ALL cars have over-estimating speedos, usually it's only 1-2mph, it;s essentially a safety feature to ensure that speedos (which are inherently affect by various things to make the slightly inaccurate) don't cause you to go over the speed limit....imagine the bad pr for the car company! Also remember that ill fitting tyres and tyres wear actually have a very small effect on the accuracy of your speedo. A popular trend to save money in the UK is to use the 'wrong' tyre size for your wheels (using a cheaper/more competitive tyre size can save up-to £100 a corner). It's perfectly safe & perfectly legal, several different tyre sizes are in-fact so similar that they will fit the same wheel...the issue is that this will slightly affect your speedo. Also just changing your wheel size will affect your speedo.
Sir, that is ********. You can be pulled over for causing an obstruction, e.g. driving slowly in lane 2 when lane 1 is empty, but simply driving slowly on a motorway is not against the highway code. If 10mph below the speed limit were true, cars with space-saver spare tyres (limited to 50mph) would be banned from driving on them, which they aren't. And that is extremely dangerous. Brake lights are designed to illuminate when the brake pedal is applied, to warn motorists behind that this has happened. Slowing down by simply using the engine to decelerate means the brake lights don't activate and drivers behind have to be paying careful attention to notice that you're slowing down.
Yeah who the hell wants to be paying attention to what's in front of them when driving at 70 odd mph.
Not many, if you look at the number of rear end shunts that happen on the motorways, where the driver wasn't paying attention to the road and traffic in front of him. That's why braking correctly is even more important.
Well, I don't know about you but I find a light being on or off is easier to notice than whether the car in front is marginally closer than it was a second ago. Since I'd have travelled a good 30 metres in a second, these clues are helpful.
I don't think he was stating the fact you would have to slow down as an issue alone, more the issue that the bigger difference in speed you are required to drop if someone pulls out to overtake could increase the chances of an accident. At least, that is my take on it and how I assumed he meant it. I personally don't see a huge point in raising the motorway speed limit to 80. If I travel 100 miles at a solid 70 it is going to take around 1:25, the same journey at a solid 80, 1:15. Wow! I have burnt all that extra fuel and saved myself a whopping 10 minutes. My commute in the morning takes me on the A1M from Peterborough, until I get off it at the A14 and sit in traffic forever, it would save me about a minute of time, which the A14 would kindly take back from me
Lol breaking the speed limit by such a large margin isn't "living a little" - it's just stupid (and inconsiderate, and disrespectful ). Fair enough if people do 75 or even 80 for a brief moment when overtaking etc; but for people who altogether disregard the law and drive consistently at 85+ claiming the speed limit is "outdated therefore doesn't apply to me"... they're the people who spoil the driving experience for everybody else. Nothing impressive about that.
If you've left a safe gap then you'll have more than enough time to notice a car slowing down if a driver lifts off the accelerator. It also prevents a concertina effect of drivers all hitting their brakes because a driver at some point ahead has braked to knock a few mph off his speed. There's a time and a place to use your brake pedal on a motorway, altering your speed slightly is not one of them.
Bringing the speed limit up, should have been done ages ago, will it make much of a difference proably not. Traffic will continue at the speeds it always has done, all this will be is a mere formality. Would preffer legislation that makes people take lessons on how to drive on a motorway as people still think the middle lane is the safest place to be.
you miss my point - you are taught when learning to drive not to constantly touch the break, the various advanced drivers courses I've done strongly warn against touching the break when not essential. I'm not talking about breaking when breaking is called for, I'm talking about the idiots that constantly 'accelerate, break, accelerate, break, accelerate, break' which is extremely dangerous. You should break when necessary of course, but it's much safer to maintain a steady speed and a safe distance rather than driving up-to the car behind and breaking. If you maintain steady speed then there isn't an attention issue...accelerating simply to then break regardless of lights means the driver behind has to pay much more attention! Not to mention the breaking on a motorway in particular is the cause of tailbacks and 'speed waves'...which is far more dangerous to a driver not paying attention than not spotting a light. In regards to seeing lights being a benefit as opposed to judging the speed of the car behind you this is extremely debatable. You should keep enough space between you and car in front regardless and you should have no trouble judging if a car is slowing down (else you shouldn't be on the road). When somebody touches their breaks and lights come on...if the person behind isn't paying attention...then the lights usually cause them to break too hard and they usually end up getting rear ended themselves. Far safer to maintain a constant speed/space and not feel the idiotic need to fill every inch in-front of you. Break lights exist because breaks cause a 'sudden' change in speed..if the change in speed isn't sudden, then you don't need lights. Otherwise the break pedal would simply be the decelerator pedal.
In some circumstances - yes, I would say 80 would be sensible, because we all know that means "90" to most people - as 70 means 80 now. But I would not say all situations require it. Personally I think variable limits on ALL motorways would be better, depending on weather etc. How many people leave extra gap or slow down sufficiently in fog? How many people even take note of the 50 signs and keep doing 70?
Just for the record, we have a 130 km/h limit here in Denmark. The 110 km/h is only in the congested areas around major cities. And tbh I find it a bit fun to be caught behind someone going way too slow on the freeway - lets you exercise that 3rd gear acceleration
I am all for this increase in speed. But what really need to be done is the change in driving attitude. I see far too many people just sit in the middle lane or 3rd lane like they own the motorway, driving at 65. Move over so faster cars can pass more easily! That is probably the cause for speed waves: too many cars too close on the inside lane, slower car join in a tiny gap due to midlane hugger, causing a wave of cars to slow down. And agree with Fuss: constant speed is key. I wish every other car has cruise control, I am sick of seeing my distance decrease and having to take action (disengage cruise or overtake) because the car in front don't understand up hill means slowing down.
Personally, although I'm quite happy for it to be raised I don't think it will make a differemce. Drivers who already speed above the existing 70, will likely speed above the 80 limit if set. Drivers who drive under the existing 70 limit are likely to drive under an 80 limit. Drivers who drive too close to the people in front, drive too fast for the weather conditions and speed up / break hard will still do the same... 70 or 80, the general attitude to driving in any given person (in most cases) will stay exactly the same no matter what changes are introduced. Most drive based on a lot of habit and learnt response so I personally don't think it limit will have any big effect.
Speed doesn't cause accidents, the police's own figures show that speed is a factor in a relatively small number of accidents. The most common direct causes are distractions, tiredness, fitness to drive, etc. Aka. the DRIVER rather than the speed. If there was a direct relationship between speed and accidents, the entire population of Germany and the Isle of Man would be dead. Every single race driver would be dead. I've driven on the unrestricted Autobahns in Germany (about 1/3 are derestricted, 1/3 restricted and 1/3 temporarily restricted [roadworks]). I feel strongly that we should have a similar model here - contrary to many wingers, our motorways are often very high quality. All it takes is a little discipline - if you see someone coming up behind you move over. If you're not actively overtaking, you move over. From Wikipedia: The overall road traffic safety of German autobahns is comparable to and in some cases better than that of other European highways. According to the statistics collected by the International Traffic Safety Data and Analysis Group,[9] there were 2.2 road user fatalities per billion vehicle kilometers on German autobahns in 2008. Neighboring countries with available data include Belgium (4.2 in 2007), the Netherlands (2.1 in 2009), Denmark (2.5), Austria (4.2), Switzerland (1.2), and France (1.8). Using the same statistic, 4.5 fatalities have occurred in the United States on motorways. If you really, really want to reduce accidents no matter what - have more traffic cops with more power. I see plenty of distracted drivers, people weaving across lanes, etc. If people had to take responsibility for their driving, then maybe we wouldn't even have a speed debate. There's always the story of the person who claims to have never had an accident... but witnessed plenty in their rear-view mirror. That person is the real menace, not someone in a big German saloon that could comfortably sit at 155mph all day. FYI, I don't have a big German saloon Also: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2011/aug/25/speed-cameras-accidents-maths http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/road-safety/2747604/Scrap-speed-cameras-now.html
I disagree with it. There seems to be a mentality that "I can get away with ten miles an hour more", so taking it to 80 would only make people think 90 is acceptable. However, I'm a new driver, so my experience isn't as vast as others.
3 points. 1st. On some roads you get better traffic flow at slower speeds 'cos it stops the concertina effect. The higher the speed, the more prononuced the concertina will be. 2nd. It wont make journeys much faster unless you drive unsociable hours, at any busy time you're restricted not by the speed limit but by traffic. 3. Just teach people how to F*~#ing drive on F*~#ing motrways. There SHOULD NOT be a need for a 4 carriage F*~#ing motorway in the UK. If people were in the right F*~#ing lane traffic flow would be fixed. Give people 3 points for being in the wrong F*~#ing lane and see what that does to traffic flow. I bet you could double the traffic flow on anymotorway with thar one F*~#ing move. Not only would it sort the traffic flow, it would make the goverment a mint, they could save a F*~#ing bomb on not needing to widen F*~#ing roads. Job done
+1 to this! also, widening doesn't fix the problem at all, those people driving in middle lane will just go drive in 3rd lane.
