Englands fastest speeders

So you believe the speed limit needs to be increased because you enjoy driving quickly? - Buy a track day and leave the rest of us road users to obey the speed limit. Sorry, not a valid reason for it NEEDING to be increased.

Journey times being reduced? - Not really as those who want to do that by driving quickly do anyway. Sorry, not valid as a reason for it NEEDING to be increased.

Fuel revenue? - Very little difference in fuel consumption between 70 and 80 in the modern car, and the increased pollution would be to the detriment of the environment. Again, not a viable reason for it NEEDING to be increased.

The long and short is there IS no reason that the limit NEEDS to be increased, which is why it hasn't been.

The only drive (pun intended) behind your call for the increase appears to be that you want to drive faster.

See point 1.
 
ST4 said:
You could enforce the 80 more rigerously and not such generous leeways as it is. As it were, I doubt dibble would pull you for 80 on a clear mway. Most don't do 90 or 100. Eventually if we did in future years see a 90 or 100mph limit, so what?
Click to expand...
Most don't do 80 neither. I drive on dual carriageways or motorways every day, cruise control on at 70 mph and keep pace with the majority of other motorists who will also be doing 70mph, some will be going slower but I will always encounter at least one or two over a 6 mile stretch of road who are travelling faster and invariably faster than 80mph.
If you want greater enjoyment of driving at high speed, find a race track and go on a track day.
 
b****r the environment, its 10% increase approx in usage, thats more revenue. Journey time reduction boost commerce and business activity. They, IMHO, need to be increased on motorways, the other limits are fine. A motorway should also be differentiated from a DCW which allows farm traffic, no hard shoulder, tighter gradient bends.

IIRC I read most of our mway network was engineered for 120mph driving. Seems its sold a bit short
 
big soft moose said:
sigh - if you drive like a prat in dangerous conditions and rely on luck not to have an accident - the more occasions on which you drive like an utter cock in adverse conditions, the greater the odds both of you stacking it into an innocent motorist, and of you getting pulled over by the dibble. This is what the law of averages means.
Click to expand...

sigh - There is no law of averages. I assume that you are using the "you" in general terms or are you specifically referring to me? There is however the law of being too cocky and ending up dead driving like that.
 
ST4 said:
b****r the environment, its 10% increase approx in usage, thats more revenue. Journey time reduction boost commerce and business activity. They, IMHO, need to be increased on motorways, the other limits are fine. A motorway should also be differentiated from a DCW which allows farm traffic, no hard shoulder, tighter gradient bends.

IIRC I read most of our mway network was engineered for 120mph driving. Seems its sold a bit short
Click to expand...

Ah steve's powers of recollection again.
We are all saved.
 
Increased fuel usage a good thing? Since when! We are already on borrowed time for oil, prices are continually going up and you think it'd be a good idea to waste more just to make your journey legally that little bit shorter?
 
viv1969 said:
Jesus......that doesn't matter....it's still the LAW.
I swear some people actually need to sustain a head injury to understand reality.
Click to expand...

My what a charming statement!

I'm with the Bumble fella:p
 
I really don't get the increased speed means more enjoyment, when I drive fast, and I'm not going to claim I've not broken the speed limit as I'd be lying it is because I need to get to somewhere by a certain time, and for what ever reason I've become delayed...I don't habitually speed for the sheer hell of it and I don't see what is enjoyable about it, when I have exceeded the speed limit I spend most of the time hoping that something random doesn't happen like a car in an unexpected position, an animal or worse running out or a copper being around

I also love that when presented with the fact that we have much safer roads than those countries with unrestricted motorways the response is not "oh sorry I was wrong" it's "oh while I can live with that" the point is actually no you might not live with that, more over you've not considered that its a good chance that it won't be you that's killed, I've not got a clue on where you'd find the figured but I'm willing to bet far more people are killed by speeding drivers, than speeding drivers are killed by their own driving

Would you want to be the one telling the mother, daughter, son, father other whoever that their loved one isn't coming home anymore because of some cretin that enjoyed driving fast..I know I wouldn't want to be..
 
Gaz J said:
sigh - There is no law of averages..
Click to expand...

so you think that if you roll a dice and it comes up with a six, every time you roll a dice it will also come up with a six - or does random chance dictate that sooner or later the number 1-5 will come up ?

the more times you (that is someone) does the same cretinous thing behind the wheel, the greater the culumative odds that they'll either crash or get caught
 
MWHCVT said:
I spend most of the time hoping that something random doesn't happen like a car in an unexpected position, an animal or worse running out or a copper being around or a TR6 being parked round a blind bend
Click to expand...

FTFY

to be fair I can see the appeal of driving fast - its a test of ones abilities to take the car to the edge of its performance envelope and stay in control , plus the adrenaline and endophins that come from doing something inherently hazardous and getting away with it ... as with sky diving, free climbing etc

I don't have a problem with that - in fact I've done it myself

However the appropriate place to do that kind of thing is on a track - definitely not on the public highway
 
big soft moose said:
FTFY

to be fair I can see the appeal of driving fast - its a test of ones abilities to take the car to the edge of its performance envelope and stay in control , plus the adrenaline and endophins that come from doing something inherently hazardous and getting away with it ... as with sky diving, free climbing etc

I don't have a problem with that - in fact I've done it myself

However the appropriate place to do that kind of thing is on a track - definitely not on the public highway
Click to expand...

Knew that would be added...I've even got six little stars on my licence to remember that TR6... I wonder had it been a TR3 would I have only got 3 points :suspect:
 
if it had been a TR7 you'd have got a medal
 
big soft moose said:
so you think that if you roll a dice and it comes up with a six, every time you roll a dice it will also come up with a six - or does random chance dictate that sooner or later the number 1-5 will come up ?

the more times you (that is someone) does the same cretinous thing behind the wheel, the greater the culumative odds that they'll either crash or get caught
Click to expand...

For every journey in the fog i complete the chance of an accident the next time is exactly the same. The clock is reset. Its the randon variable that your talking about so its feasable that I could get away with it a number of times.
 
Last edited:
big soft moose said:
if it had been a TR7 you'd have got a medal
Click to expand...

To be fair if it had been a TR7 by the I'd got there it would have probably just been a pile of rust coloured dust :lol:
 
Gaz J said:
Its the randon variable that your talking about not the law of average.
Click to expand...

same thing, also known as the law of large numbers (we are just arguing about semantics now)

In probability theory, the law of large numbers (LLN) is a theorem that describes the result of performing the same experiment a large number of times. According to the law, the average of the results obtained from a large number of trials should be close to the expected value, and will tend to become closer as more trials are performed.
Click to expand...
 
MWHCVT said:
To be fair if it had been a TR7 by the I'd got there it would have probably just been a pile of rust coloured dust :LOL:
Click to expand...
And had it been a "7" and you hit it nose on,
you would have been fine, just treat like a speed hump :thumbs:
 
MWHCVT said:
Knew that would be added...I've even got six little stars on my licence to remember that TR6... I wonder had it been a TR3 would I have only got 3 points :cautious:
Click to expand...

guess you're lucky it wasnt a TR12 ;)
 
decrease in journey times? Been on the M25 recently? Until they put in the variable speed limits, it was a 3 lane car park between the A3 and the M40. the variable speed limits meant that it started to move, albeit reasonably slowly. If people did what they were supposed to, and stayed in lane, it would move even quicker.
Leaving that aside, maximum speed a road can take is governed mostly by the amount of traffic on it, not what speeds it is physically possible to drive on it, so putting limits up fails on point one. Again, you are ignoring the increase in collisions that would result. The net result is likely to be lower average speeds over a given route.

A better idea would be to make everyone take a motorway test, fail it, and no motoroways. Retest every 2 years, and perhaps people will as a habit drive better! Throw in any exceeding speed limits, or failing to use lanes as you should means 6 months ban, and apart from emptying the motorways after a few week, which would decrease journey times, I'd agree with raising them.
 
No, I am being practical. So, your plan is for just some motorways? Thats not going to work either, you do it for all, or none, otherwise you poor little darlings can't work out what speed you should be going.
 
Bernie174 said:
No, I am being practical. So, your plan is for just some motorways? Thats not going to work either, you do it for all, or none, otherwise you poor little darlings can't work out what speed you should be going.
Click to expand...

That's a bit patronising considering that many countries including this one already have variable speed limits not all motorways in Germany are without speed limit
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
Bernie174 said:
No, I am being practical. So, your plan is for just some motorways? Thats not going to work either, you do it for all, or none, otherwise you poor little darlings can't work out what speed you should be going.
Click to expand...

Its not hard, some signs will say 80, some will say 70. Or will it be too hard for dibble to work out to pull for speeding as dibble won't be able to tell if its a 70 or 80 section of mway?

I'd also add, us poor little darlings, are the ones responsible for you being employed and therefore you living the life you do. Some humility wouldn't go amiss as to who is actually responsible for providing your salary.
 
Last edited:
Gaz J said:
Before that, the national speed limit sign meant no limit.

:oops: :$ I thought it still meant that.
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as a "national speed limit" Sign.

There is however a "National speed limit applies" Sign

There is a difference (Applies depends on the vehicle)

NSL Applies sign at the beginning of a dual carriageway.

Car = 70 mph
Van over 2t GLW = 60 mph (take note Transit Connect drivers)
 
MatBin said:
On a speed awareness course I went on the other day I was advisd that the stopping distance for a car in a good mechanical condition and driven by a Class 1 Police driver stops in the same distance now as it did when the Highway Code was first written, possibly excluding "thinking" time. The reason being that although brakes, tyres, road grip etc have got better cars have got a lot heavier and so one cancels the other.
Click to expand...

I was on a course in Preston and they said almost the same thing (end justifies the means)
They said that even though cars will stop quicker the over all stopping distances in an emergency have stayed pretty much the same. They said it was due to the many distractions we now have. Sat nav, Phones, Radio's with loads of buttons.
 
mattyg said:
I was on a course in Preston and they said almost the same thing (end justifies the means)
They said that even though cars will stop quicker the over all stopping distances in an emergency have stayed pretty much the same. They said it was due to the many distractions we now have. Sat nav, Phones, Radio's with loads of buttons.
Click to expand...

You should be concentrating on the road so these distractions shouldn't manifest themselves.

I drove a 1995 Mercedes E320 coupe, and its brakes were hopeless compared to the 2005 example I had. Never mind the extra kit, the newer car would stop a lot quicker and harder. I also had a shot of a 1986 Mercedes SL280 (R107) compared to the R230 (present day SL from 20 years on) it was a relic. Brakes, cars, have moved on so much, ok the people driving them haven't, but for the sake of 10mph we are safer at 80mph today in an emergency, rather than 70 in the 1970's in an emergency.

I've not even moved onto the vague steering and sloppy handling of some older cars compared to moderns
 
Last edited:
mattyg said:
There is no such thing as a "national speed limit" Sign.

There is however a "National speed limit applies" Sign

There is a difference (Applies depends on the vehicle)

NSL Applies sign at the beginning of a dual carriageway.

Car = 70 mph
Van over 2t GLW = 60 mph (take note Transit Connect drivers)
Click to expand...

I refer to my previous post of "no limit".
 
Bernie174 said:
decrease in journey times? Been on the M25 recently? Until they put in the variable speed limits, it was a 3 lane car park between the A3 and the M40. the variable speed limits meant that it started to move, albeit reasonably slowly. If people did what they were supposed to, and stayed in lane, it would move even quicker.
Leaving that aside, maximum speed a road can take is governed mostly by the amount of traffic on it, not what speeds it is physically possible to drive on it, so putting limits up fails on point one. Again, you are ignoring the increase in collisions that would result. The net result is likely to be lower average speeds over a given route.

A better idea would be to make everyone take a motorway test, fail it, and no motoroways. Retest every 2 years, and perhaps people will as a habit drive better! Throw in any exceeding speed limits, or failing to use lanes as you should means 6 months ban, and apart from emptying the motorways after a few week, which would decrease journey times, I'd agree with raising them.
Click to expand...

How about the police using a bit more effort to stop speeding in towns and outside schools and clamping down on mobile phone use in cars,especially in towns. Probably result in a bigger improvement in the accident stats given that 75% occur at 30 or less.
 
Last edited:
ST4 said:
Too hard for dibble...
Click to expand...

Im not knocking the police here. To me that is a better use of their time with demonstrable safety improvements and therefore worth doing.
 
Gaz J said:
Im not knocking the police here. To me that is a better use of their time with demonstrable safety improvements and therefore worth doing.
Click to expand...

But they don't do this nearly as often as they set traps on quiet sections of the motorway, rural roads and sit back and watch the money roll in. I'd argue, given the crime rates in Glasgow and the antisocial and violent behaviour you see at night, that too much police resource is allocated to road policing and not enough to other areas.
 
donut said:
just wondering if anyone here considers themselves to be a crap driver ?

I'll not be holding my breath waiting for the hand to go up
Click to expand...

I can't park.... Since I bought a "proper" car anyway, I had 9 years of Mini's, 6 months in a 1 Series has been a bit of an eye opener to me. I now realise how easy the Mini was to park compared to the looooooong bonnet on my family sized hatchback :eek:
 
Gaz J said:
Im not knocking the police here. To me that is a better use of their time with demonstrable safety improvements and therefore worth doing.
Click to expand...

Hmmm.... Without question the most common ticket officers from my Traffic garage give out is for mobile phones. I reckon speeding tickets come in about third or fourth place. ALL of our pro-active enforcement is done on surface streets not motorways with the vast majority of it being in limits of 30mph or less....so, no, it isn't too hard for us.

We do patrol the motorways (for me this does include the M25) and do deal with speeders, but in most cases those who get tickets have been driving like idiots that has included excess speed. On these occasions it is common for us to give a speed ticket rather than a WDC ticket or process for dangerous if, when stopped, the message given has been understood.
 
I think theres a number here who've implicitly admtted to being 'crap ' drivers - anyone who can't reliably keep their car under the posted speed limit or who feels that the law is there to be flouted can't really claim to be a 'good' driver

that aside I can't parallel park for toffee - if the space isnt big enough to just drive in forwards i'll just go park somewhere else
 
Bernie174 said:
No, I am being practical. So, your plan is for just some motorways? Thats not going to work either, you do it for all, or none, otherwise you poor little darlings can't work out what speed you should be going.
Click to expand...

Some motorways have 60 (even 40 on the elevated section of the M4) so why not sections of 130kph (the European norm) ?

I have a 30 mile commute on the M4, most days getting over 60 is rare, however, on the days that it is flowing well, most traffic other than HGV's & coaches are travelling in excess of the speed limit. The biggest problem is that they are all in lane 3, and lane 1 is empty. The idiots "stuck" in the Volvo lane are actually creating a 2 lane lane motorway, which causes the traffic to slow, and then the ones with half a brain start driving like cocks. If we had better lane discipline most of the poor driving wouldn't start in the first place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
How about the police using a bit more effort to stop speeding in towns and outside schools and clamping down on mobile phone use in cars,especially in towns. Probably result in a bigger improvement in the accident stats given that 75% occur at 30 or less.
Click to expand...

According to HMG, you don't want to pay for Police, and thats why the numbers are being reduced. In any case, they cannot be omnipresent, just because you don't see that happening, does not mean it doesn't.

That's a bit patronising considering that many countries including this one already have variable speed limits not all motorways in Germany are without speed limit
Click to expand...

Correct, Germany does, in spite of the opinion held by some have speed limits on motorways. They were introduced because of the number of accidents, which reduced as a result.

As for your other point, no it's not patronising, it's simply from experience of listening to the whinny excuses from people who can't be bothered to read road signs, or look beyond the end of their bonnet and who will persist in trotting out the excuses of how they didn't know it was a 30/40/50/60/70 mph limit.
 
ST4 said:
I'd argue, given the crime rates in Glasgow and the antisocial and violent behaviour you see at night, that too much police resource is allocated to road policing and not enough to other areas.
Click to expand...

Really?? I did look at some facts around this a little while ago and in the Met they go a bit like this..... You are 3 times more likely to be killed in a collision than you are by being murdered, but we have 3 times more officers involved in murder squads than we do in Roads Policing. You are about 3 times more likely to receive a serious injury in a collision than you are to be seriously sexually assaulted....yet we have 3 times more officers involved in dealing with the latter.

At my garage there are 70 constables who specialise in Traffic. I would guess that in the area we cover there are 5 THOUSAND constables dealing with other matters that aren't Traffic related. I can't see these figures being too weighted in favour of us ticket givers. Incidentally, we don't have any of the type of vans used to measure speed and send out tickets. All of our speed enforcement involves the driver being stopped (except for some extreme circumstances).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top