1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Driving age increase to 18 *warning, may constitute a rant*

Discussion in 'Serious' started by Ninja_182, 9 Apr 2010.

  1. DarkLord7854

    DarkLord7854 New Member

    Joined:
    22 Jun 2005
    Posts:
    4,643
    Likes Received:
    121
    Yes (you drive around a closed course, make stop, do a pull-in parking, drive at 20mph, make another stop, do a "highspeed emergency stop" at 30mph, and pass an easy as balls 20 question "test" about road road signs), yes (though you have to be accompanied by a 21 yr old driver for 1 year or until you turn 18), and no.. most parents here buy their kid a sports car or large SUV and pay for all gas & insurance for them as soon as they get their license.

    It's pretty bad.
     
  2. Krazeh

    Krazeh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    12 Aug 2003
    Posts:
    2,115
    Likes Received:
    56
    Not sure an increase in the driving age would necessarily have that much of an impact tbh, what they need to do is radically rethink the whole testing process because at the moment it's letting underexperienced/underqualified people get behind the wheel and take control of the most dangerous weapon they'll ever get thier hands on.

    Personally i'd like to see the introduction of a minimum number of supervised hours of driving before you're allowed to take your test, a requirement to take a further number of hours of supervised driving before you can take the test again if you fail any attempt, and periodic retesting throughout your life in order to retain your license.
     
  3. Pookeyhead

    Pookeyhead It's big, and it's clever.

    Joined:
    30 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    10,848
    Likes Received:
    468
    Engine size limits won't work. Due to crippling insurance costs, it's almost impossible for anyone but the wealthy to insure a car over 1.3 as a 17 year old anyway - which is why most 17 year olds drive little Saxos and Clios etc. They still drive like dicks mainly.

    Attitude is the problem, and you can't change that easily.

    One thing that would probably work, is that when you obtain your license at 17, it is subject to being revoked should you be caught speeding, doughnuts in McDs car parks or generally being a ****. If you want it back, you have to take another driving test, and pay DOUBLE. Get caught again being a dick within 12 months and you lose your license for 12 months, no questions asked. This system will be in place until your 25th birthday.

    That will work, I promise you.

    Think it's harsh? Tough... just don't be a dick and you'll be fine.

    For all those who think this is unfair to young drivers because they're not all bad etc... this shouldn't effect you should it? You're a good driver, so why are you worried?

    This will eventually reduce young driver accidents, and bring down insurance premiums for all, young AND old, and then at 17 you may be able to actually insure something decent without being on Mummy's policy.
     
  4. Krikkit

    Krikkit All glory to the hypnotoad! Super Moderator

    Joined:
    21 Jan 2003
    Posts:
    23,453
    Likes Received:
    368
    I've been pondering on this for a while, and I think I've got a few things that would increase driver ability and awareness.

    1) Set a minimum number of instruction hours required before a test, with different requirements for those who have held a 50cc licence and can prove they've used it on the road.

    2) Force insurance companies to relax premiums on larger-engined cars. I think part of the reason we see lots of 17y/o's having accidents is because they're stuck in a tiny-engined car which can barely keep up with normal traffic, so they push that car to the absolute limit, where bad things happen, because the drivers can't handle what the car starts to behave like. (i.e. snap oversteer, understeer). Put them in mum and dad's Derv Focus and they'll be able to keep up with normal traffic, and not have to really push the chassis anywhere near its limits.

    3) Mandatory skidpan and/or advanced handling training, as well as training on country roads. A lot of accidents with new drivers happen out in the countryside, they let themselves get a car out of shape and end up in a ditch or worse yet try an overtake in an underpowered car (see #2) and end up in a head-on collision. With a little training on what to do on a proper country road, watching out for dips and crests and judging speed through bends etc, I think you could make a serious impact on accidents.
     
  5. Pookeyhead

    Pookeyhead It's big, and it's clever.

    Joined:
    30 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    10,848
    Likes Received:
    468

    Huh? I can keep up with traffic just fine in my 1.0 Micra :) I've never once had to push it to the limit to keep up with normal traffic. Where do you live, the Nurburgring?

    Seriously, you think you have to push a sub 1.3 car to it's absolute limit to keep with normal traffic? You can keep up with normal traffic with anything, and still drive it normally.
     
  6. PureSilver

    PureSilver E-tailer Tailor

    Joined:
    16 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    3,152
    Likes Received:
    235
    I agree with Pookey and Krikkit, actually. I learned more about car control in my sub-1.0 Micra than I ever will in my 1.6 MINI Cooper, because I pushed it to it's limits (in empty carparks, in fairness) to see what it would do approaching and beyond them (understeer, lift-off oversteer if severely provoked). That was on Bakelite tyres on 13" steelies on a car that cost nothing to run and nothing to repair. To break traction in the MINI, I'd have to be using the handbrake. 17" alloys and big, expensive tyres = lots of mechanical grip. I'm using the understeer as a judge, but really, the first time I find that car's limits I expect to end up in a hedge. The country driving/city driving thing is also interesting - I'm a Londoner and can't keep up with my friends on tight B-roads even at legal speeds; in the city, I leave them for dead well below the speed limit. Certainly, a bit of cross-training could be useful.

    It's true that I pushed my micro-engined Micra to it's limits and often drove like a dickhead, so Krikkit's semi-right. On the other hand, I never had any trouble keeping up with traffic (even fast-lane motorway traffic, although that took more planning) without ever having to resort to driving like a nutcase. I'd say all first cars should be small hatches; light, cheap, and don't have the power to get you out of serious trouble (like ill-judged overtakes). That forces you to think more, and plan ahead - both good in my book.
     
    Last edited: 11 Apr 2010
  7. DarkLord7854

    DarkLord7854 New Member

    Joined:
    22 Jun 2005
    Posts:
    4,643
    Likes Received:
    121

    I'm actually all for letting people do stupid sh*t in parking lots and stuff.. because generally it's a very good learning experience when they screw up, or almost do, and it's in a fairly closed-off environment (empty lot at night) and doesn't generally endanger innocent bystanders or motorists.

    I've done it multiple times where I've gone to empty lots and did donuts, burnouts, drove through the corners wildly, attempting to drift, etc.

    I've spun out a bunch of times and almost crashed. I actually hit a tree once and got saved by my rear wheel hitting a root on the side which bounced the car off and resulted in only a scratch on the rear quarter panel.

    Doing that in these more or less closed-off areas taught me to better handle my car in the event an emergency situation crops up (there have been several already). It also lets me get that out of my system so I don't feel the need nor want to do it on the road where I can endanger innocent drivers.


    While I know you could technically go to the track to drive fast and stuff, it's expensive as hell and you can't do donuts, you can't drift, you can't do burnouts, you can't do any of that except drive behind some other guy at decently fast speeds.
     
  8. Burnout21

    Burnout21 Is the daddy!

    Joined:
    9 Sep 2005
    Posts:
    8,614
    Likes Received:
    197
    Country B road bombing oddly i find safer at night, easier to see on coming traffic due to there head lamps.

    Of course the risk of hitting wild life goes up, but that all part of the fun... lol

    There are only a few cars i have driven which have struggled to keep with the traffic, one of which was a non turbo 1900cc diesel that sounded like it was running on coal oil.

    And an old transit tipper that has seen better days, would cut out even with your foot hard down, took ages to warm up and never achieved more than 2200RPM, must have been loosing compression on all of its cylinders tbh.



    Car park fun is where a lot can be learned, but on your own, showing off to your mates you learn nothing.
     
  9. Malvolio

    Malvolio .

    Joined:
    14 Dec 2003
    Posts:
    4,632
    Likes Received:
    178
    One point I think that has not been made is: why does everybody need motorized transportation?

    I say limit those that can drive down to a select few that have gone through extensive training and education on the use of these amazingly dangerous objects, and utilize the small group of drivers for large-goods transportation, and inter-city transportation of people. Use the money otherwise spent on motorized-vehicular transportation, and beef up the woefully inefficient public-transportation system, and provide as many other alternate methods of transportation to the community as possible.

    While I realise that certain people require a motorized-vehicle for their job, but I'm not saying take their vehicle away, I'm saying that it's a well known fact that most people whom live within a city's limits generally never venture outside of their respective city, so why does Joe Blow require a twenty-thousand dollar method of personal transportation to travel the (average) ten to fifteen kilometres required to commute to work and back? Not only is that person wasting space, they're also spending money they don't need to, and endangering the lives of everybody around them needlessly.

    Allow vehicles only to those that absolutely require it, and can pass the same stringent standards required to hold many other dangerous weapons (note: don't look towards the USA as an example of such requirements).

    I honestly feel that this would be the answer to making the roads safe (or at the very least, safer). Unfortunately the transition would require far too much effort for most people, and thus will never be looked at as a viable option, as humans as a collective (at the very least, in the western world) have become accustom to having their fat-asses carted about. Plus I may be slightly bias, seeing as I don't own a motorized-vehicle, and work in a bike shop, where I directly advocate for the downfall of the car as a personal transportation method.
     
  10. PureSilver

    PureSilver E-tailer Tailor

    Joined:
    16 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    3,152
    Likes Received:
    235
    Eh? The world stretches beyond North America. I've been all over the country in the last few days alone with friends and alone on purely personal trips, and I live in one of the oldest and largest cities in the world. The furthest I've been by car from London is, I think, Sicily. People travel; this is a fact of modern life. I agree, however, that much better public transport would solve probably 90% of trips currently made by car.
     
  11. Bufo802

    Bufo802 Member

    Joined:
    28 Jul 2008
    Posts:
    335
    Likes Received:
    8
    I passed my test earlier this year and drive a 1.1l hyundai i10, and have never felt that I don't have enough power or can't keep up with traffic (unless you count keeping to speed limits everywhere causing queues behind me). Also I feel that you get to know how to drive a car much better if you have to change gear quite often and get to know what works, and its small size does make it easier especially when parking etc.

    Having a limit to the power really wouldn't make a difference anyway as even on small engined cars the premiums are ridiculous, just been quoted £1400 for next year (as a named driver along with my parents) so will probably go for a pay by week thing.

    I know I have a lot to learn about anticipating what people will do and generally getting used to driving and everything but learning to drive does make you realise how bad/stupid other drivers are, I'm not saying I'm perfect but white vans and taxis especially can have an interesting view of the rules of the road....
     
  12. jhbellsh

    jhbellsh Hmmm... never mind.

    Joined:
    23 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    Couldn't agree more! :)

    Personally I think patience is the biggest issue that drivers face. In my opinion the worst drivers I've seen as both a driver and now a pedestrian are those that:

    a) can't wait the two minutes it takes for the traffic lights to change so jump the lights,
    b) REALLY feel that the extra 20 seconds you gain by over taking a tractor on a blind bend are really worth it, or
    c) feel that driving at 40 in a 30 zone is going to make a HUGE difference to their lives.

    At the end of the dat I know it feels good to drive fast, but surely people could learn to relax a little and enjoy driving rather than rush it...
     
  13. talladega

    talladega I'm Squidward

    Joined:
    18 Aug 2007
    Posts:
    5,258
    Likes Received:
    495
    is it ok to do 150 in a 30 zone?
     
  14. Sloth

    Sloth #yolo #swag

    Joined:
    29 Nov 2006
    Posts:
    5,634
    Likes Received:
    208
    Playing devil's advocate here, but it does make a somewhat sizable difference. If you're going somewhere 12 miles/kilometers (depending on your units for speed) away it's the difference from 24 to 18 minutes and the difference just gets bigger as you drive farther and farther. Six minutes isn't entirely something to write off.

    Don't get me wrong, I totally agree that it's not at all worth the danger involved, but it's not entirely without gains.
     
  15. sesterfield

    sesterfield New Member

    Joined:
    30 Sep 2008
    Posts:
    516
    Likes Received:
    12
    I think it's less advantageous here, where there are far more junctions/roundabouts on the road which everyone has to slow down for anyway. The advantage of a slightly iffy overtake probably isn't as large as somewhere with long, straight roads.
     
  16. Bufo802

    Bufo802 Member

    Joined:
    28 Jul 2008
    Posts:
    335
    Likes Received:
    8
    Half the time someone overtakes me I catch up with them at the next junction/traffic lights, so I think it really isn't often worth it in the UK.
     
  17. Guest-23315

    Guest-23315 Guest

    I passed just after I turned 17, and am 18 now, and I agree that something should be done to change it.. I dont think increasing the age is a good idea, but I think a required number of hours beind the wheel should be required, so say you have to have 40 hours of driving under your belt before you take the actual test.

    And then, perhaps force a second test 2 years later, to make sure no bad habits have been picked up in the time.
     
  18. DarkLord7854

    DarkLord7854 New Member

    Joined:
    22 Jun 2005
    Posts:
    4,643
    Likes Received:
    121
    Overtaking on city streets is never worth it IMO, unless some douche won't let you merge
     
  19. jhbellsh

    jhbellsh Hmmm... never mind.

    Joined:
    23 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is kinda more along the lines I was getting at - sure if you take it literally an extra 10 miles an hour for 20 minutes can make a significant difference, but in the UK you tend to just catch up with the car in front a few seconds later.

    I wouldn't mind so much if it was just their life they were taking into their own hands - but if they were to have a head on crash 10 metres in front of me (even on the wrong side of the road), there's a reasonable chance I'm going down too...
     
  20. Sloth

    Sloth #yolo #swag

    Joined:
    29 Nov 2006
    Posts:
    5,634
    Likes Received:
    208
    True, really does depend on just where you're at and what roads you're taking. City driving, certainly pointless. Unless you realllly want to get to that next red light as fast as possible!

    On open stretches, though, it reminds me of when US freeways had their speed limits reduced to 55mph for fuel usage reasons. Just 5mph was enough to cause a huge number of complaints and lack of compliance (and a pretty awesome song). In the situation of a frequent commute or multi-hundred mile drive your time saved by going just 5mph faster can start to add up.
     

Share This Page