70 rising to 80 on the motorway????

[Steve L]

All over the news today is the iniciative (if you can call it that!) from Eric Pickles regarding raising the speed limit from 70Mph to 80Mph to fall in line with the EU.
My initial thought was about time too considering the current average speed of free flowing traffic is 79Mph according to experts.

Then I wonder if Pickles is barking up the wrong tree. Currently I have noticed a marked increase in the number of drivers taking it steady trying to make the fuel last. Another point is the consequential drop in revenue from the speed camera's, at a time when everycouncil, police force are being urged to save money or raise funds elsewhere than from the government coffers.

IMO. The max speed for lanes 3 & 4 of motorways could easily be 90Mph and on top of that lane 1 should have a minimum 55Mph speed limit. Then instead of ticket hunting the speeders, target those who can't drive properly like, Lane hoggers, undertakers, sunday drivers doing 50Mph an so forth. BTW, there is a minimum speed sign in the highway code and is often used as a catch question in a driving test. It is round, blue background and white numbers & border. Never seen one in the flesh though in 35 years of driving.

So now having probably put the preverbial cat amongst the pidgeons, I wonder what everyone thinks of the proposed upgrade of speed limits.

 

[ProfJohnL]

This is not particularly new news, its been around on message boards for a couple of months

What is not being memntioned as much is that to go along with the suggested rise in the limit is the likelyhood that the authorities will be keeping a much tighter control on the speed cameras and prosecuting more drivers who go over the raised limits.

No mention has been made of upping the other limits such a caravan towing speed, and HGV, so in practice its not going to make much difference to average speeds.

As for setting minimum speed limits on the nearside lane, How many times do you actually find a situation where someone is going slower than the HGV's limit 56mph without good reason?

Steve take canal boating, it may be quicker!

 

[otherclive]

Cannot get too worked up about an increase in speed as there are so many times that I cannot even manage a steady 70-75 mph for very long on our crowded M ways, whereas in France and Germany it is a different story. Without a reasonable time at the higher speed I cannot but feel that the Goverments perceived economic benefit to the country is so much hot air. Now a law to rapidly move on travellers and squatters would win my vote.

 

[seth1]

Thats fine saying that,but what about vehicles that cant maintain a 55mph minimum speed in all conditions?How would these fair?

 

[ProfJohnL]

Clive,

You have waved a red flag!

Why do you want to break the law by trying to "manage 75" anything over the current derestricted speed limit 70 (oximoron I know) is speeding, why brag about wanting to breaking the law.

 

[Surfer]

Speed limit is 70mph but motorists knwo they can get away with doing up to 80mph so if the national speed limit becomes 80mph they will think it is okay to do up to 90mph. At either speed death comes very quickly, but if it is not your fault, a bit unfair, but that was life i guess. I think the current speed limit is fine as it gives you slightly more time to react to an emergency.

 

[Lutz]

Surely, by your argument, there is a case for dropping the speed limit to 60mph as that would give you even more time to react in an emergency?
Actually, over here where there is no general speed limit, most fatal accidents happen at much lower speeds and few because someone was going a lot faster than, say, 90mph. Experience has shown that, given total freedom, the majority stick to speeds around 75 to 80mph and few have the urge to go faster even if they could.

 

[otherclive]

In reply to Prof's comments re my having difficulty at maintaining 70-75mph I am so pleased that his colour perception at the red end of the spectrum is 100%!

 

[Steve L]

I think that over on the continent, there is a lot more lane disapline.
I don't think clive need's a red flag given that, his speedo will be reading about 5% faster than actual speed.
I would welcome lane speed limits and even a minimum speed limit asbeing brutally honest, if you can't manage to drive on a free flowing motorway at more than 55Mph in your car, I would have to ask if the motorway is for you?
Going by what I see happening hourly let alone daily, the police want to do some real work instead of playing with their "hair driers". They could make far more money for the government, if they booked those who lane hog, undertake, pull out without signals or regard for others, than they evr would from speeders. A typical example being the other day when I was driving up dinmore hill on the A49. I was doing an indicated 50 mph which was driving at the speed limit. When a Chrysler PT cruiser pulled out without signals from 100 Mtrs behind a lorry doing about 45 mph. He then proceeded to maintain 45 Mph. This did nothing except hold up me and half a dozen cars behind. After about 500 Mtrs, he pulled back in behind the lorry. I managed to pass the lorry but the rest of the traffic behind me had to litterally force their way back into the crawler lane to avoid going over the hazard stripes on the top of the hill. All in all the PT cruiser caused frayed tempers, several infringements of the law by the other cars and all because he couldn't drive with due care and attention! Which happens to be a motoring offence carrying upto 6 points on your license.

There are plenty of covert speed camera vans about to do the simple nicks. The latest one I saw in hereford was an 02 reg plain white scruffy vauhall morvano with a black window panel on the back door and low and behold a tax disc camera and speed camera mounted in them. Very skeaky.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Clive and Steve

Thankfully my colour vision is fine, as I can readily identify all colourful road signs including speed limits. can you?

Unless the poster defines the basis of their speed measurement, I will always assume they mean the corrected real speed, after all they are quoting an MPH which has as definition.

Unless you can prove otherwise the max speed limit on UK public roads is 70MPH, and therefore anything over is speeding.

It is a separate matter if the police or other authorities decide to ignore a speeder, but they could legitimately charge any driver for exceeding limit by as little as 1MPH.

I have given more thought to Steve's idea re the imposition of minimum speeds on motorway lanes, and I think there is some merit in exploring the idea further, and even applying it to dual carriage ways across the country.

Because there some legitimate vehicles that need to use the motorways, but may not be able to meet Steve's suggestion of a minimum speed of 55mph on nearside lane, for example some hopefully laden HGV's may not be able to achieve 55 on some of the motorway inclines. I would leave the nearside lane de-restricted.

But any other lanes on a motorway or dual carriage way could have a minimum speed of 55MPH unless a lower speed limit is in place.

Obviously where a multi-lane carriage way has specific route directions, such as where the road ahead splits to go in different directions, then the minimum speed limit would be diss-applied.

And another suggestion that at all traffic islands the speed limit is automatically 30MPH, regardless of the limits on any adjoining roads.

 

[Surfer]

This must be the only country in the world where laws get changed to accommodate the law breakers. Next burglars will be allowed to burgle your property if they are broke! LOL!

 

[drsorento]

What about the fact that we are all ,as motorists taxed to the hilt because our cars put out "harmfull emmisions" well surley if the speed limit goes up so will the emmisions, or are our wonderful goverment conceeding that global warming is not the fault of the motorist and is indeed a natural cycle of event that has for millions of years caused the earth to warm up and cool down, so are they about to reduce the tax burden on the motorist? I THINK NOT

 

[Steve L]

I can see John's point about lorries and the nearside lane and I have in the past while towing a full capacity 2 ton load behind an Espace had to travel at 40 Mph due to the trailer weight. I was realy aiming at the car drivers who do travel at well below the limit and as such hold up cars & trailers, and lorries.

Actually Surfer the original motorway speed limit was 90 Mph and was supposed to be lowered temporarily to 70 Mph back in the 1960's to save fuel during the suez crisis, I believe. I can remember my dad driving his Ford Popular 100E down the M5 trying to get 90 out of it. In those days very few cars could cope with sustained speeds over about 70 Mph, without blowing head gaskets and the like. The modern cars today can both cope with the higher speeds and also they have brakes designed to cope too. So actually taking engineering inovation and progress into account it could be argued that the original design concept of 90 Mph could be used.

What hasn't kept pace with progress is the driver training principles. For instance you only find out by "accident" or otherwise, that the Driving Standards Agencey (who regulate driving instructors), change pupil instruction stratagies and don't inform all drivers old and new of their new rules. one example being doing away with the option to use the inside lane of a 2 lane roundabout to go straight ahead, or allowing pupils to stay in gear, but with the hand brake on at certain road junctions.

I've advocated it before and will say again, I would welcome periodic driver assessment for all road users. Accidents always have a cause and the most used reason is driver error and mainly for lack of observation and anticipation. As a lorry driver, I was trained not only to be progressive in order to make best use of the engine pulling power, but also to be far more observant and anticipate other vehicle's errors and sudden reactions. For example I have on at least 3 occassions stopped prior to people flinging open their car door and bailing out to get to the paper shop, thus avoiding running them down or damaging their car.

 

[NickinFrance]

Actually Surfer the original motorway speed limit was 90 Mph and was supposed to be lowered temporarily to 70 Mph back in the 1960's to save fuel during the suez crisis

Actually motorways were unrestricted until December 1965 when the 70 mph limit was introduced on an experimental basis, then made permanent in 1967. BTW the 'Sues crisis' was in 1956.
The biggest problem with the UK motorway network is the MLOC (Middle Lane Owners Club).
I used to do the return trip from Stafford to Torquay every week-end & looking at the faces of most of the members of the MLOC, they seemed to be terrified. I might be an idea if drivers went on to advanced or at least motorway driving course after they have passed their test.
Surfer, any law that is routinely broken by so many people must be deemed a bad law & should warrant reviewing.

 

[NigelHutson]

"Surfer, any law that is routinely broken by so many people must be deemed a bad law & should warrant reviewing."
Not strictly true. The other alternative is proper enforcement. It's only because folk get away with things for so long that they become almost accepted.

 

[NickinFrance]

"Surfer, any law that is routinely broken by so many people must be deemed a bad law & should warrant reviewing."

Not strictly true. The other alternative is proper enforcement. It's only because folk get away with things for so long that they become almost accepted.

One alternative is full enforcement but that still doesn't stop it being a bad law that should be reviewed.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Just because a law or regulation is routinely broken does not necessarily make it a bad law. What it means is that too many people think they are above the law.

Few people would argue with a 30MPH limit in residential and areas around schools, yet how many even exceed the limit in such areas. does that make it a bad regulation?

We hear there is a rise in violent crime and burglary, does that mean it should be legalised?

Of course not - the people that regularly complain about being caught for speeding, or other felonies are usually the ones who complain the loudest.

 

[NickinFrance]

Just because a law or regulation is routinely broken does not necessarily make it a bad law. What it means is that too many people think they are above the law.

Few people would argue with a 30MPH limit in residential and areas around schools, yet how many even exceed the limit in such areas. does that make it a bad regulation?
We hear there is a rise in violent crime and burglary, does that mean it should be legalised?
Of course not - the people that regularly complain about being caught for speeding, or other felonies are usually the ones who complain the loudest.

I would hazard a guess that more motorway drivers break the speed limit than people walking down the road break into houses.
Personally I see nothing wrong in driving past a school in excess of 30 mph at 0400 hrs but I guess that the 'if it saves one child' brigade would want me strung up for doing that but yes, blanket 20/30/40 mph limits are bad regulations, variable limits would be much better.
For this proposal even to be mentioned it must have been approved by the Police & if they think it's OK (which by their lack of enforcement, they must), it is worth looking at.
Reviewing laws to suit changing circumstances must be (IMHO) a good thing but unfortunately it means that Common Sense might be brought into play.
FWIW, I haven't been done for speeding for over 35 years & never on a motorway (in the UK).

 

[ProfJohnL]

I happen to agree with you that variable speed limits can make a lot of sense, and in fact outside some schools, there are already variable limits that apply when the lights on the notice. We also have variable limits on parts of the motorway system.

But until they are applied we must follow the regulations that are in force.

 

[NickinFrance]

But until they are applied we must follow the regulations that are in force.

You missed a bit off at the end:
or face the consequences (if caught).

 

[ProfJohnL]

Nick,
It is totally irresponsible to suggest a course of action to the readers on this forum that is contrary to the law.

You must not encourage anyone to speed, by suggesting that its alright - untill you are caught.

It is not alright,

It is illegal.

It is anti social and morally wrong.

Save fuel and slow down

 

[colin-yorkshire1]

hi guys just found this on the old tinternet might be of interest

ACPO website.
Bear in mind that exceeding a speed limit by any amount whatsoever is an absolute offence, and a police officer is fully entitled to charge a driver for doing, say, 31 in a 30 limit outside a school at closing time, or in a busy High Street.
However, since a speed camera or Talivan is unable to make any judgment as to aggravating circumstances, automated FPNs issued by these means should not normally fall below the Fixed Penalty level set by the formula. In the past, many Gatsos had thresholds set much higher - in the Metropolitan Police area they were originally set at 43 mph in 30 limits - but in recent years most have been brought down to the minimum ACPO figures. However, I have yet to see a case where someone has received an FPN from a camera or Talivan for a speed below these guidelines - although obviously this can be done by a police officer in person.
Given that most car speedometers overread by up to 10%, if you drive past a speed camera at up to an indicated 5 mph above the posted limit, you will normally be OK. On the motorway, an indicated 80 mph should not cause any problems.

 

[NickinFrance]

It is totally irresponsible to suggest a course of action to the readers on this forum that is contrary to the law.

I haven't suggested anything, I made a statement of fact, I'll repeat 'But until they are applied we must follow the regulations that are in force or face the consequences (if caught).' that applies to anything whether it be murder, theft or speeding.

You must not encourage anyone to speed, by suggesting that its alright - until you are caught.

I'm not encouraging anyone to do anything, I actually credit members of this forum with enough intelligence to be able to make up their own minds.

It is not alright,

Obviously it is 'alright' in the eyes of those who do it.

It is illegal.

That I will agree with.

It is anti social and morally wrong.

Sorry, I don't see how driving on a motorway at 0400 hrs doing 72 mph is anti-social, murder, theft & a whole host of other crimes are 'anti social and morally wrong' but not IMHO marginal speeding.

Save fuel and slow down

One of the principal reasons I left the UK was because of people imposing their opinions on me, nice to see not much has changed.
I will use as much fuel & drive as I want, in the full knowledge that I am unnecessarily spending money & risk prosecution IF I decide to drive at speeds which are above (in many cases) an arbitrary limit.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Sorry, I don't see how driving on a motorway at 0400 hrs doing 72 mph is anti-social, murder, theft & a whole host of other crimes are 'anti social and morally wrong' but not IMHO marginal speeding.

Ok
So i think I will try some marginal murder

 

[Steve L]

I stand corrected on how we arrived at 70Mph. My memory struggles to go back to 1965, I was only 6 years old then.

I'm no angel

and have been caught 3 times in my first 10 years of driving for speeding twice in a 30 and once in a 50mph limit. But I guess that's part of being "jack the lad" and growing up while gaining experience of life.

The next 25 years has been clean (touches wood quickly). We all go through phases of driving and currently the trend is more of being economical and green, than pedal to the metal and sod the expence. I swapped to my Rover diesel purely down to economics as I was putting £65 a week through my Laguna petrol. Now I use £30 a week and enjoy driving to get 60+ Mpg while doing a steady 55mph.

I do share the view that in the small hours when most folks are in the land of nod, a variable speed limit would be quite benificial. Perhaps raising the daytime limit by 10Mph too. Quite a lot of roads outside schools now are limited to 20Mph and when there are parents and children about, you won't find me going over 20 anyway. But to still have a 20mph speed in force between 10pm and 7am is seemingly quite rediculas. From an economics point of view, having to constantly reduce speed and then gradually increase it back up to cruising speed uses more fuel and time is increased on the journey. To that end I have found that by keeping a steady 55mph on main roads affords me 60+mpg and at 55mph most corners can be negotiated quite safely. Obviously one does have to drive to the road conditions at the time and as such will have to slow down for sharp corners and sunday drivers.

Anyway, we've got plenty of time to chew the speed limits over. The suggested 80mph motorway limit isn't likely to see the light of day before 2013.