orange flashing light on them. Not all do this mind you, but nice to see some do.
|
|
Space-saver wheels are now illegal to use in the UK thanks to Case Law. (they always were because the wheels on a single axle have to be the same size, possibly drivers of three wheelers could still get away with it however) Allegedly the TV programme Top Gear ran a car on four space-savers and all four tyres burst so we don't want them over here. As to driving on motorways at 50 mph - I find it rather dangerous because it is SO BORING. OK 70 mph burns more fuel but at least there is enough mental activity to prevent one dozing off. Motorway speeds have become like autobahn speeds in the last few years so they are not the place to drive a micro-car or a Kei class vehicle. As to the Aixam, modern farm tractors can exceed 40 mph and have orange beacons so why not the Aixam? The Kubota diesel engine in those is only rated at 10 to 13 BHP and even the side-valve Reliants produced more than that.
|
There are no minimum speeds anywhere anymore there used to be a minimum speed limit sign which was a blue circle with a white number on it but this has been removed now.
Really? When was it removed? I've never known them to be widespread but I'm sure the 10mph minimum speed limit was still posted in the Dartford Tunnel last time I went through, although that was a year ago.
|
Minimum speed limit signs are certainly described in the Highway Code page 107. I think they are used on some uphill stretches of dual carriageway and motorways when vehicles that cannot maintain a certain minimum speed in one lane are required to use the next lane to the left.
|
IIRC from the long distance past, one of the questions when taking the driving test, was what does the road sign , blue circle with a white number in it, mean?
Due to protests the question was removed from the list as it was deemed unfair as the only sign in the country was at the Dartford Tunnel.
|
|
I've seen them at other places, though I can't remember where!
|
I seem to remember from one of my numerous driving courses an instructor introducing me to the ideology of the 9/10ths rule. Ie never exceed the capability of either the driver or the vehicle and limit your speed etc to 9/10ths of the driver and vehicles capabilities.
If this vehicle has a designed top speed of around 50mph, then driving at 45mph is within accepted parameters. Whether you would want to subject your vehicle to 90% output for maybe hours on end is another matter.
As one who drives a vehicle capable of 75mph maximum, driving long at between 56mph - 60mph on the motorway suits me just fine. It allows for better fuel consumption, a more relaxed drive, allows me more time to react but more importantly, allows me the option of accelerating to negate a hazard rather than having to rely solely on braking.
Slower moving vehicles can be an inconvenience on faster roads, but is that just because we have become less tolerant of others that 'don't conform'? With diesel still at £1.30.9 per litre around here, I'm surprised that more people are not driving with a lighter right foot anyway!
Defender
|
|
While 35/40 mph on a motorway in a tiny little car might present a hazard, it is perfectly legal on most motorways and other drivers should be prepared for such things. Usually slow vehicles on motorways are old Land Rovers towing horseboxes or clapped out LDV vans full of firewood or something.
The problem with minimum speed limits on motorways is that there would be times when it would be dangerous or impossible for drivers to drive 'up to' the minimum. e.g. fog, snow, heavy rain, ice, traffic queues.
As for microcars like the Aixam, they're probably great for the purposes for which they're primarily designed - pottering around town or driving on rural back roads. I wouldn't take one on a motorway, though!!
Edited by Sofa Spud on 18/12/2010 at 11:04
|
|
|
|
|
The best Bond three wheeler IMHO was the Bond 875. This had a Hillman Imp van engine driving the rear axle. As the van engine had the low compression cylinder head it was very reliable. Amazingly because of the cars low weight it would easily out-accelerate an MGB. I did hear of one that was owned by somebody living near Pershore, Allegedly it had a full works Imp engine producing about 100 BHP. Allegedly unsuspecting passengers used to crap their pants! No problem with motorways even with the base model as 70 was just a walk in the park.
As to Aixams, allegedly the automatic transmission was only intended to handle 8 BHP and the Kubota Z482 engine can deliver 13 or 14 BHP flat-out. There is a slightly larger version of the Z482 which might fit, but as the transmission is already being overworked with the 479 cc engine, going up to 600 cc might not be a good idea.
|
|
In France cyclecars (or whatever they are called) are not permitted on dual carriageways or autoroutes. Thats what the little blue sign with a little boxy car means. I checked in my Michelin atlas.
The Bond Bug was an interesting looker but many ended wrapped around lamp posts with nasty consequences for the driver. Based on the Reliant Robin IIRC. The rear engined 875 was allegedly too fast for its own good.
|
|
The Bond Bug was a Reliant Robin with a different body. The 875 was a completely different animal. It was alleged Reliant bought out Bond because the 875 was such a threat to the traditional Reliants. They then scrapped the 875 and introduced the Bug, calling it a Bond.
|
|
|
|
|
|
