[Source] Thought this might interest some of you here it also shows other European countries speed limits: European motorway limits France- 130km/h (81mph) Germany - 130km/h (recommended maximum) Italy - 130km/h Spain - 120km/h (75mph) Portugal - 120km/h Sweden - 110km/h (68mph) Denmark - 110km/h Personally I don't think it would make much difference. The motorways, I am on are either vitually stationary or freely moving at 60-80 mph.
Can't click on the poll as it misses the most important question: Will it be a clean limit or the previous +10% limit. If it's a clean limit then it levels the playing field for law abiding drivers to drive at the speed the majority of drivers are currently "allowed" to drive anyway (77mph) - so that's good as everybody will be doing 80 give or take a couple of MPH, which will help the traffic flow. If it's left to the police as a normal limit then it is effectively now 88MPH, which is not going to solve any problems as half the traffic will be going 88 and half 80.
I presume you mean American freeways? I remember being driven in the US and it felt SO slow. Edit: My Apologies for some reason I thought your speed limits were much slower I just looked them up and it varies from state to state and day and night is different in areas too.
Sorry guys i'm against, i toodle around doing 60-65 at a push trying to save fuel and car just won't go that fast. All you'll get now is the same idiots doing 90 and thinking they can get away with it
I agree with brave - there's no need for an increase in the speed limit. I would still drive at 70-75, but the people who drive as fast possible (those who try and stick to the limit +20mph because they're better than everyone else) would be driving even faster.
The limit is the limit. On UK motorways for cars that aren't towing anything, the limit is 70mph. If you're going at 71mph, you're liable to be stopped and fined. The +10% is a misnomer. Some police forces may exercise some leeway in some cases but some don't.
You realise most speedos are set to 7-8% above the actual speed you're doing? The +10% is for indicated speed, not actual, if you were actually doing 71 then you are correct in saying you're liable to be pulled over, but unless you know the exact error your speedo has you have no way of telling. It also means we can't sue the speedo manufacturer for going too fast without it being indicated, you also have to take into account error of the measuring equipment the police may be using; some of the handheld devices really aren't all that accurate. More on topic; I don't think it should be raised tbh. Think of the lorries, imagine how much people'd have to slow down when they try to overtake one another! Unless, of course, it would also involve raising their restriction up to 70mph, they'd still crawl up hills regardless mind. Also, try keeping a small capacity car at 80mph all the time, it doesn't enjoy it much. (And for that matter, a restricted motorcycle doesn't like it all that much either)
For it, drive the motorway most days, average speed for a lot of people is already greater than 80mph, though don't necessarily agree with the extra 20mph restrictions in cities that they want to introduce at the same time, there are plenty of places where 20 should be applied, schools, heavily built up areas but get the feeling they will adopt a blanket approach which will no doubt lead to other drops in limits in towns, effectively negating any gain to business claimed it article. There are already places near where I live in which roads I have travelled on for nearly 20 years have had limits dropped from 50 to 30 a etc. and for no reason I can fathom, certainly weren't accident spots.
If your indicated speed is 7% above actual speed, then if you're caught doing 71, your indicated speed is 76 so you must know that you're speeding. Stick to 70 (or below - you know you're allowed to drive at a speed lower than the maximum speed limit, right?) and you're safe. Where's the problem? Oh no! Having to slow down when you reach other traffic. The horror. WAKE UP!! This already happens. And you know what? If you don't press harder on the accelerator, when you reach a hill, you'll slow down too. Personally, I voted yes. Reaction times haven't changed but other things have - fatter tyres, more responsive braking systems, and the fuel crisis has abated. If people want to use more fuel - if they can afford it - I think they should be allowed to drive faster on roads where this is safe.
Source: Lord Hansard Written Answers. Monday, 12th March 2001. It would seem that the regulations do allow for inaccuracies in speedometers, but not in terms of under-speed representation. Different tyres, and also tyre pressures can also affect a speedometer's accuracy.
Problem is the further inequity between trucks & cars max speed. many trucks are limited to 55 anyway, add in white van/corporate car nutters who don't pay for the fuel they are burning & you have a speed differential that, yes, might reduce traffic at rush hour when there are no accidents, however I'd predict an increase in fatalities. the rumoured 10% rule is not common for the whole country, it's a discretionary thing rather than a rule anyway, my mother got issued a ticket for driving at 31mph, downhill, on a country road. How can anyone possibly argue the case that fuel is too expensive when we're pushing for a higher speed limit that, in terms of fuel economy, will only improve things for bikers? I tend to drive at around 60-65, my wife 10-15 more. guess who pays the fuel & maintenance bills?
I have to be doing 35 on the speedometer for those electronic 30mph signs to flash up. I should probably check the tire pressures though.
I voted yes for the speed increase. To be honest though, the "roads" in England really need upgrading urgently before we even start to consider the costs of re-signposting the motorways of the UK. Ugh. I really want to start a thread about increasing taxes or decreasing unimportant expenditure in the UK but I know I'll be lambasted and made generally unwelcome on the forums forever-more, but there's just so much that needs doing, that sadly isn't even being considered whilst pointless proposals like this will costs tens (if not hundreds) of millions to effectuate. Sad. TSB
Sign posts should be fine. White circular disc with a black diagonal line means national speed limit. If the limit is raised, that becomes the new national limit. No change needed.
I didn't say there was a problem, I was merely clarifying that the 10% error is for your indicated speed, not your actual speed. You have no way of knowing, unless you check properly, that your speedo is giving you an accurate 70mph or 60-something so the error exists for that. As to having to slow down; well we're assuming that people will continue to go 10-20mph+ over the speed limit. So rather than having two lanes of cars squeezing into one with a relative velocity of up to 30mph to the lorries, you're bringing it up to 40mph. Judging by your haughty stance I'd say you can drive a car so I don't need to explain the difference between 30mph and 40mph and how different it feels. People using brakes causes traffic jams because a lot of people don't think to let the car engine brake and in turn use their brakes making other people behind slow unnecessarily. Thank you muchly, I was just googling for such a document.
