Getting bans lifted

Ahhhhhh, if only the fantasists sat in the middle lane overtaking imaginary cars would drive on the left we could have a three lane motorway network in the UK, just imagine it...
 
When I were a lad, speed seemed to be the greatest thrill, getting your bike to "Do a ton" was a challenge.

Nowadays I'm older, some say wiser and am much less likely to speed, one of the reasons is economy. Maybe I've just become a grumpy old Bas**rd?

But there are times where an 80 limit is a practical option.

Here's the controversial bit........... When I worked in Oman, the limit was set to I think 140 Km/Hr above that the most annoying chiming came from the car and got louder the faster you went!! Nanny state maybe, but you kept to the limit. Massive fines if you disabled the device, how about it here??

The other thing I liked was the speed control, if you were caught speeding it was an automatic fine of the equiv of £1.50 per Km over the limit, but you had to pay in person at the police station, and that could take several hours!! There weren't many instances of major speeding.
 
Bigpeetee said:
When I were a lad, speed seemed to be the greatest thrill, getting your bike to "Do a ton" was a challenge.

Nowadays I'm older, some say wiser and am much less likely to speed, one of the reasons is economy. Maybe I've just become a grumpy old Bas**rd?

But there are times where an 80 limit is a practical option.
Click to expand...

I was a 'ton-up' lad, too - even on my little Suzy 185! But I had a mate killed when he ploughed into the back of a traffic jam at 90, and that kind of got me thinking.

As for doing a ton now... even in the safest car I don't feel safe. Most drivers on the road just probably couldn't handle it at that speed if something went wrong. Although you could probably say the same for 70, too.

The funny thing is that there's much more to learning to drive now. When I took my test (only in the '80s) it was a few times around the block and then a bit of Highway Code. Now, it's like doing a degree. Yet driving standards seem to be worse if anything. Some people seem genuinely flummoxed when it comes to any manoeuvre involving reverse gear! Mirrors, anyone?
 
Last edited:
As my dad used to say, though... 'I don't mind the driver getting killed, but it's the poor sods he hits.'
 
The increased risk of death seems to me to be a pretty reasonable cause for concern - and the dangerous sports argument actually works the other way round because the people who run those sports have invested a lot of time effort and cash in measures to make them safer over the years. If a change in the rules/equipment etc has made the sport safer it has been adopted; if it hasn't then it has been abandoned - thus if the people running those sports were in charge of motorway traffic the evidence would almost certainly lead them to conclude that the speed limit should not be increased! (and I have indulged in and enjoyed many such sports).
 
No-one seems to have considered the obvious ...

Those now flouting the 70 limit by driving at 80 will, presumably, drive at 90 if the limit is increased. It seems it's human nature to always push the boundaries in this way.

To me this counters one of the arguments which is to legitimise those who are currently in breach of the law.

I see no good reason to increase the limit at the expense of life and limb, and the significant increases in fuel consumption and pollution.
 
Canalsman said:
No-one seems to have considered the obvious ...

Those now flouting the 70 limit by driving at 80 will, presumably, drive at 90 if the limit is increased. It seems it's human nature to always push the boundaries in this way.

To me this counters one of the arguments which is to legitimise those who are currently in breach of the law.

I see no good reason to increase the limit at the expense of life and limb, and the significant increases in fuel consumption and pollution.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's true. The 'unofficial' speed limit has always been 80. When I'm on the bike, I very rarely go above 70 now... and I always seem to be in the inside lane.
 
Call me an old cynic - I know that someone will :) - but given that there's been a huge downturn in tax revenue from petrol and diesel as a result of much reduced consumption, upping the speed limit will help redress the balance!
 
Canalsman said:
Call me an old cynic - I know that someone will :) - but given that there's been a huge downturn in tax revenue from petrol and diesel as a result of much reduced consumption, upping the speed limit will help redress the balance!
Click to expand...

How very true. I would vote for you, if you were a Politician☺☺☺ Amazing how saftey goes out of the window.
 
Canalsman said:
No-one seems to have considered the obvious ...

Those now flouting the 70 limit by driving at 80 will, presumably, drive at 90 if the limit is increased. It seems it's human nature to always push the boundaries in this way.

To me this counters one of the arguments which is to legitimise those who are currently in breach of the law.

I see no good reason to increase the limit at the expense of life and limb, and the significant increases in fuel consumption and pollution.
Click to expand...

I don't accept this at all. The reason that many people (but not all by any means) drive over the limit is that the limit is too low. Most people do not drive at 40 mph in built-up areas which have a 30 mph limit because they can understand the reason for the limit and are happy to comply.

The 70 mph limit is far too low. It was imposed a long time ago when vehicles were much less sophisticated and far had greater stopping distances. We should adopt a system such as the one used in France, which is obeyed by the vast majority of drivers i.e. 80mph when it's dry and 70 mph if it's raining.

The government's reason for wishing to raise the limit isn't just because it's being flaunted by some, it's also because they realise that it's outdated and bears no relation to modern vehicle engineering and safety standards. I also understand that the police will take a much tougher line on those exceeding the 80 mph limit than they do currently. When it's 80 mph they will no longer turn a blind eye to someone doing ten mph over the speed limit.
 
Canalsman said:
Call me an old cynic - I know that someone will :) - but given that there's been a huge downturn in tax revenue from petrol and diesel as a result of much reduced consumption, upping the speed limit will help redress the balance!
Click to expand...

Are you seriously putting that forward as a genuine reason for the government wishing to increase the speed limit? If that's how government works I wonder why they have campaigns to encourage us to stop smoking and drinking? I wonder why they are forcing car makers to constantly improve engine efficiency and give much greater fuel economy?

Statement like this are in the same league as 'Princess Diana was killed by the Duke of Edinburgh' or 'The moon landing was faked in a shed in Arizona.'

The reason why conspiracy theories such as this are bunkum is because no one can keep secrets this big. Of the thousands of people that would have to be involved in some of the favourite conspiracies, isn't it amazing that not one has decided to sell his story?

And the same goes for 'They're only upping the speed limit to make us use more fuel'. If this had even been whispered some civil servant would have 'accidentally' let it slip!
 
Northerner said:
I don't accept this at all. The reason that many people (but not all by any means) drive over the limit is that the limit is too low. Most people do not drive at 40 mph in built-up areas which have a 30 mph limit because they can understand the reason for the limit and are happy to comply.

The 70 mph limit is far too low. It was imposed a long time ago when vehicles were much less sophisticated and far had greater stopping distances. We should adopt a system such as the one used in France, which is obeyed by the vast majority of drivers i.e. 80mph when it's dry and 70 mph if it's raining.

The government's reason for wishing to raise the limit isn't just because it's being flaunted by some, it's also because they realise that it's outdated and bears no relation to modern vehicle engineering and safety standards. I also understand that the police will take a much tougher line on those exceeding the 80 mph limit than they do currently. When it's 80 mph they will no longer turn a blind eye to someone doing ten mph over the speed limit.
Click to expand...

Well, here's a letter that was in The Times last week. Fuel for a warm debate, I don't doubt... grist to the mill...

As a civil engineer of 36 years' experience who has worked on the design of many motorway projects, including Spaghetti Junction in Birmingham, may I point out that motorways were designed for a speed of 70 mph. The radius of curves, their super-elevation, the gradients, the sight lines, were all determined by that speed - so the figure of 70 mph was not just plucked out of the air, it was fundamental to our designs.

Hark... I thought I heard a scream...
 
Last edited:
Yes, but he's talking about a motorway design that was implemented forty years ago for cars that had the road holding, handling and braking of cars forty years ago! My first car in 1966 was a Ford Anglia that would just about do seventy and it has skinny wheels, drum brakes and rubbish handling!

It's utter nonsense to suggest that cars cannot drive on motorways at ten miles an hour faster than the cars of the '60s. Apart from which, if that was the case, why were the early motorways unrestricted?

I would also add that the sharper curves on complex junctions such as he's referring to very often have speed restrictions anyway. Just because it may not be safe to drive around a sharpish bend at 80 mph doesn't mean that the other 99% of straight motorway isn't suitable for a higher speed.
 
Actually, I think the maximum speed on motorways should be lowered to 60. That way, it would unofficially become 70, so everything will be as it should be... ;)
 
Talking of driving down the middle lane at 60mph has anybody else noticed that there seems to have been a recent increase in the number of HGVs driving at 60 side by side in the inner and middle lanes? It used to be the case that you could rely on HGV drivers to be the sensible ones but in the past few weeks I have not only come across these "tandem" drivers but also an increasing number of them who tailgate and, after overtaking, cut in so sharply that you are forced to brake (btw, I am talking about what happens when I am in the inner lane, not the middle one). Is there some kind of protest going on or do they just not like motorhomes? And before anyone replies, no they are not all Hungarian or Romanian - the vast majority of these idiots have been British.
 
So far I have read this thread with interest, and not one response has in my mind hit the nail on the head as to why we shouldnt raise the limit.

Whilst I would agree that car braking systems etc are more efficient, better chassis etc etc etc ...........the operator i.E driver I dont think has evolved that much since the late 60,s

As already adequately illustrated by previous posts, we seem to have this attitude of others being less competent than ourselves. This is exactly the reason why things should stay as they are.

A good driver, considers other road users and respects perhaps their lack of experience and confidence. And if they are truly skillfull makes progress within the confines already laid down.

On the basis few seem able to achieve this I dont see any reason to increase the speed limit.

Moreover an increase of the motorway limit from 70 to 80 mph ......What benefit would this in true terms bring about in Journey times ?

I would suggest none .....if a journey is quicker by 30 or 60 ....... mins say London to Edinburgh it matters not, If that 60 mins is so important we would be far better investing time in looking at our quality lof life

Channa
 
If that 60 mins is so important we would be far better investing time in looking at our quality lof life
Click to expand...

That 60 minutes is so often stress filled while on the road, especially in areas with dense traffic. Eliminating that 60 minutes would improve my quality of life,greatly.

Otherwise I agree with much of what you say, without reaching the same conclusion. I was taught to drive as though everyone on the road was inexperience (the exact words were "bloody idiot"). I also learnt to drive in London, giving me much needed confidence in chaotic conditions.

I don't think that the bar should be set at the lowest common denominator, but I do think that repeated dangerous driving should be dealt with more severely than at present, in terms of loss of licence and test resitting. Driving without licence should quickly result in loss of liberty.

Safety should be the key issue, rather than focussing on arbitrary limits. IMHO.


Polly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who viewed this discussion (Total:0)

Back
Top