Broken speedo MOT tomorrow

prowla

AdrianC wrote: »

Sorry, are you really suggesting that meeting a vehicle coming the other way, without a working speedo, but with a driver who is aware of his speed, is somehow inherently dangerous...?

Melodrama, much?

I'd say that meeting a car which is coming the other way is not really something you want to do.

Retrogamer

Some of the comments here are amusing.

Most people speed with or without a working speedo = most people don't seem to care.

A few people stay at the speed limit without a working speedo and apparently that's unacceptable

Joe_Horner

prowla wrote: »

[...]

It's not just about whether you can (or think you can) control your car on a given stretch of road, but also what other people are able to expect of you.

Whether they might have the time to complete a manoeuvre, whether a pedestrian can cross the road, whether to go through a chicane, whatever.

The thing is, all those examples that you give come under "driving to the conditions".

Very often that will mean driving below the speed limit, at which point the speedo is meaningless because it's incapable of identifying what a safe speed is at any given time. Your speed "in numbers" is about the one thing that you should not be factoring into your safety decisions on the road.

Unfortunately, people do factor it in because of the wholly inappropriate messages we're fed by certain organisations. Which is why you so often hear things like "It wasn't my fault, I was within the speed limit".

Nessun_Dorma

AdrianC wrote: »

Sorry, are you really suggesting that meeting a vehicle coming the other way, without a working speedo, but with a driver who is aware of his speed, is somehow inherently dangerous...?

Melodrama, much?

No, I am worried about a driver who thinks he knows what speed he is doing. Also, if he is that cavalier about the maintenance of his vehicle, what else is he likely to have ignored. Perhaps he thinks that if he hits a corner at a specific speed, he doesn't have to get that suspension arm fixed, or the brakes, or the steering arm.

Or maybe, if he takes his foot off the accelerator and gears down in time, he doesn't have to worry about those worn brakes. Then there's the tyres which, although worn, might almost stop him in the dry, so he'll risk it not raining today.

Nessun_Dorma

Retrogamer wrote: »

Some of the comments here are amusing.

Most people speed with or without a working speedo = most people don't seem to care.

A few people stay at the speed limit without a working speedo and apparently that's unacceptable

At least those who do have a working speedometer, know that they are speeding and can adjust their behaviour accordingly.

Nessun_Dorma

Joe_Horner wrote: »

The thing is, all those examples that you give come under "driving to the conditions".

Very often that will mean driving below the speed limit, at which point the speedo is meaningless because it's incapable of identifying what a safe speed is at any given time. Your speed "in numbers" is about the one thing that you should not be factoring into your safety decisions on the road.

Unfortunately, people do factor it in because of the wholly inappropriate messages we're fed by certain organisations. Which is why you so often hear things like "It wasn't my fault, I was within the speed limit".

To be honest, I can't ever recall hearing anyone saying that.

AdrianC

Nessun_Dorma wrote: »

No, I am worried about a driver who thinks he knows what speed he is doing.

One that he judges to be safe and appropriate for the surroundings. Does he need to have a number to judge that?

Also, if he is that cavalier about the maintenance of his vehicle, what else is he likely to have ignored. Perhaps he thinks that if he hits a corner at a specific speed, he doesn't have to get that suspension arm fixed, or the brakes, or the steering arm.

Or maybe, if he takes his foot off the accelerator and gears down in time, he doesn't have to worry about those worn brakes. Then there's the tyres which, although worn, might almost stop him in the dry, so he'll risk it not raining today.

And you think they're comparable levels of vehicle defect, do you?

So what would you make of my motorcycles, which don't have a speedo fitted, don't need a speedo fitted to be road-legal, and have never ever had a speedo fitted since they were built? Are they somehow comparable with an ill-maintained and unroadworthy MOT failure of a car?

salubrious

Seems this thread won't die.

I will add a scenario into the equation that is more in relation to the original post. It's one I have come across myself.

If an mot tester has to carry out a decelerometer test and notices the car speedo isn't working, what do you think he should do?

AdrianC

It's very simple and clear as to what he should do.

http://www.motinfo.gov.uk/htdocs/m4s06000701.htm

Is it, in his opinion, "clearly inoperative"?

salubrious

Yes, but should the tester be driving the car with a broken speedo?