Speeding

[michaelH]

Guilty, of course, and many times too. In fact, guilty of 100 + mph on a couple of occasions. But since I am one of those annoying members who lectures people about the evils of racing on public roads, perhaps I had better attempt to justify myself.

100 mph, even on a deserted, dry motorway in perfect visibility, driving a safe and powerful car (a Celica and an IS200 in my examples), remains strictly illegal of course, but I don't see it as any more dangerous than most other kinds of driving - and far less dangerous than a perfectly legal 50 mph on a 'fast' B road with bends, oncoming traffic, farm turnings, pedestrians, badgers and side roads. In contrast, if I were to drive at 100 mph on a busy section of the M6 in pouring rain, that would be madness and would probably merit instant disqualification or worse.

Any good driver will drive according to the road weather and traffic conditions, and that may often mean driving at well below the legal speed limit, but it may also allow for the limit to be exceeded, in moderation. Speed cameras don't know this of course.

In contrast, racing powerful cars on a public road must almost by definition involve pushing things to (or near to) the limit. As such, it is inherently dangerous. Does anyone disagree?

[SteveAudioX]

:shutit:

[Lexus Jim]

although I see your point about been on a deserted motorway and doing 100mph is safe, there is also the chance of a blow out or some other thing could happen that you have no control over and had you been travelling at the 70 mph speed limit the risk of injury/damage to your car would be a lot less.

Just a thought

[jac114]

why doesnt the goverment force the car manufactures to stick speed limiters on every vehicle.. i mean why make a car that does 130mph when there isnt a place in the uk that you can do this..

... no cause there would be uproar from the manufactires aswell as consumers, But the roads may be a safer place..

because if the goverment was to do this then they would lose a lot of revenue from speeding tickets ands such like..

( the same reason why the do not ban smoking outright) they make to much money from it..

and that would then mean they would start taking about 75p from every pound you make just to get it back

[UKPulse]

Surely the point is speed cameras are supposed to be a deterrent? They are randomly sited and the message is "commit a speeding offence and run the risk of getting punished for it". If they were only sited at schools & accident blackspots, everywhere else would be a free for all. Much as I hate the things as much as the next guy, they do make many people think twice about speeding, especially on unfamiliar roads. If that reduces deaths & serious injury, by even one or two, then surely that's good.

Also, what the revenue from them is used for isn't the point - contentious I know, but (sadly?) there's no rule that says because they target motorists, the proceeds must benefit motorists. Morally it might be wrong, but that's life I guess.

Fact is, we all speed, we all think we exercise judgement and we all pray to whatever we believe in that we don't get caught.

Why don't UK cars have speed limiters? Imagine the complexities of implementing that!

[michaelH]

Lexus Jim is right of course in saying that a blow out at 100 must be more dangerous than one at 70, but then nothing is wholly safe. Is the risk of a possible blowout on the empty motorway greater than the risk of hitting an emerging tractor or cyclist as you come round the bend of the B road at 50 mph? Or the school kid as you pass the school gates at 20 mph? That is my point.

As for speed cameras and safety, I don't recall the roads being more dangeous back in the days before they arrived, but I do recall more police cars on the motorways. and the police can usually distinguish between dangerous and non-dangerous driving. Also, people who got disqualified under the totting up rules used to be those who regularly drove like idiots. Now there are thousands of basically safe drivers staring disqualification in the face. No, I am not one of those (no points or convictions, as yet), but I do think that the current points system is now too harsh on high milers and needs revision. Minor speed infringements should be punished only by a fine, or perhaps by a fine and 1 or 2 points.

[Mr-Lex]

Never but noticed tt99 on my licence...wonder whats that :P :shutit: :winky:

[Wosket]

i got pulled by the police for doing 93mph on the M5 back in the days when i had a mark II fiesta before uni and the police told me that the speed wasnt a problem. the problem believe it or not was that i was driving by the rules!!!!! i was indicating every time i changed lane and using all 3 lanes of the motorway to pass the idiots who can only drive in the middle lane, so instead of whizzing past in the slow lane i would go out to the fast lane and then back again. i was told this made me look like a drunk driver!!!!!! i was breathalised which was negative and given a producer. when i said if im driving by 'the book' as they said and they should pull the idiots who can only drive in the middle lane they replied that it was unpractical as they didnt have the time or resources to pull so many drivers! i was just pleased not to get a speeding fine and a few points but at the same time a bit befuddled.

[Arif]

And i have 6 points on my License as Proof :duh: :D

[Lexus Jim]

i got pulled by the police for doing 93mph on the M5 back in the days when i had a mark II fiesta before uni and the police told me that the speed wasnt a problem. the problem believe it or not was that i was driving by the rules!!!!! i was indicating every time i changed lane and using all 3 lanes of the motorway to pass the idiots who can only drive in the middle lane, so instead of whizzing past in the slow lane i would go out to the fast lane and then back again. i was told this made me look like a drunk driver!!!!!! i was breathalised which was negative and given a producer. when i said if im driving by 'the book' as they said and they should pull the idiots who can only drive in the middle lane they replied that it was unpractical as they didnt have the time or resources to pull so many drivers! i was just pleased not to get a speeding fine and a few points but at the same time a bit befuddled.

word to that, they should be automated camera's doing people who sit in the middle lane on motorways and people with fog lights on when there's no fog etc...

seriously tho, you must have seen the 'have some horse-sense on the road' advert on tv. You would have to be stupid to do anything like that.

Think they should put a 'turn your fog lights off' and 'pull over to the inside lane when finished overtaking' adverts instead

[Wosket]

LOL!!!!!! funnily enough i've not come across one horse on the road in the city of manchester! how strange?! what a waste of money that ad was, i mean for the amount of people for whom it is relevant its ridiculous.

[AltezzaScott]

The person that said no is a liar!!! LOL i`d bet my house on it

[Fargo]

why doesnt the goverment force the car manufactures to stick speed limiters on every vehicle.. i mean why make a car that does 130mph when there isnt a place in the uk that you can do this..

... no cause there would be uproar from the manufactires aswell as consumers, But the roads may be a safer place..

its the car manufactures that perpetuate the need for speed. i mean the new mclaren on another thread is sweeet n'all that, but with such stats as:-

"Mercedes claims the SLR is capable of sprinting from 0-62mph in 3.8sec, to 124mph in 10.6sec, and to 186mph in 28.8sec. Top speed (provisionally) is 208mph.

Surprisingly, a humble five-speed autobox is standard, featuring 'shift speed adjustment' with three manually selectable shift strategies: Sport, SuperSport and Race. Many supercar-watchers would have been expecting something more sophisticated in a car of this calibre."

im left thinking, why your gona need a 'race' mode box on the street..

[Scorpion]

Still not quicker than some Two Wheel machines and at a fraction

of the price the Mclaren will be.........still a nice moto though

B) B)

[UKPulse]

Still not quicker than some Two Wheel machines and at a fraction

of the price the Mclaren will be.........still a nice moto though

B) B)

Hehe - my Fazer will get to 60 about 0.5s quicker that the Mclaren, and probably beat it to 100mph too! But once his aerodynamics and endless bhp take over he'll be passing me and will be relaxing listening to Beethoven or something as he does so... not hanging on for grim death!

...we'd both probably get nicked tho!

[Wosket]

Still not quicker than some Two Wheel machines and at a fraction

of the price the Mclaren will be.........still a nice moto though  

B)  B)

Hehe - my Fazer will get to 60 about 0.5s quicker that the Mclaren, and probably beat it to 100mph too! But once his aerodynamics and endless bhp take over he'll be passing me and will be relaxing listening to Beethoven or something as he does so... not hanging on for grim death!

...we'd both probably get nicked tho!

fast bikes scare the hell out of me

[Scorpion]

Last bike i had was a Yamaha R1........0 > 60 just over 3secs...

........0 > 100 > 0 under 10 secs.Top speed from the crate(no fettling) 176 mph

B) B)

[Scorpion]

Wait till THIS comes out,if it ever does!!

you'll deffo lose your license