UK speed limit to increase

corshamjim

Monkeypump wrote:

You're going to avoid all motorways? Totally impractical for me, but if you can do it, fair play.

Yes. Hmmm... Thinking about it, driving up to Inverness to visit my sister could be interesting. :roll: I could of course take the train though.

corshamjim

okgo wrote:

Good.

Another step towards me rationalizing buying an M3.

You're going to buy a motorway?! Good on you!

bompington

corshamjim wrote:

okgo wrote:

Good.

Another step towards me rationalizing buying an M3.

You're going to buy a motorway?! Good on you!

Well, hadn't you heard they're for sale? ;-)

CiB

Monkeypump wrote:

corshamjim wrote:

If the speed limit increases above 70 I'll simply avoid those roads. Doubtless cars have improved but their drivers haven't, and neither it seems has anyone's understanding of Newtonian physics ( present company excluded of course ).

You're going to avoid all motorways? Totally impractical for me, but if you can do it, fair play.

But the limit is 80, now. No-one gets done for doing 80 in normal conditions. Nothing changes with this law. Can people not grasp this?

mrc1

Average speeds are really surprising.

My parents live in Yorkshire so whenever I go up there its a 190 mile journey of which about 180 is on the M25/M1.

In our previous car (no cruise control but plenty of power) I'd generally go around 80 in the free flowing sections and then drop down to 50 for the (lengthy) stretches of 50 average speed cameras on the M1. Generally involved quite a bit of slowing then reaccelerating as a result of slowing for slower cars etc etc. Journey time generally averaged out at about 3hrs 20.

In the new car (with cruise control) which uses lots of diesel I decided to keep the speed lower and set the cruise control at 72 (seemed to be about the speed of the ambient traffic) and again stuck religiously to the 50 limit sections. Barely had to touch the brakes/accelerator for the entire journey. Journey time 3hrs 25.

greg66_tri_v2.0

CiB wrote:

Monkeypump wrote:

corshamjim wrote:

If the speed limit increases above 70 I'll simply avoid those roads. Doubtless cars have improved but their drivers haven't, and neither it seems has anyone's understanding of Newtonian physics ( present company excluded of course ).

You're going to avoid all motorways? Totally impractical for me, but if you can do it, fair play.

But the limit is 80, now. No-one gets done for doing 80 in normal conditions. Nothing changes with this law. Can people not grasp this?

That's true.

But now the limit is going up to 90.

More champagne! Champagne for everyone*!

*Except left-wing car haters who only hate cars because they were too poor to drive as teenagers and so never got any sex. No girl puts put because you walk her to a bus stop. FACT!

rjsterry

mrc1 wrote:

Average speeds are really surprising.

My parents live in Yorkshire so whenever I go up there its a 190 mile journey of which about 180 is on the M25/M1.

In our previous car (no cruise control but plenty of power) I'd generally go around 80 in the free flowing sections and then drop down to 50 for the (lengthy) stretches of 50 average speed cameras on the M1. Generally involved quite a bit of slowing then reaccelerating as a result of slowing for slower cars etc etc. Journey time generally averaged out at about 3hrs 20.

In the new car (with cruise control) which uses lots of diesel I decided to keep the speed lower and set the cruise control at 72 (seemed to be about the speed of the ambient traffic) and again stuck religiously to the 50 limit sections. Barely had to touch the brakes/accelerator for the entire journey. Journey time 3hrs 25.

This is just a large scale demonstration of the pattern you get on a commute - one day you're taking it steady and the journey takes 1hr 5 minutes. The next day you get into some serious SCR action, nearly make yourself cry with the effort of it and get home in ... 1hr 3 minutes. I just don't get what the benefit is to anyone. You're not going to get there any quicker. You'll be able to fit fewer cars on a given stretch of road, it'll cost you more. I suppose it'll be slightly more fun if you find motorway driving fun.

And as Greg66 says, if the official limit is 80, the 'socially acceptable' limit will be nearer 100. Nobody will be sitting there thinking "well thank goodness I'm no longer a criminal. 80's enough for me".

rick_chasey

rjsterry wrote:

mrc1 wrote:

Average speeds are really surprising.

My parents live in Yorkshire so whenever I go up there its a 190 mile journey of which about 180 is on the M25/M1.

In our previous car (no cruise control but plenty of power) I'd generally go around 80 in the free flowing sections and then drop down to 50 for the (lengthy) stretches of 50 average speed cameras on the M1. Generally involved quite a bit of slowing then reaccelerating as a result of slowing for slower cars etc etc. Journey time generally averaged out at about 3hrs 20.

In the new car (with cruise control) which uses lots of diesel I decided to keep the speed lower and set the cruise control at 72 (seemed to be about the speed of the ambient traffic) and again stuck religiously to the 50 limit sections. Barely had to touch the brakes/accelerator for the entire journey. Journey time 3hrs 25.

This is just a large scale demonstration of the pattern you get on a commute - one day you're taking it steady and the journey takes 1hr 5 minutes. The next day you get into some serious SCR action, nearly make yourself cry with the effort of it and get home in ... 1hr 3 minutes. I just don't get what the benefit is to anyone. You're not going to get there any quicker. You'll be able to fit fewer cars on a given stretch of road, it'll cost you more. I suppose it'll be slightly more fun if you find motorway driving fun.

And as Greg66 says, if the official limit is 80, the 'socially acceptable' limit will be nearer 100. Nobody will be sitting there thinking "well thank goodness I'm no longer a criminal. 80's enough for me".

Some cars are quite a push to get to 100.

rjsterry

Rick Chasey wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

mrc1 wrote:

Average speeds are really surprising.

My parents live in Yorkshire so whenever I go up there its a 190 mile journey of which about 180 is on the M25/M1.

In our previous car (no cruise control but plenty of power) I'd generally go around 80 in the free flowing sections and then drop down to 50 for the (lengthy) stretches of 50 average speed cameras on the M1. Generally involved quite a bit of slowing then reaccelerating as a result of slowing for slower cars etc etc. Journey time generally averaged out at about 3hrs 20.

In the new car (with cruise control) which uses lots of diesel I decided to keep the speed lower and set the cruise control at 72 (seemed to be about the speed of the ambient traffic) and again stuck religiously to the 50 limit sections. Barely had to touch the brakes/accelerator for the entire journey. Journey time 3hrs 25.

This is just a large scale demonstration of the pattern you get on a commute - one day you're taking it steady and the journey takes 1hr 5 minutes. The next day you get into some serious SCR action, nearly make yourself cry with the effort of it and get home in ... 1hr 3 minutes. I just don't get what the benefit is to anyone. You're not going to get there any quicker. You'll be able to fit fewer cars on a given stretch of road, it'll cost you more. I suppose it'll be slightly more fun if you find motorway driving fun.

And as Greg66 says, if the official limit is 80, the 'socially acceptable' limit will be nearer 100. Nobody will be sitting there thinking "well thank goodness I'm no longer a criminal. 80's enough for me".

Some cars are quite a push to get to 100.

True*. Mine included, especially with the top box on. So you're still going to have a large proportion of vehicles travelling at 60-70mph, with the 80-100mph crowd dodging around them. Sounds ace.

*Not that you don't see some people flogging their little hatchbacks to within an inch of their lives.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Rick Chasey wrote:

Some cars are quite a push to get to 100.

...and some will still have you pinned to the back of the seat as they accelerate past 100.

rjsterry

Greg66 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Some cars are quite a push to get to 100.

...and some will still have you pinned to the back of the seat as they accelerate past 100.

Fewer of them than the those that struggle to reach 100, I'd guess. We're all going to be getting in your way Greg :P

CiB

rjsterry wrote:

And as Greg66 says, if the official limit is 80, the 'socially acceptable' limit will be nearer 100. Nobody will be sitting there thinking "well thank goodness I'm no longer a criminal. 80's enough for me".

Don't agree. 80-85 is the norm now and works well enough for it be set as the law. I don't accept that the nation would do 100 or more if only there were laws that tacitly approved of doing at least 80. Most of the m/way network is not covered by cameras and police patrols are a a rarity, and everyone drives at a comfortable speed - 80-90. Not a problem now, won't be a problem in 2013.

Clever Pun

CiB wrote:

You're going to avoid all motorways? Totally impractical for me, but if you can do it, fair play.

But the limit is 80, now. No-one gets done for doing 80 in normal conditions. Nothing changes with this law. Can people not grasp this?[/quote]

Correct popo wont stop you upto about 82... unless you're just taken the mick in front of them. So 80 has become an acceptable level.

I've noticed on motorways there are less people going at greater speeds due to petrol costs (as alluded to earlier).. does mean some slow numpties in the outside lane clogging up the place though.

SimonAH

The problem is that the average speed cameras are not police, and don't discriminate - they just send you a ticket. I'm sure that there is some leeway, but what it is I don't know and don't want to experiment to find out.

They are becoming the norm now too.

mrc1

SimonAH wrote:

The problem is that the average speed cameras are not police, and don't discriminate - they just send you a ticket. I'm sure that there is some leeway, but what it is I don't know and don't want to experiment to find out.

They are becoming the norm now too.

Theres a load on the A13 that are set to 50 but whenever I'm there I see cars going through considerably faster. Some may be numpties that get caught but I assume some are regulars doing a speed they know they can get away with.

roger_merriman

SimonAH wrote:

The problem is that the average speed cameras are not police, and don't discriminate - they just send you a ticket. I'm sure that there is some leeway, but what it is I don't know and don't want to experiment to find out.

They are becoming the norm now too.

I always do 45/50 since I don't want to be done for doing 51mph or what ever.

It's only a few miles so secs you loose any way.

rolf_f

I'm completely convinced that at some point, this government will make a decision that isn't completely cretinous and moronic. It has to happen sometime.......

Stone Glider

The motorways at weekends are very different beasts to those during the working week. Lots of lorries doing 50/60 and taking two lanes, plenty of WVM trying to hold 75+ and reps 80+. Civilians, largely doing 60/70 and fretting about fuel consumption. I reckon average speeds on motorways has dropped in the past twelve months.

EKE_38BPM

spen666 wrote:

EKE_38BPM wrote:

I think I've said this before but on motorways, I'd up the speed limits to 100mph but if you are caught doing 100.1+ mph, tailgating, driving in the wrong lane (undertaking, hogging the middle or driving in the overtaking lane when not overtaking etc), driving too fast for the conditions (fog, wet roads etc), ignoring temporary speed limits etc, and you lose your licence for a year (for all of the offences outlined). I.......

Point of order:

Undertaking is not an offence in England & Wales and is perfectly legal

I know the Highway Code isn't law, but

The Highway Code wrote:

264
You should always drive in the left-hand lane when the road ahead is clear. If you are overtaking a number of slower-moving vehicles, you should return to the left-hand lane as soon as you are safely past.

and

The Highway Code wrote:

Overtaking
267
Do not overtake unless you are sure it is safe and legal to do so. Overtake only on the right...

Can't the police do you for undertaking, under the guise of incorrect lane discipline or something?

rolf_f

EKE_38BPM wrote:

I think I've said this before but on motorways, I'd up the speed limits to 100mph but if you are caught doing 100.1+ mph, tailgating, driving in the wrong lane (undertaking, hogging the middle or driving in the overtaking lane when not overtaking etc), driving too fast for the conditions (fog, wet roads etc), ignoring temporary speed limits etc, and you lose your licence for a year (for all of the offences outlined).

So you want to go from a largely self regulating situation to one that requires a huge amount of policing? How are you planning on paying for it?

Incidentally, speed isn't massively dangerous as such (hence why motorways are fairly safe) - what is dangerous are speed differentials. With a loosely enforced limit of 70 mph, most people are travelling at between 60 and 80 mph. If you increase the limit to 100 mph, the speed differential doubles.

Net result = significant reduction in safety for not much net gain.

mybreakfastconsisted

Rolf F wrote:

Incidentally, speed isn't massively dangerous as such (hence why motorways are fairly safe)

When accidents do happen on motorways the consequences are usually more severe. The reason motorways are fairly safe is because there is much reduced inter action with vulnerable road users, low casualty rates certainly don't prove speeding is safe.

TRL 421, ‘The effects of drivers’ speed on the frequency of road accidents’ published in March 2000.


This study was designed to discover the speed-crash relationship. The authors looked at 300 sections of road, made 2 million observations of speed and got 10,000 drivers to complete questionnaires. They found that

the faster the traffic moves on average, the more crashes there are (and crash frequency increases approximately with the square of average traffic speed)


the larger the spread of speeds around the average, the more crashes there are

http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki/AB ... ly_Factoid

I thought the trade-off for higher motorway speeds was local 20mph zones becoming easier to approve, haven't seen any sign of that. Round my neighbourhood the wealthier residents were refused permission to self-impose a 20mph zone because the council said it would an encourage an apartheid-system of lower speeds in wealthier areas and higher ones in poor neighbourhoods.