Man of Honour
Indeed. It is on my car anyway. It'll do 50, or even 45 in 6th, so long as you're going down hill or very flat. It'll pull up hills from this speed in 6th, but it'll probably drink diesel.
60+ is my 6th gear speed.
National speed limit to be cut to 50mph on "most roads" as early as 2010
- Thread starter NathanE
- Start date
Indeed. It is on my car anyway. It'll do 50, or even 45 in 6th, so long as you're going down hill or very flat. It'll pull up hills from this speed in 6th, but it'll probably drink diesel.
60+ is my 6th gear speed.
No, but it's probably a better assessment than the NSL sign that's been there since 1960, to be fair.
![( |-| |2 ][ $](/styles/overclockers/avatars/4.png){kind=avatar}
Associate
Exactly, nothing is ever safe. I could have had a blowout, but then again my engine could blow up and catch fire at 30mph.
What I meant was that to me it was save and I wasn't a risk to me or others (obvious reasons, deserted straight rural road), I don't care about some random hippy sado's opinion.
If it's in fast moving traffic maybe, if everyone else is doing 60/70 and your speeding along at 100+, all you need is some muppet to pull in front of you and your in trouble. The reason we have to put up with stupid limits is because of the irresponsible few who like to take the **** and think it's acceptable to speed past everyone else because they deem it "safe".
Last edited:
Man of Honour
But whose fault would it be... really?
Now reduce the speed of mr 100+ to 35mph and do you still reach the same conclusion?
It doesn't matter who's fault it is, either way it's still dangerous. No I don't reach the same conclusion but then again I don't really know what you're getting at.
Associate
True, but that indicates one instance of where speeding could be dangerous. An educated driver should be able to spot that and adjust speed accordingly.
I believe it an educated approach not being rapped in a blanket and the dull life that leads too.
( |-| |2 ][ $;13645223 said:
I agree but you can't tell me that you'll know some muppet won't judge your speed properly and just pull out. You could be the best driver in the world and be involved in a bad accident. Although most cars are safe at 100+, it the majority of idiots who ruin it for those who can drive properly. The test in this country is stupidly easy, drive around for a bit, a couple of hill starts, a bit of parking and a u-turn and then you are free to do as you please on the roads. Motorways aren't even part of the test, it's a joke.
Last edited:
Associate
No I can't and you're right. But I personnally believe that the current laws have a good balance between risk and speed. I don't think the roads need to be made any slower.
The dangerous driving laws and punishments for those who do drive dangerous and crash as a result are a good thing. Perhaps even harsher punishments (and advertising of this) for those that actually cause crashes etc would be an even better deterant.
Soldato
So would it be fair to say that cruising at 50mph instead of 60 means you'll need to drop down a gear and consume more fuel, thus emitting more CO2
Well, as a person who doesn't mind going slow, I don't mind the change, however do disagree with their reasoning for this completely. Not going to make things that much safer, but maybe will cut down on co2... but do know that it will cut down a lot of tax payers money...
Still think, they should use the money to kick out the chav scum, you know the kind that doesn't want to work, thieving gypsies and the like... Get them out first then mess with the roads.
Still think, they should use the money to kick out the chav scum, you know the kind that doesn't want to work, thieving gypsies and the like... Get them out first then mess with the roads.
The first one is there to show you that the belts might have stopped him flying around the car. The cause doesn't matter.
The second one simply shows the driver was going to fast and trying to perform dangers over take.
But this wont matter to you anyway, going by past posts of from you seem to like the speed.
Last edited:
Most people don't even understand how the gearing on cars work. I constantly get stuck behind idiots crawling up the hill because they can't anticipate things properly and change gear accordingly. Britain needs to get a bit stricter and stop giving out licences to people who have barely mastered the art of moving backwards and forwards. Motorway training and a day on a skid pan should be compulsory amongst other things. I found it way to easy to pass the test and I thought I wasn't prepared for driving on my own on motorways and I did a Pass Plus course with a fantastic bloke who taught me how to drive properly, not all this riding the clutch and not using engine braking crap that normal instructors teach you.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
The point I was (trying to be) getting at was that although I agree with you that that speed is dangerous on such roads, if the person pulling out into oncoming traffic hadn't done so then there'd be no accident.
If they hadn't seen the approaching car then they should be more observant. I failed my first test due to poor observation, which amounted to me not turning my indicator back on after it had clicked off when I pulled into the side of the road and straightened up the wheels.
I'm extra observant as a result
I suppose I'm totally against this proposed move; it'll solve nothing and **** me off immensely.
Let me know if you ever need to borrow my ladder.
My point was that the proposed target audience will think they are a joke. You can see whatever you like, but they won't.
Man of Honour
Probably. But I'll be going slower, so I'll be using fewer tyres over the car's lifetime, killing less weasels or whatever runs out in front of cars these days and probably add a few months onto my journeys to work or wherever over the course of my working life - Because I'll have to get up earlier and I'll get home later what with the journey taking that much longer. I'll lose countless hours sleep and be constantly tired and/or depressed.
Depression will mean months off work and taking up valuable NHS resources to diagnose and treat.
A false economy this speed limit cut, methinks.
I have just argued with our resident carbon goon in the office about this and made all the points raised here.....apparently I don't have an argument and speed is to blame for causing those deaths, so by reducing it to 50 is a good idea 
I am fed up with this government, but I don't know how best to fight it...like most people, you just end up being a keyboard warrior. I have signed the petition and forwarded it around to everyone that I think can see behind this hidden agenda.
Ho hum...back to work and twiddling my thumbs till the next election.
I am fed up with this government, but I don't know how best to fight it...like most people, you just end up being a keyboard warrior. I have signed the petition and forwarded it around to everyone that I think can see behind this hidden agenda.
Ho hum...back to work and twiddling my thumbs till the next election.
Man of Honour
About 75mph. And even then I need to drop it down to go up any kind of hill or actually speed up (which obviously I would never do, officer). That's the price of being off-boost.
M
Soldato
IIRC the swiss toll road system costs around 40 euro for a 12 month pass, so even better value.
And you know why, don't you?
