|
The sat-nav shows a difference of 12 mins between 70mph and 85mph - centre HW to centre Brum
|
|
My car achieves better mpg at 75 than 65, it also improves on that if I go up to 85. I've plotted a graph of speed against fuel consumption, and if i cruise at 135 the car won't actually use any fuel, anything above that and it will be making fuel.
|
|
I find the bulk of this thread shocking. Whatever the car or conditions people are not capable of driving safely at these speeds. The ex racing car champion Damion Hill puts the top limit at 55 mph for most drivers. Although the reality is that this can be upped relatively safely the current speed limits should never be exceeded. I have thought for a long time that unmarked police cars would be invaluable in trying to make our roads safer. These posts confirms my view. Being caught and mpg should be least of your concerns - what about people's safety ?
|
I find the bulk of this thread shocking. Whatever the car or conditions people are not capable of driving safely at these speeds. The ex racing car champion Damion Hill puts the top limit at 55 mph for most drivers. Although the reality is that this can be upped relatively safely the current speed limits should never be exceeded. I have thought for a long time that unmarked police cars would be invaluable in trying to make our roads safer. These posts confirms my view. Being caught and mpg should be least of your concerns - what about people's safety ?
Someone should tell the Germans. Maybe Michael Schumacher can do a public broadcast.
|
|
aaah, yes..the Germans.....I wondered when they were going to be brought into the comparative equation?
Well, even they are now looking at speed limits on motorways.....plus, it appears as a whole, German drivers have a wholly different attitude towards drivng to their UK counterparts.
I wonder why the French have never followed suit?
The main reason I see for the aquiescence towards exceeding the posted speed limit stems from a lack of resources for enforcement.
There are barely sufficent resources for a 'presence', let alone anything else.
In that respect, the use of technology ['cameras,etc'] is a godsend, simply because they are a 'catch-all'..
However, despite what so-called expert drivers think, motorways are in fact the safest, and easiest of roads to drive on.
Mainly because of the amount of room, and the lack of conflicting traffic.
For a typical motorist, it is likely that 70mph is about the maximum that a human being can cope with, should a mishap occur.
The feeling of confidence, competence and 'being able to cope' above those speeds is really an illusion, which, happily, rarely gets put to the test.
We forget that, although racing drivers appear to cope with higher speeds, their environment is very strictly controlled.
Far more so than that on a motorway.
{I've often thought that formula one, to find the true measure of their drivers, should be run with half the grid going round one way, and half going round the other way]
Since none of us on here want to see restrictive use of the motorway highways..because it would affect every one of us..probably adversely....I think the flagrant flouting of the Law by some will be here to stay.....until, that is, the collision rate startts to climb?
Edited by alastairq on 05/05/2013 at 17:43
|
For a typical motorist, it is likely that 70mph is about the maximum that a human being can cope with, should a mishap occur.
I thought speed limits were more to do with the stopping distances of a 1950's family car than anything to do with the drivers as such.
|
For a typical motorist, it is likely that 70mph is about the maximum that a human being can cope with, should a mishap occur.
I thought speed limits were more to do with the stopping distances of a 1950's family car than anything to do with the drivers as such.
What you have to remember is that, whilst cars have much better brakes than those of 40-50 years ago, the roads (especially the dual carriageways and motorways) are much more congested than back then, with cars and lorries regularly running at high speed with only a few car lengths (if that) between each. Even an F1 driver and car wouldn't be able to react and stop/get out of the way in time if they had another two lanes of traffic and a central reservation (now made worse if they have no hard shoulder).
The pace of life (particularly within the workplace) is so frenetic these days that most people do not (or cannot) plan their journeys leave for meetings, visits, etc in good time so they don't have to speed. Being streesed out (because you're running late) doesn't help you when driving on very busy roads (especially with the large number of idiots on them nowadays) and will only make the journey and possibly the visit/meeting itself (the point of your journey) more difficult due to not arriving in a good state of mind. It might pee my managers off sometimes, but I'd rather take it easy, leave a bit earlier and get to my destination ready to do a good job. Better than being cold in a pine box, or causing someone else to be.
|
The pace of life (particularly within the workplace) is so frenetic these days that most people do not (or cannot) plan their journeys leave for meetings, visits, etc
No. That's what we like to believe and what we tell other people. Of course we really drive at 85 because driving at 70 is stultifying and we stop concentrating, fall asleep and cause a pile-up which really doesn't do our NCD any favours at all.
There's really no downside to driving briskly on motoways-except that persistent wall of air that won't go away.
|
|
|
|
|
Apparently a red arrows pilot once said that he felt far more confident flying than he did on the motorway as while flying he was in formation with trained colleagues but on a motorway he was in formation with a thousand strangers whose next move he could not anticipate.
|
|
go by train?
If one finds 70mph 'stultifying'...then one really needs to suffer a severe fright or two?
|
If one finds 70mph 'stultifying'...then one really needs to suffer a severe fright or two?
People that mindlessly take comfort in round numbers are perhaps more in need of a fright. On a busy motorway, you'll be limited to the speed of all the other traffic. If all the other traffic is doing 80, and you do 60 because it 'feels' safe, you're creating the hazardous speed differential. On a lightly occupied motorway, it really doesn't matter, does it?
|
|
There is nothing 'mindless'about keeping to the speed limit. It is there for a reason. Are you suggesting that if enough people did it you should drive on the right hand side of the road ? It is the same logic. Also anyone doing 60 will probably be in lane 1, unless overtaking slower traffic. I suggest you need to apply your mind more to safety on the roads rather than defending the mindless speeding of people who have an inflated opinion of their driving capabilities.
|
Are you suggesting that if enough people did it you should drive on the right hand side of the road ?
On country roads I spend a lot of time on the right hand side of the road to avoid poorly repaired road surfaces and to afford a better view of the road ahead. Much safer than slavishly hugging the left kerb
Also anyone doing 60 will probably be in lane 1, unless overtaking slower traffic.
Since al the lorries are doing 50-56mph, that'll most of the time on weekdays. In which case, there won't be an opportunity for drivers to get to 80+ so nothing to worry about.
There is nothing 'mindless' about keeping to the speed limit. It is there for a reason.
The motorway speed limit was an arbitrary figure picked in a knee jerk reaction to some very high speed driving in the sixties. It was picked at a time when drum brakers and cross-ply tyres were the norm and hasn't been updated to take into account the improved handling and braking capability of vehicles.
|
|
You clearly have the luxury of NOT having to drive at rush hour.
If I can get over 50mph on the M6 or M1 its a luxury!
|
Edited by alastairq on 06/05/2013 at 13:46
|
There is nothing 'mindless'about keeping to the speed limit. It is there for a reason. Are you suggesting that if enough people did it you should drive on the right hand side of the road ? It is the same logic. Also anyone doing 60 will probably be in lane 1, unless overtaking slower traffic. I suggest you need to apply your mind more to safety on the roads rather than defending the mindless speeding of people who have an inflated opinion of their driving capabilities.
Safety is an attitude and competancy, not a number.
Mindlessly obeying a 70mph speed limit (Normally an INDICATED 75mph) is no more or less safe than any other speed if you aren't concentrating.
|
|
I'm not aware I've put anything different. Obviously, if you drive below 70 while texting you are not driving safely - pretty obvious. If you are keeping to the speed limit but not concentrating then you are not safe. However, if you are foolishly driving in excess of the speed limit then you are not safe, concentrating or not. Putting one fact does not make an added assertion true. As I put, some people have an inflated opinion of their driving capabilities. The cars have improved way beyond any improvement in driver competence. There is carnage on the roads which would cause horror and a call for action in any other situation.
|
The cars have improved way beyond any improvement in driver competence.
This is true. But both have improved since the motorway speed limit was introduced in the mid sixties.
There is carnage on the roads which would cause horror
There is, but there is less of it on motorways than on other roads. Motorways have the highest speed limits but the lowest rate of accidents of all roads.
If you are keeping to the speed limit but not concentrating then you are not safe.
Do you drive at 60 on twisty roads just because that is the posted limit? Do you drive at the same speed in winter as you do in summer? Driving to a number is a band-aid for poor drivers. Just like changing gear at 2500 RPM because the DSA tells them to!
|
|
I thought this was a Motoring forum, not a Health & Safety forum - I get enough of that at work! I bet most of us have driven at the OPs speed from time to time, let's be honest! I think the problem is we are conditioned by the constant mantra that "Safety is the number 1 priority!, drilled into us by public authorities, the police etc, wheras in reality it's nonsense, we live life and take the risks that suit us to achieve our aims. Otherwise we'd never fly,drive, climb ladders, use power tools, partake in dangerous sports etc. Benefit versus risk is such a a part of daily life we actually forget we do it!
Going back to the OP, i seem to recall that aerodynamic drag increases to the square of velocity, hence about 60 mph is considered a good compromise for mpg. As 659 says, the OP needs a long legged diesel - the 1.9 PD used to be considered the most efficient IC engine ever made in mass production.
|
|
It is about motoring - safe driving. At no point have I ever, nor would, advocate always driving at what is the limit. That is what it is, a safety limit. Yes, there are fewer accidents on motorways; that is not the point. It is the prevention of collisions that is the point. If people wish to take personal risks that don't affect others that is their choice. Sadly it is others who often pay the cost of irresponsible driving. I do wonder if a post which agrees with breaking the law should be allowed. The regrettable truth is that people have not been conditoned by the safety mantra.
|
|
The motorway speed limit was an arbitrary figure picked in a knee jerk reaction to some very high speed driving in the sixties. It was picked at a time when drum brakers and cross-ply tyres were the norm and hasn't been updated to take into account the improved handling and braking capability of vehicles.
Not in the least bit arbitrary!
And at the time, that limit was actually above the maximum speed most run-of-the-mill family cars could achieve.
It was considerd to be the maximum speed an average [untrained?] human being could travel at, and respond to a sudden change of conditions adequately.
Regardless of whether they were in a car or not.
Now..you yourself may feel perfectly 'in charge' when driving at 85 mph, able to cope with any sudden changes on the road around you.
But...how will you feel when you reach the age of 85? And still want to use your car? And make use of the motorway system?
How does an 18-year-old feel about 85MPH? A week after they have passed their test......and no longer have a skilled instructor alongside them to offer timely advice?
Or, would you suggest such extremes of driver ability be banned from the motorways?
Perhaps all motorway users should be subjected to a further drivng test, to enable use of these so-called high-speed roads?
Would you yourself pass? [Any test, for that matter?}
The motorway system was never intended for high-speed travel.
It is intended to allow any vehicle able to use a motorway, to get between two points quickly, with little interference or interruption.
The fact that such an environment enables higher speeds to be attained is but a by-product.
The lowest [legal] speed limti for any category of vehicle using the motorway is 40mph....that, for an LGV weighing in excess of 46 tonnes, operating under STGO cat 2.
There is no requirement for flashy lights, outriders, or any such paraphenalia....so, to you it would look like any other LGV.
If there is an issue regarding a slower vehicle..then the issue is caused not by that slower vehicle, but by the inability of all the other [incomeptent, as it may turn out?] drivers to cope with that slower individual.
Which in turn begs the question....are the majority of drivers hurtling along at 85mph actually competent to do so?
Or, do they just think they are...and survive purely because of the prevailng circumstances?
The greatest danger on a motorway presents itself not with slower vehicles [and the inability of others to cope with them.....] but from the higher speed 'bunching' of vehicles.
This was an issue identified by Police way back in the early 1960's, when the 70 limit was introduced.
It still remains today...however, the speeds of these bunches of vehicles have steadily risen.
At such speeds, everybody literally hopes everybody else will 'play the game'?
Nobody considers...''what if.....?'
The motorways at certain times are nought but high speed conveyor belts...with everybody in their own personal travel capsule.
|
|
An excellent well thought out post which makes a valuable contribution. Perhaps we could have those who consider themselves capable of driving above limits obliged to go in to a motoring simulator and be given a test of how they would react at the speeds they claim to be safe driving at. Then, when they fail, be required to surrender their license until they realise the possible consequences. Incidentally I would expect everybody to be willing/expected to have their driving skills checked. If anybody is not able to drive safely they should not be on the road.
|
Not in the least bit arbitrary!
Speed limits are arbitrary. They do not imply that the posted limit is a 'safe' speed or even realistically attainable. Your confidence in these numbers really is rather concerning.
But...how will you feel when you reach the age of 85? And still want to use your car? And make use of the motorway system?
How does an 18-year-old feel about 85MPH? A week after they have passed their test......and no longer have a skilled instructor alongside them to offer timely advice?
This is lowest common denominator policy. The fact that some drivers, wisely aware of their vulnerabilities, feel unable to travel past 70mph, does not mean that no-one should.
The lowest [legal] speed limti for any category of vehicle using the motorway is 40mph....that, for an LGV weighing in excess of 46 tonnes, operating under STGO cat 2.
This raises a valid point. Only in the UK would 50 tonnes be considered "exceptional". The low speed for HGVs is another anachronism that needs revisiting. Modern tractor units could easily sustain 65mph+ while pulling 50 tonnes, and with better braking, they can safely stop. A minimum non-congested speed limit of 55mph would make a lot of sense.
The greatest danger on a motorway presents itself not with slower vehicles [and the inability of others to cope with them.....] but from the higher speed 'bunching' of vehicles.
No-one disputes the point that congestion is exacerbated by speeding. You're setting up a straw man argument, then patting yourself on the back for demolishing it.
It still remains today...however, the speeds of these bunches of vehicles have steadily risen.
Actual motorway speeds reached a plateau years ago. It's only your perception that speeds have continued to rise.
My argument is that on a lightly occupied motorway, It makes little difference if a proportion of the users on that stretch of road elect to travel at a higher speed.
|
|
Everyone knows that speed limits are not recommend as safe driving speeds. They are the maximum speed at which you are permitted to drive, not that you should drive at it - you must not exceed it. I suppose on a lightly occupied motorway there will never be a blow out or mechanical failure. I repeat what I've said previously. Provided they only endanger themselves people should be able to do whatever they want to. However, that is not the law. It is the putting of others at risk that concerns me. They are not above legal and moral obligations.
|
|
##Speed limits are arbitrary. They do not imply that the posted limit is a 'safe' speed or even realistically attainable. Your confidence in these numbers really is rather concerning.##
On the contrary...far from being arbitrary, the speed limit is deemed as the maximum speed considered acceptable, given the permanent conditions. Nothing random or arbitrary about it at all. At no point have I intimated any sort of confidence whatsoever.
##This is lowest common denominator policy. The fact that some drivers, wisely aware of their vulnerabilities, feel unable to travel past 70mph, does not mean that no-one should.##
If a road is to be a 'public highway', then consideration must be given to all the varying degrees of skill and awareness of users. The problem that lies with allowing drivers to exercise their own judgement is.....more often than not they cannot!
But either are not prepared to accept that fact...or chose to disregard it.
The issue isn't even about whether a driver feels confident about driving faster....but..whether all the other road users can cope with that driver travelling faster?
PArt of everybody's driver skill isn't just about 'being able to cope with the actions of others [comfortably, without drama]...but to drive in such a manner, that others can cope withus?
As soon as we come across someone who cannot cope with what we are doing..then the risk of a serious mishap is magnified considerably.
As it is, most traffic on a motorway arrives without mishap more by chance, than by any deliberate act on the part of drivers to reduce risk levels to an acceptable level for all.
##This raises a valid point. Only in the UK would 50 tonnes be considered "exceptional". The low speed for HGVs is another anachronism that needs revisiting. Modern tractor units could easily sustain 65mph+ while pulling 50 tonnes, and with better braking, they can safely stop. A minimum non-congested speed limit of 55mph would make a lot of sense.##
FAr from being a UK-only anachronism, this is a Europe-wide situation. The weights quoted are at the low end of a broad spectrum. Google STGO for more details?
There is considerable refence to 'modern' vehicles [especially LGV's]. This suggests a policy of restricting all LGV's to a maximum age of, say, 3 years? I doubt that would be seen as 'workable'?
On the Public Highway, there are no such age restrictions placed upon vehicles.
Nor should there be...for that would represent a realrestriction of freedom.
Minimum speed limits pander to only a certain segment of the driving population..ie, those in a hurry...and are pretty unenforceable on motorways, especially.
And as such also represent a limitation of freedom.
##No-one disputes the point that congestion is exacerbated by speeding. You're setting up a straw man argument, then patting yourself on the back for demolishing it. ##
Actually, you have identified another issue entirely. The point I make is witnessed every time one goes out onto a motorway.....the presence of a number of vehicles, perhaps spread across two or three lanes, travelling in very close proximity to one another, behind, and alongside, for considerable lengths of time.....all travelling at very simlar speeds,all moving at very high speeds.What leads most to a sense of security is the relativespeed of these vehicles seem to vary quite slowly.
It is an illusion only shattered when one relates the speed of the group to the real world.
##Actual motorway speeds reached a plateau years ago. It's only your perception that speeds have continued to rise.##
Plateaued it may have done....but it is an inlcined 'plateau for all that...and I do go back to the 1960's! My perceptions are irrelevant...and don't form any part of my professional outlook.
##My argument is that on a lightly occupied motorway, It makes little difference if a proportion of the users on that stretch of road elect to travel at a higher speed.##
It may do to other road users? There is an air of assumption involved? And lightly-occupied motorways seem to be somewhat like hen's teeth these days?
Edited by alastairq on 06/05/2013 at 16:27
|
|
FAr from being a UK-only anachronism, this is a Europe-wide situation. The weights quoted are at the low end of a broad spectrum. Google STGO for more details?
Sweden, Finland, and the Netherlands pushed for (and were granted) an exemption to the 44 tonne maximum mass and permit up to 60 tonnes without STGO restrictions.
There is considerable refence to 'modern' vehicles [especially LGV's]. This suggests a policy of restricting all LGV's to a maximum age of, say, 3 years? I doubt that would be seen as 'workable'?
! The STGO tractor units are often much older than the regular fleet of tractor units because they have relatively low annual mileages. When I say 'modern', I mean having an engine with more than about 250 horsepower and, more importantly, effective braking systems.
Tractor units without compression brakes or Eddy Current Brakes should be plated to a lower maximum mass if the operators do not wish to retrofit these devices. There's no excuse for trundling along at 40mph any more.
PArt of everybody's driver skill isn't just about 'being able to cope with the actions of others [comfortably, without drama]...but to drive in such a manner, that others can cope withus?
As soon as we come across someone who cannot cope with what we are doing..then the risk of a serious mishap is magnified considerably.
|
PArt of everybody's driver skill isn't just about 'being able to cope with the actions of others [comfortably, without drama]...but to drive in such a manner, that others can cope withus?
As soon as we come across someone who cannot cope with what we are doing..then the risk of a serious mishap is magnified considerably.
I completely agree. But why would any competent driver feel unable to cope with being overtaken on a multilane highway?! If drivers can't cope with a reasonable speed differential on a motorway then they haven't got a cat in hell's chance of safely negotiating roundabouts or junctions. At this point it is time to suurender the licence to the DVLA and take out a contract with a local taxi firm.
We don't let the fastest 5% of drivers set the standard. The same applies with the slowest 5%.
|
|
Good lord, is this still going on?
As a motorcyclist of 30+ years experience, I have one rule which guides my riding and driving at all times: that EVERY other road user (including pedestrians) I encounter on the road is out to kill me, either through ignorance, incompetence or intent.
With this in mind, a lot of speed limits make complete sense. A 30mph limit on a stretch of road outside a school during the weeks when school is in, is too high.
Much more than 50 on a winding, 60-limit rural A-road with blind bends, summits and side-roads / entrances to field etc is often asking for trouble, especially during harvest season.
But equally, the M40 after 7pm most evenings? All 3 lanes mostly empty? I'll cruise at 80 / 85 as there's plenty of time and space to allow for the movements of other traffic. It's all about the prevailing conditions and traffic levels. Going much faster is asking to get nicked by an unmarked police car.
|
|
Doing 85 I would be worried about unmarked police cars and motorbikes.
|
Tractor units without compression brakes or Eddy Current Brakes should be plated to a lower maximum mass if the operators do not wish to retrofit these devices. There's no excuse for trundling along at 40mph any more.
Well..yes there is....if only from the viewpoint that despite all the technologies available, the limitation is the driver and their ability.
As you say, it isn't the top 5%, or the bottom 5%, but the huge percentage in between, with their differeing levels of awareness and skill.
No more obvious than with LGV drirvers.
|
Edited by alastairq on 06/05/2013 at 22:21
|
Well..yes there is....if only from the viewpoint that despite all the technologies available, the limitation is the driver and their ability.
I'm sure that the average lorry driver's reaction times can cope with speeds greater than 40 odd mph! Their speed limits are influenced more by the efficacy of their braking systems.
In the US semi tractor trailers are equipped with compression brakes which don't lock up or overheat. As such, they run at normal highway speeds. This greatly ameliorates the speed differential problem.
|
|
Ignoring all the waffle about whether its OK to drive at this speed or not . . . . .
The obvious choice would be a 2005 Mondeo 2.0 TDCI
These can give 50+ MPG in rela worls motorway conditions
|
|
I think for once unthrottled has bitten off more than he can chew. Knowledge of cars, and even 'motoring' does not make an expert law maker. He, and maybe many others here, are relatively expert drivers.
In just a few minutes on an M road, we can see huge numbers of distracted drivers in poorly maintained cars, tense and obviously late for meetings, phoning, eating, drinking, turning around flirting, head banging to music, showing off to their 'birds' etc etc.
This last week-end provided many examples too of accidents which probably entirely ruined days out to Bank Holiday events, visiting Granny and so on. The M-road system imposes a responsibility on motorists not to crash (does that sound stupid?). But the great British public have demonstrated how important rules are for the greater good. One overturned car on the A3 on Friday (sunny, dry, clear, quiet at 7.00 a.m.) caused me and thousands of others to miss important matters. How do you overturn a car in such conditions on a straight dual carriageway? The car wasn't going 50 mph I'll bet. I hope the driver lived.
The London Olympic venues were the first ever to have been built in which not one person was killed during construction. The much deridied health and safety culture may be annoying (to me too!), but someone probably drove to see friends on a motorway yesterday who would have been dead without it.
|
But the great British public have demonstrated how important rules are for the greater good. One overturned car on the A3 on Friday (sunny, dry, clear, quiet at 7.00 a.m.) caused me and thousands of others to miss important matters.
Yes. Because general laws based upon singular events have such a good track record...
Councils wishing to reduce a stretch of road designated National Speed limit are supposed to apply the median rule ie 50% of traffic currently travel below the intended new limit. In this way speed limits are supposed to be largely self-enforcing amongst 'average' drivers.
Using outliers to set thresholds is, frankly, childish.
|
Good lord, is this still going on?
As a motorcyclist of 30+ years experience, I have one rule which guides my riding and driving at all times: that EVERY other road user (including pedestrians) I encounter on the road is out to kill me, either through ignorance, incompetence or intent.
With this in mind, a lot of speed limits make complete sense. A 30mph limit on a stretch of road outside a school during the weeks when school is in, is too high.
Much more than 50 on a winding, 60-limit rural A-road with blind bends, summits and side-roads / entrances to field etc is often asking for trouble, especially during harvest season.
But equally, the M40 after 7pm most evenings? All 3 lanes mostly empty? I'll cruise at 80 / 85 as there's plenty of time and space to allow for the movements of other traffic. It's all about the prevailing conditions and traffic levels. Going much faster is asking to get nicked by an unmarked police car.
Quite right craig, the sensible thing to do is drive to the conditions. I also agree with most of the comments by unthrottled. The posters who are advocating a blind obedience policy are wishing for Utopia. The speed limits are set as a guidance which has now become a money making industry sideline to safety enforcement. A wise man once said "rules are for the blind obedience of fools and for the guidance of wise men". As with most things in life, judgement is all. If every driver exercised his judgement and common sense while driving there may be more or less 'speeding' but probably for fewer 'accidents'. Cheers all. Concrete
|
"The speed limits are set as a guidance"
A bit like the Pirate code? Not so much rules as guidelines?
The words "limit" and "set" give a clue as to their purpose.
"rules are for the blind obedience of fools and for the guidance of wise men".
Attributed to Douglas Bader, before he disobeyed the rules on low flying aerobatics, crashed and had both legs amputated ending a promising rugby career.
|
|
|
The ex racing car champion Damion Hill puts the top limit at 55 mph for most drivers.
What have I been telling all of you for ages? "Drive 55, stay alive." President Carter sez so.
|
|
Someone once observed that everyone who drives slower than us is an idiot, and everyone who drives faster than us is a maniac.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The majority of european motorways have a 81mph speed limit.
Motorways are the safest roads in the UK. Even 85mpg is safer than doing 50 on a single carridgeway road. why? All the cars are going in the same direction. There are far less roadside objects, people, cyclists etc etc to hit. On a 60 mph single carridge way you may be driving legally but you have a 120 mph combined speed if you coolide with as car coming the otherway.
70 mph motorway speeds are outdated,
|
Well, my car has adaptive cruise control, collision damage mitigation, lane keep assist, frontal radar and lots of other gizmos which mean I can drive how I like, at the speed I choose and to hell with the rest of you. Doesn't it?
And, to answer the OP, it's a Honda with a 2.2 diesel engine that will show 50mpg at an indicated 80mph.
Now, back to the real world. The most pleasant driving experience I know is on the ordinary roads of Switzerland, where the speed limit is 80kph or 50mph. No hurry, no hassle and all the better because drivers in Switzerland do what they are told.
|
|
I think that the 70 limit is about right for most drivers.
Brakes and tyres may have improved massively since the limit was set but reaction times haven't.
And, of course, the roads are considerably more congested these days.
|
|
|
|
What an excellent post - yes, of course, some will say it's because I agree with it. It gets to one of the real issues which is the selfishness so widespread in our society. People cannot react quickly enough at the speeds some drive at. The higher the speed the greater the impact. Do we have to be rushing everywhere so frentically that safety and the enjoyment of the drive don't count ? I've often thought when abroad how much more pleasant driving appears. Many cars are great improvements but anything is only as good as its weakest linking. Could you say which Honda - sounds a great car.
|
|
Accord I-dtek automatic with ADAS - which I think stands for Automated Driver Assistance System. The handbook is more than 600 pages and I'm working my way through it...
|
Accord I-dtek automatic with ADAS - which I think stands for Automated Driver Assistance System. The handbook is more than 600 pages and I'm working my way through it...
Given that most people never read more than 20 pages of any manual.. I suspect it's a bit too complex...
|
|
Both mine (15 miles) and the wifes (19 miles) commutes use motorways, dual carriageways, good A roads and a bit in town. If we could drive at 85 instead of the usual 70 on the motorway bit (too busy normally - you have to go with the flow of traffic) we would save about 2 1/2 minutes on our trips, is it worth it for the miniscule time saving, of course not.
When we go on longer trips and traffic conditions allow we set the cruise to 70 mph on the sat nav and sit back. Loads of cars will drive past like their a***s are on fire yet since the drivers are incapable of keeping up a steady speed we will catch up and pass some a few miles later.
On Monday a muppet on the M1 screamed up behind us swerved to overtake us then dropped back, caught us up again and then I spotted he was on the phone. Should be banned.
Rather than driving at 85 mph why not set off a few minutes earlier. You will save loads on fuel and not be on another forum moaning that you cannot get anywhere near the official combined figure.
|
Both mine (15 miles) and the wifes (19 miles) commutes use motorways, dual carriageways, good A roads and a bit in town. If we could drive at 85 instead of the usual 70 on the motorway bit (too busy normally - you have to go with the flow of traffic) we would save about 2 1/2 minutes on our trips, is it worth it for the miniscule time saving, of course not.
When we go on longer trips and traffic conditions allow we set the cruise to 70 mph on the sat nav and sit back. Loads of cars will drive past like their a***s are on fire yet since the drivers are incapable of keeping up a steady speed we will catch up and pass some a few miles later.
On Monday a muppet on the M1 screamed up behind us swerved to overtake us then dropped back, caught us up again and then I spotted he was on the phone. Should be banned.
Rather than driving at 85 mph why not set off a few minutes earlier. You will save loads on fuel and not be on another forum moaning that you cannot get anywhere near the official combined figure.
Nice to see some fellow posters on the same wavelength, although from previous experience those with the opposing view just disregard everyone else (I think some actually like baiting and arguing just to p*** other off, which won't keep people on the forum), thinking they have the right to do as they please on the roads as long as they think they can "get away with it" due to their "inate driving skills". What they conveniently forget that (whether such people are in fact very skilled drivers [anyone can do near the ton in a straight line] is neither here nor there) its the other road users they should be concerned about, who may not be as skilled.
Taking their argument to extremes, you may as well allow F1/rally/touring car drivers to take their hypercars up the M1 at 190+ because they are good enough to stay in control. Pity them (and those here advocating doing 85+ on motorways) when the less experienced young driver or suchlike pulls out into their lane doing a lot less than they are - no time to get out of the way = major pile up and deaths.
|
Thinking they have the right to do as they please on the roads as long as they think they can "get away with it" due to their "inate driving skills"
Was that comment directed towards me? if so, could you highlight the paragraph where I boasted about my "inate driving skills"?
You've built up a charicature of an aggressive driver which is completely irrelevant to the discussion. The irony is that anyone who gets upset about being overtaken by an "idiot" is displaying the very same aggresion to which they object!
You may choose to drive like a Guardian Reader on its way to a fairtrade convention. I find that style of driving selfish and objectionable, but I don't resort to straw man arguments to bolster my stance.
|
You may choose to drive like a Guardian Reader on its way to a fairtrade convention.
Hey! I read The Guardian but love cars and bikes: no stereotyping please ;-)
|
|
unthrottled : Why do you believe you are safe driving at such a high speed ? the question is asked respectfully.
|
Thinking they have the right to do as they please on the roads as long as they think they can "get away with it" due to their "inate driving skills"
Was that comment directed towards me? if so, could you highlight the paragraph where I boasted about my "inate driving skills"?
You've built up a charicature of an aggressive driver which is completely irrelevant to the discussion. The irony is that anyone who gets upset about being overtaken by an "idiot" is displaying the very same aggresion to which they object!
You may choose to drive like a Guardian Reader on its way to a fairtrade convention. I find that style of driving selfish and objectionable, but I don't resort to straw man arguments to bolster my stance.
I actually read the telegraph, and you rude remarks just because I stick to the LAW doesn't do you or your "argument" any credit. Note that I did not specifically mention any other posters, so I suppose the phrase "it takes one to know one" seems apt here.
Are you also implying that because I don't break the law (even if I disagree with some, including some other speed limits), implies that I am of a certain type of political persuasion? My point was that yours and others argument of "85 is fine" was wrong becuase "why stop there", why not 100mph? I believe you haven't made your case for a higher limit generally (on clear/empty motorways, maybe, but not busy ones), especially as the only reason why most people want it is because they're running late and need to make up time.
|
I believe you haven't made your case for a higher limit generally (on clear/empty motorways, maybe, but not busy ones),
I give up. As I have stated many times, it is generally impossible to drive at a speed higher than the general population on a crowded motorway, so the 'problem' is entirely self-limiting.
BTW, when you drive in France, does your opin ion of 85mph (~130kph peage speed limit in dry conditions) sudenly change, just because its legal definition has?! :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
