speed limits

Strider590

Hammyman wrote: »

Oh dear. Someone who has bought the governments "Speed Kills" rubbish, hook line and sinker. "As long as you drive at the speed limit, you'll be OK".

Well around here sticking to the limit will get you killed on most of the countys roads. Lots and lots of narrow or single track country lanes with blind corners, hairpin bends.

Well... That's not really what I was saying.

There's simply no reason not to reach the speed limit if the vehicle, road and conditions allow it.

On my way to work, I pass along a "country lane", it's all 60mph limit, but for the first mile or so it's tight and twisty, you certainly wouldn't want to do much more than 35. Especially on a Monday morning when the recycling truck does it rounds on that road. But after a mile it opens up a little and you can see through the corners, so 60 is then easily possible.

jase1

Hammyman wrote: »

Absolutely none of the above had anything to do with speeding however the public have been brainwashed to think they do. The tailgaters would have had a crash even at the speed limit or lower because they were too close to stop. The person passing you could have still had a head on collision on the blind bend if they were doing the speed limit or lower. None of them had speed as the cause. All of them had bad driving as it though.

Absolutely, and I am frequently annoyed by people who conflate speed with tailgating, the two are not the same.

Speed, in and of itself never killed anyone. Inappropriate speed is the problem, and that could be 50 in a 70 in some conditions. Overtaking on blind bends, pulling out in front of people without looking, tailgating, poor observation in general and lack of vehicle maintenance are killers. Driving at 80mph (or even 90 or 100) on a completely clear motorway where you can see for 2 or 3 miles ahead never did anyone any harm, and I defy anyone to come up with a single example of where it did. Anyone doing this needs to be aware though that passing traffic at that speed is potentially dangerous, and moderate to suit.

Driving at 10mph below the speed limit may be far more dangerous than driving 10mph over, if the slower driver is exhibiting signs of dangerous driving.

almillar

viao - post 10 about a 'worn' bulb - This could be explained if the car was a diesel, and the lights above the exhaust had darkened from the soot coming from the exhaust over the years. Not a worn bulb of course, but has that effect.
OP hasn't come back yet, but yes, irrespective of speed, drive on the LEFT. Quite simple. People shouldn't tailgate you in any lane, but especially not the left lane.

Bongles

almillar wrote: »

viao - post 10 about a 'worn' bulb - This could be explained if the car was a diesel, and the lights above the exhaust had darkened from the soot coming from the exhaust over the years. Not a worn bulb of course, but has that effect.

One thing that could be described as bulb wear is if it's a coloured bulb behind a clear cover. The colour can fade, or a coloured coating can start to come off, and the bulb, while still working, show a whiter light than it should.

That's not uncommon with orange bulbs in indicators, but I'm not sure that many tail lights are red bulbs behind clear covers.

jaydeeuk1

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

it may handle like one but it's a longer car so turning, reversing etc will all be a lot more difficult if you're not used to it.

My driving instructor started out with a vectra which had just been released, but had to switch to a fiesta because too many of his students didn't like learning in a large car, and so moved instructors.

To be honest, I wouldn't want to be seen by my mates driving a vectra either.

Mrs_Arcanum

Hammyman wrote: »

Oh dear. Someone who has bought the governments "Speed Kills" rubbish, hook line and sinker. "As long as you drive at the speed limit, you'll be OK".

Well around here sticking to the limit will get you killed on most of the countys roads. Lots and lots of narrow or single track country lanes with blind corners, hairpin bends.

I too find this amazing. Single track, twisty, unmarked & badly surfaced roads at national speed limit whilst beautifully surfaced roads with superb visibility are 50 or even 40. :eek: Just proves that someone in an office somewhere has never gone out and actually looked at where these daft limits are!

dggar

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

We have a family friend who's an ex police woman and now a driving instructor.
Her gripe with learners, and she admits that she has not found anyway of teaching the answer, is that they have no grasp or undersdtanding of approaching or closing vehicle speeds.
They simply can't judge it, scary or what??:eek::eek:

Surely the undersdtanding of approaching or closing vehicle speeds
comes with experience of driving in traffic. I'm not supprised that she hasn't found a way of teaching it.

Maybe something like the equivalent of a flight simulator for training pilots might work.

Lilibee

Mrs_Arcanum wrote: »

I too find this amazing. Single track, twisty, unmarked & badly surfaced roads at national speed limit whilst beautifully surfaced roads with superb visibility are 50 or even 40. :eek: Just proves that someone in an office somewhere has never gone out and actually looked at where these daft limits are!

It's because speed limits in this country are generally reactive, at least on roads that have been in existence for some time. Apparently all roads were originally national speed limit, those that have lower limits now are because a certain number of accidents took place on that stretch. The tiny, twisty roads with a 60 limit have just never been reassessed because not enough speed-related incidents happen there.

Same thing with warning signs (hidden junctions, dips, tight bends etc). They generally only get put up if enough incidents happen in that spot.

mikey72

jase1 wrote: »

Absolutely, and I am frequently annoyed by people who conflate speed with tailgating, the two are not the same.

Speed, in and of itself never killed anyone. Inappropriate speed is the problem, and that could be 50 in a 70 in some conditions. Overtaking on blind bends, pulling out in front of people without looking, tailgating, poor observation in general and lack of vehicle maintenance are killers. Driving at 80mph (or even 90 or 100) on a completely clear motorway where you can see for 2 or 3 miles ahead never did anyone any harm, and I defy anyone to come up with a single example of where it did. Anyone doing this needs to be aware though that passing traffic at that speed is potentially dangerous, and moderate to suit.

Driving at 10mph below the speed limit may be far more dangerous than driving 10mph over, if the slower driver is exhibiting signs of dangerous driving.

Sit in a big catapult, and fire yourself out at a wall at 2mph.
Do exactly the same thing, but fire yourself out at 80mph.
All you've changed is the speed.

jase1

mikey72 wrote: »

Sit in a big catapult, and fire yourself out at a wall at 2mph.
Do exactly the same thing, but fire yourself out at 80mph.

Or, don't be stupid enough to fire yourself out of the catapult.

That's a straw man argument and you know it. If the legal limit for firing yourself out of the catapult is 60mph, does that automatically make it safe?

Some people's answer here would evidently be 'yes', and I find that profoundly worrying. To them, speed is the one and only cause of any and all accidents. Whereas anyone with any sense would realise that the dangerous act is to fire yourself at the wall in the first place.

If the catapult were 50 feet in the air, would firing at 2mph automatically make it safe?