Mud-club
Chat & Social => The Bar - General Chat => Topic started by: mike142sl on December 30, 2008, 10:55:51
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7803997.stm
Well I probably like the idea of this, but then again I'm amongst those who tend to follow speed limits anyway although occasionally creep above them by a few mph. I also use my cruise control to maintain speed limits through villages so in a way I already have one of these.
It will be interesting to see what happens next.
-
Our Merc has a speed limiter as part of its cruise control.
Things it's handy for:
1) Going through speed cameras
2) Going through average speed zones
3) Um ... that's it.
No seriously - I've tried using it in towns and villages - but the problem is that everyone else drives at 35mph so you end up with some muppet sitting 6" off your bumper.
I wouldn't think of using it on the open road - the last thing I want trying to overtake someone who's doing 50mph on a country road is the car to crawl past at 60.
Actually - going through average speed zones is quite nice cause you can set the speed and then overtake everyone else cause you know you can't be going too fast. That's until you catch up with the people sitting 10mph below the max speed in the overtaking lane.
Z~
-
I dont know really...
Ive got a speed 'bong' on my golf when it goes above 75
I use cruise control on the motorway
But ;)
Ive found that in 6th gear on tickover on my Golf GT (Diesel Torque rules) it does about 33mph :afro:
-
I think its a good idea, trucks already have limiters and they are accepted now. Not sure if they will reduce road deaths though.
-
Interesting the comment about 6th gear and doing 33mph.
I recently attended a "speed awareness course" (yes I was speeding) and one of the things I learnt was that it's not an offence not to be in the highest gear when travelling through a restricted area - in fact your car may run more efficiently if you use a lower gear - I'm old school and always attempted to get the car into top gear asap but since the course I've stopped doing it and it seems to work
Just a thought - no offence intended or I hope taken
Chris
-
None taken!
I dont know about economical... it does struggle a bit, especially when a hill comes! However it does stop me speeding though - and I have to admit, until I actually started doing something about it I used to do it a lot.
It wont stop me speeding, but I do have more of an awareness now!
-
Having just re-read the article, im not sure about 'Applying the brakes if necessary' NOTHING does my nut more than somone in from who seems unable to keep a constant speed and has to keep braking every 100meters for no apparent reason!
-
Interesting the comment about 6th gear and doing 33mph.
I recently attended a "speed awareness course" (yes I was speeding) and one of the things I learnt was that it's not an offence not to be in the highest gear when travelling through a restricted area - in fact your car may run more efficiently if you use a lower gear - I'm old school and always attempted to get the car into top gear asap but since the course I've stopped doing it and it seems to work
I think people get confused between what you're meant to do to pass your test (drive in as high a gear as you can which is appropriate for the conditions in order to maximise fuel efficiency & minimise wear-n-tear on the car was my understanding) and what you have to do legally.
When I sat my test (6 or so years ago now) I was told I should drive in built up areas at 30mph in 4th gear.
In fact in one part of the test route I was told by my instructor "there's enough room down this stretch of parked cars for two cars to get through ... if you're not doing 30 you'll get a mark against you."
Z~
-
Having just re-read the article, im not sure about 'Applying the brakes if necessary' NOTHING does my nut more than somone in from who seems unable to keep a constant speed and has to keep braking every 100meters for no apparent reason!
Actually that's a damn good point ... our merc's an automatic which is how it manages to apply the limiter - it just gears down and engine brakes if it needs to.
Could this end up stalling cars with manual boxes? Say your car can't cope with being in 5th at 30mph and the limiter applies ... suddenly you've got a car dead in the water in the middle of 30 mph traffic?
How do the limiters in HGV's cope with htis?
Z~
-
I think its a good idea, trucks already have limiters and they are accepted now. Not sure if they will reduce road deaths though.
IIRC there've been various threads on here about how hacked off the truckers get with their limiters stopping them from overtaking other trucks without holding up traffic.
Not sure just how aware car drivers are of trucks having limiters.
Z~
-
The proposal is that it would be voluntary. The suggestion is that it might be suprising just how many people would fit them. It would also be switchable in the car so you can turn it off if you need a little extra to overtake a car safely.
Personally, I would consider it simply as a 'cruise control' in average speed camera zones, etc. I've made my views on speeding perfectly clear before and I maintain that speed in its own right is not dangerous. It's the use of excessive speed in the wrong places that is. 30mph in a 30mph zone is not always appropriate. Often it is better to be going rather slower. Equally, it could be perfectly safe to do 70mph in some 60mph zones. The 60mph limit is simply there because it's the national speed limit for a single carriageway.
I can't help thinking that some poeple might use the limiter to just do 30mph in a 30mph zone regardless of whether it's appropriate or not. It could have the effect of switching off the brain which is the most dangerous thing you can possibly do when driving.
-
It could have the effect of switching off the brain which is the most dangerous thing you can possibly do when driving.
Indeed.
-
No problem with it being voluntary, however I'd find it very insulting if we were forced to have them (as would probably be the next step with the current bunch in power). My view is that I've passed my test and avoided any points, so why can't I just be trusted to obey laws? Mind you, innocent until proven guilty has taken a bit of a battering in recent years...
I've driven with cruise control and tend to use it for those long sections of roadworks with reduced speed limits. It can be dangerous though as it means that your natural tendency to lift off when you notice a hazard doesn't make any difference - you have to either tap the brake or switch it off.
-
One of the safest things the government could enforce would be the removal of all 'safety' devices fitted to modern cars. In the extreme fitting a blade to the centre of the steering wheel would stop anyone having a crash. They would all drive *very* carefully!
Over the top, but my point is that modern cars take any feeling of vulnerability away giving the occupants a false sense of security. And there is no question that this affects the way people drive. If we all drove round in old Minis or 2CV's, the roads would be a much safer place because we would be more aware of the world around us and not cacooned in our own little padded cell.
It never ceases to amaze me how many people think that crashing is almost an inevitibility and buying a 'safe' car filled with airbags, etc is a good thing. If they didn't crash in the first place, they wouldn't need all this junk in their cars and nobody would be proposing the use of speed limiters. A bonus would be dramatically reduced fuel consumption too because you're not carrying around all that extra junk.
The general public have been brainwashed into believing they need secondary safety devices in their cars instead of having to maintain their driving skills to a higher standard. Nobody in governement or the motor industry seems to talk about primary safety much. There are a few primary safety devices in common use like ABS and that's great. But the majority of what is banded about relates to secondary safety (i.e. after you crash).
Sorry. This has been one of my pet niggles ever since my days at Lotus. I'll get of my soapbox now. :lol:
-
One of the safest things the government could enforce would be the removal of all 'safety' devices fitted to modern cars. In the extreme fitting a blade to the centre of the steering wheel would stop anyone having a crash. They would all drive *very* carefully!
My thoughts exactly! Bumper sensors mounted to a glovebox of TNT.
As V8MoneyPit says, They would all drive *very* carefully!
-
On the radio they were talking about having an override button in case you needed it. The example the interviewer gave was say you were overtaking somebody in a 40 limit and they sped up; you'd press the button and the limiter would go off so you could complete the manoeuvre safely.
I'd welcome it personally. I drive within the limits as I don't want to pick up points, and I don't want to kill anybody much either; having a device like this would be a handy way of not accidentally straying above the limit. On the whole I don't approve of speeding, on the basis that speed limits save lives in the event of an accident. If people don't like the limits then they should campaign to have the limits changed, but I don't agree with ignoring laws that you just happen to disagree with. That said, I'd suggest an 80mph limit on the motorway would be a good idea, as that's what everybody does anyway, but I could live without it.
I reckon one of the most successful safety devices is the fact that your insurance becomes a nightmare if you have a crash.
-
They have speed limiters fitted to the landies down the falklands, it is amazing the lengths people will go to not to slow down!!! Just because they cant go over 30mph. I think it is time to reinforce drivers standards instead of making cars hide driver incompetence.
-
I think it is time to reinforce drivers standards instead of making cars hide driver incompetence.
I totally agree with what has been said by LittlePow. So limiters are fitted; how long would it take before someone finds a way to get round them? Will motorbikes have to be fitted with them as well?
As for it being voluntary, I don't believe that. It will be the case of 'If you don't have one, your car won't pass the MoT'. How long before cars have to be fitted with locator systems, for 'anti theft measures'?
The main common denominator in all road traffic prangs is human error; that needs to be addressed.
-
I have long held that the driving test process needs to be longer. "Intensive Courses" cannot be considered safe as they simply don't give the new driver enough experience. I would suggest that rather than a big test they change to a system where you demonstrate competence in various areas to an instructor. This would also enable them to gauge attitudes and behaviour - it would be harder for the morons to behave themselves for hours than for the current test.
There should also be a mandatory refresher course at 70, including a medical. The vast majority of evasive action I need to take locally is due to the ancient and confuddled who apparently have a Disco-shaped blind spot! :lol:
-
If I've got a device on my cart that limits my speed and knows the speed limit appropriate to where I am, does that mean I won't ever get prosecuted for speeding ever again? guarantee that and I might be interested.
-
I do have a device that is 100% capable of knowing all the speed limits and making sure the car sticks to them; it can avoid traffic, control the car and even anticipate problems instead of having to react to them after the event. It sits just behind the steering wheel with feet on the pedals.
OK I don't claim to be 100% reliable 100% of the time but the truth is I should be.
Is the application of speed limits not the responsibility of the driver? If 'machines' take over why do we have a driver?
-
the spotlight is always on the speeders !!!
now i tend to drive around the limits almost all of the time although like most i can and do drift over..
statistics say that of all road deaths on our roads less than a third are caused by excess speed
i believe more needs to be done to make the layout of roads/junctions etc. and more importantly to change driver attitudes
-
I suspect after a time of the 'voluntary' fitting, it will become compulsory for those convicted of speeding i.e. part of the day course they have to attend.
-
i think it will never be forced on us by the government think of all the money they would lose if no one was caught speeding :roll:
-
i think it will never be forced on us by the government think of all the money they would lose if no one was caught speeding :roll:
Cynic :lol:
-
After reading all the fors and against limiters being fitted I still think its a great idea.
For one reason only.......... Then Golly, my little 1000cc mini would beable to keep up with all the big boys :clap: :clap: :clap:
-
i think it will never be forced on us by the government think of all the money they would lose if no one was caught speeding :roll:
Cynic :lol:
Tsk tsk tsk! :roll: Cynic is such a dirty word! Try 'realist' instead! :twisted:
-
statistics say that of all road deaths on our roads less than a third are caused by excess speed
In fact the Gov't own statistics state that in 1/3 of all road accidents exfess speed is a factor and of those 5% are caused by loss of control due to excess speed.
Sp 1.6% of accidents are caused by speed and another 32%ish are casued by stupidity but could have been avoided/less severe if people were teavelling less quickly.
Thereofre 65% of accidents have nothing whatsoever to do with speeding :-k
The gov't also claims that speed cameras have single handedly lead to a reduction in road accidents, they give no credit whatsoever to improved road design, improved car safety/handling/braking or to the increasing standard demended of new drivers on the road.
Tha said the rate of reduction of raod accidents has slowed if not stalled since they decided to replace real coppers with cameras and that is by far the most telling story
-
Expect "black boxes" before this, the technology for this is really really cheap, in fact your sat nav can already do it and your ECU knows enough about your driving to do EBD etc so adding some RAM on a loop would be easy.
Expect insurance discounts if you have one or some EU legislation. Speed limiting would be a step to far and hard to implement (Eg. how would my track day car cope?)
I agree the HGV limiting issue is an interesting argument but so is the fact that Tiredness is a factor in lots of night time accidents yet "driving through the night" gets hero status but driving whilst having two pints, rightly gives you plonker status, yet all night diving is worse than "minor" drink drive issues (I believe). So why do only HGV have Tachos and Hours limits etc.
-
Expect insurance discounts if you have one or some EU legislation. Speed limiting would be a step to far and hard to implement (Eg. how would my track day car cope?)
This style of speed limiting is already fitted to the new skyline. It can tell when you have entered a race track and removed the power and speed limiter on the vehicle. This is done via the gps system having a location database of every track, so theoretically it could be updated for this country too!
-
The gov't also claims that speed cameras have single handedly lead to a reduction in road accidents, they give no credit whatsoever to improved road design,
You must be aware of the arguments about the Stocksbridge Bypass a few years ago though Blues. We used to hear of death after death on that road and the loudest argument at the time was the design of the road. However as soon as the averaged speed cameras were installed the accidents and deaths stopped.
-
The gov't also claims that speed cameras have single handedly lead to a reduction in road accidents, they give no credit whatsoever to improved road design,
You must be aware of the arguments about the Stocksbridge Bypass a few years ago though Blues. We used to hear of death after death on that road and the loudest argument at the time was the design of the road. However as soon as the averaged speed cameras were installed the accidents and deaths stopped.
There will always be a right and wrong place for any type of speed control measure.
Ultimately though, it must come down to the drivers using inappropriate speed. And I maintain that if everyone drove at the correct speed for any given circumstances, none of these controls would be needed, including speed limits.
-
Two words come to mind - NANNY STATE !!!!!
-
I have said for years why doesnt a device similar to this come into use. As long as it doesnt cost an arm and a leg to install I will have it fitted to my cars. I would rather pay more attention to the kid about to run out into the road in front of me than be looking down at the speedo and miss him / her.
Only thing I would question is what would happen if you suddenly tow something? Would the device know and reduce speed limits accordingly?
I know I'm only 26 but sound like a grandad and drive like one too (60mph behind a lorry on motorways) but I save money in fuel and speeding fines. If I got a speeding ticket my insurance would go up on both cars by an unthinkable amount and the 6k I have spent over the last 9 1/2 years to get the various categories on my license, I dont want to waste by trying to get somewhere 30 seconds earlier.
Also I found out today that a 19 year old lad died last night from crashing into a ditch and hitting a tree along a dead straight piece of road in the village. Thoughts from neighbours are he must have been doing approx 80mpg in the 30mph. If this is true then surely this would be a great device for young drivers to slow them down? I hold my hands up and admit when I first passed my test I thought I was invisible. Thankfuly I had a very small bump which shook me up enough to slow me down. Others arent quiet so lucky.
-
I have said for years why doesnt a device similar to this come into use. As long as it doesnt cost an arm and a leg to install I will have it fitted to my cars. I would rather pay more attention to the kid about to run out into the road in front of me than be looking down at the speedo and miss him / her.
No disrespect intended, but isn't that missing the point? The only reason you would be 'watching' the speedo is so you don't get caught speeding. This would suggest that, if you are driving within the correct limits of the road/vehicle, that the speed limit is too low. In reality, in most 30mph limits, it is rarely appropriate to actually be doing as much as 30mph anyway. So, if you need to watch the speedo, you are likely to be driving too fast for the circumstances.
However, as you suggest, it is close to impossible to educate every member of the public to drive appropriately. As with your example of the youngster crashing or your comment on your earlier driving years.
-
i think it would be a good idea to introduce into the first two years of driving. then, have the two year probationary period of six points and you lose your licence. have to take test again and have the speed limiter etc etc.
it may also be a deterrent to peoplewho persistently speed.
unsure on the easiest way to implement it, but i will think more! :-k
-
I believe the use of a black box to be a more sencible answer (as required in Canada), The use of data being restricted to police investigations.
-
i think it would be a good idea to introduce into the first two years of driving. then, have the two year probationary period of six points and you lose your licence. have to take test again and have the speed limiter etc etc.
Um ... they have that already - 6 points is enough to lose your license in the first 2 years of driving. Also being responsible for an accident is enough as well IIRC.
On top of that you have to re-sit your test too.
Probationary Periods
Road Traffic (New Drivers) Act 1995
If a driver first passes a driving test on or after 1/6/97 and accumulates 6 or more penalty points on his driving licence within the first 2 years of passing a driving test (either in the UK, Gibraltar or any EC State) as a result of offences committed before his test or within that 2 year period, his licence will be revoked by notice in writing and he will have to reapply for a provisional licence and retake a driving test if a full licence is wanted.
Only penalty points gained from offences committed within the previous 3 years count.
Z~
-
but like i actually said, have the limiter for two years THEN have the two year probationary period without the limiter.
-
Im going to make a lot of enemies and possibly upset some people with this comment but this needs to be said. If you are likely to be offended do not read on.
Crashing a car, and smoking fall into the same category in my opinion. It is natural selection. if you smoke, you lessen your life expectancy, equally if you drive like a T**T you lessen your life expectancy, accept it. There is no such thing as an 'accident', there is always a cause and injury/death is the effect. Given the exceptions whereby there is a mechanical failure, or a pedestrian/someone in a stationary car or similar is injured THIS IS JUST HOW IT IS.
I hate this arguement. It is utter bull.
The moment anything like this becomes mandatory I will move elsewhere, the country is a bloody nanny state as is.
If I hear the arguement that a blade or a spike in the middle of the steering wheel is the best deterrant again I am actually going to scream. Like corporal punishment do you? The idea is ridiculous.
How about just having an academic test before allowing people to drive, follow this with a test that is actually relevant to day to day motoring, with a marking system saying that if you score 90-100% you pass, if you achieve less suggest more tuition, but not a retest and if you score less again you need further tuition and a retest?
The driving test is a sham, make it more challenging and add in motorway,skid pan, speed awareness then maybe we can make progress. how about you have to update your license every couple of years and demonstrate competence like a helicopter?
How about if you don't pass first time you are not allowed to retake? Seems a good Idea to me!
I don't have the answer- I am no driving professional, and I DO SPEED, but I have the INTELLECT and the COMMON SENSE to be able to SEE IF/WHEN it is appropriate. Its down to making a Dynamic risk assessment, ie busy road at school time, you drive more slowly because the risk is high, whereas the M4 at 1.30am in the morning, in conditions above freezing, when there are no other vehicles about, what is the problem?
If people dont have the ability to see what is appropriate then take them off the road- dont 'put a spike in front of there face'- that is the kind of suggestion I expect to hear from a 15 year old. or Jeremy Clarkson.
And No, I don't agree with speed cameras either, they are a simple way of beating the motorist further for cash. Raise alcohol or cigarrette tax, kill two birds with one stone, lower drinking and smoking, gain more money, regain support of motorists.
Just my Threepennies worth
Chris
-
My Mum has a peugeot 207 which has a speed limiter function, I think its quite a good idea as a tool to use when driving, but don't think it'd work so well as a mandatory thing you couldn't set yourself. It works as follows...
You select a speed on the trip computer using set +/- buttions just like a cruse control, but rather than it holding that speed automaticly it becomes you max limit so your still 'driving' the car. Lift, it slows down. Use too higher gear it'll still be grumpy like any car but it won't alow you to exceed the limit using engine power. As its a manual car its in the gear you put it in so engine brakes as normal. IF YOU FLOOR IT IT'LL OVERRIDE THE LIMITER! Therefore its perfectly safe for overtaking and it resumes when your back below the limit (the speed flashes if your exceeding the limit.
I think that setup can work well as a volentry system and maybe car makers should be encoraged to fit it, but governing it to the limit seems a step a bit far. Maybe if it was governed but alowed you a breaf bit of unlimited overspeed for overtaking that'd work but I don't think it'd be possable to do that safely as there would be a limit where it'd cut in mid manoeuvre. Thats something you need a driver to judge. When everything is limited to almost the same speed you get the problems with overtaking lorrys on the motorway, thats actully easy to rectify as if the lorry being overtaken bothered to lift his foot or turn off the cruse control for a breaf moment the overtaking lorry would be passed pritty quick and neather loose any time, though many seem not to bother doing this, and I bet if it was fitted to cars even fewer car drivers would do it. The truckers that do lift never really hold you up so you don't notice how often its actully done).
For emissions resions I can see the point in bringing in a max vehicle speed (like the +3.5t limit of 90km/h) around 140-150km/h (guess that'd have to be 130km/h as everyone would just run lead foot on the motorway makeing that the normal speed, and thats the highest limit within the EU bar the few remaining unlimited autobarns, which probuly have their days numbered anyway again for emissions resions). Truth is no one really needs to go faster on the roads (sure you could turn it off for blue light vehicles, which are usally a bit bespoke anyway) and those who do are waisting significant quantitys of fuel, often for little gain [ and only to them, sometimes at the expence of others]. I'm sure the EU will do something like that one day anyway, they are already having a go at cars with high rolling resistance tyres (ie grippy ones) and sadly that could effect performance cars. For track/off road use a max speed limiter could easilly have a system like the Nissan GTR where its unlimited in an apropreate place - all that technology is avalable to modern vehicles right now. Rules like this are rarely applied retrospectively and I don't think should be as its much less feasable. If your car doesn't have an ECU controled engine its more tricky to fit such a limiter, and retrofitting such a feature to many ECUs that don't surport it would also be tricky. Adding to new cars wouldn't cost a penny though, modern cars with satnav already have the required sensors and actuators! Most people would still buy new cars rather than drive older unlimited ones, it would just become another classic feature like not having a CAT.
The current defender already has such a limiter but who compains or has noticed it? Someone who likes doing 90MPH on the motorway with mud terains? I'd rather they wern't flying past me anyway. I think its quite a sensible limit for the defender given its vehicle dynamics - they aren't built for high speed handleing, thats why they are still good in other areas - seems LR agrees too.
Maybe an overall max limit doesn't bother me though as all my vehicles don't really do over 60MPH comfortably anyway, though that doesn't really bother me.
-
Increased erosion of freedom is what bothers me.
-
If I hear the arguement that a blade or a spike in the middle of the steering wheel is the best deterrant again I am actually going to scream. Like corporal punishment do you? The idea is ridiculous.
If you read the post properly, you will realise it was not a suggestion, but an example. Nobody, as you rightly say, would seriously suggest we actually have blades pointing at drivers. The point (if you excuse the pun!) is that if people felt more vulnerable, they would change the way they drive.
Crashes are not innevitable. With correct driving by everyone on the road they are avoidable.
-
How about this for a radical new idea?
What you have is a load of people in uniform, in big marked up cars, driving the roads who are allowed by law to stop people who are driving badly, speeding, using mobile phones, driving shed vehicles or stolen vehicles, who are allowed to use discretion and would therefore act as a deterrent?
We could call them 'Traffic Police' :-k
Hang on though, that sounds like it might not make the Government much money. Best scrap that idea. :roll:
-
How about this for a radical new idea?
What you have is a load of people in uniform, in big marked up cars, driving the roads who are allowed by law to stop people who are driving badly, speeding, using mobile phones, driving shed vehicles or stolen vehicles, who are allowed to use discretion and would therefore act as a deterrent?
We could call them 'Traffic Police' :-k
It'll never catch on
-
How about this for a radical new idea?
What you have is a load of people in uniform, in big marked up cars, driving the roads who are allowed by law to stop people who are driving badly, speeding, using mobile phones, driving shed vehicles or stolen vehicles, who are allowed to use discretion and would therefore act as a deterrent?
We could call them 'Traffic Police' :-k
It'll never catch on
After all, in my 'perfect world' of everyone driving properly, we would never need the likes of LSP to watch out for the idiots. And I would never want to put him out of a job :lol:
-
How about this for a radical new idea?
What you have is a load of people in uniform, in big marked up cars, driving the roads who are allowed by law to stop people who are driving badly, speeding, using mobile phones, driving shed vehicles or stolen vehicles, who are allowed to use discretion and would therefore act as a deterrent?
We could call them 'Traffic Police' :-k
It'll never catch on
After all, in my 'perfect world' of everyone driving properly, we would never need the likes of LSP to watch out for the idiots. And I would never want to put him out of a job :lol:
I don't think there is any chance of that, matey! I think my line of work is the only one at the moment that is on the way up, unfortunately!
-
How about this for a radical new idea?
What you have is a load of people in uniform, in big marked up cars, driving the roads who are allowed by law to stop people who are driving badly, speeding, using mobile phones, driving shed vehicles or stolen vehicles, who are allowed to use discretion and would therefore act as a deterrent?
We could call them 'Traffic Police' :-k
It'll never catch on
After all, in my 'perfect world' of everyone driving properly, we would never need the likes of LSP to watch out for the idiots. And I would never want to put him out of a job :lol:
I don't think there is any chance of that, matey! I think my line of work is the only one at the moment that is on the way up, unfortunately!
Mmm. Sadly, I think you are right :roll: