remember the gut who got caught at 156mph ?

Yas786 · 16 Jun 2003 at 13:14

Originally posted by Mr Blonde
My brother got stopped on the M3 not so long back doing 139mph in his Boxster-S......he got off scot free!
He was stopped by two coppers in one of those persuit Omegas. One minute he said the road was totally clear in front and behind and the next they were flashing him in his mirror. He pulled over and was just honest with them. They asked him why he was doing that speed to which he said that as the road was totally clear he just for once wanted to see what his car was like at that speed. They asked if he'd loose his job because he couldn't drive and he said yes. A few other questions but just it straight with no BS. They must have had a long day as they didn't even caution him. The last thing he said to them was that he wouldn't be doing it again.....he hasn't.

m8 ur bro got lucky then...my bro more or less had the same thing happen to him in his audi tt the other nite....but they really grilled him..he wasnt speeding or anything as i was with him but the stupid and pathetic questions they asked him were unbelievable to say the least...asking him if the car was his even tho they did their checks etc.....asked him if he had been drinking etc...my bro dont drink for a start...lol...
but my bro didnt let it get to him..just gave them the info they needed and he was off...not only that hes been pulled over 5 times last week... :rolleyes:

its liek the police got nothing better to stop a young asian lad who drives a new audi tt..even tho my bro worked his butt off for that car...
hate to imagine how many times im gonna get stopped for drivin my m3 around...lol..

Cr8tive · 16 Jun 2003 at 13:28

umm i have never said im above the law...lol...hey if i choose to speed down a lonely road and i crash and hurt myself then u know wot m8...its my fault...simple....just like anyone else who speeds and has an accident...i ONLY blame them..i dont condone speeding in the slightest..so pls stop putting words in my mouth... ....ok if it makes u feel any better then i WONT speed down that road...lol...if i BREAK the law and i get caught then i take full responsibility for it...im man enuff to take responsibilty for my actions..always have been and will be...

You don't condone it... you're saying you'll be speeding. It's ok for you to speed but not others? lol. The point is, it's still breaking the law. Why do you think you have the right to do that?

The guy with the Boxster-S was lucky, the police usually like to harasspeople in flash cars, a friend of mine is always getting stopped in his 911, police just love an excuse to mess about with that car.

Matteh · 16 Jun 2003 at 13:28

ok creative, fair enough, im sorry but, if im on a motorway and i can achieve the speed limit i will. i may occasionly speed on motorways, but that is only if it is safe to do. i will not do it when its throwing it down with rain in thick fog in rush hour. i never speed on residential roads. i think something you are missing here is that a lot of the posters here (i wont say all, because i dont know) are sensible drivers, and they know when it is safe to drive above a speed limit and when it is not.

Matteh · 16 Jun 2003 at 13:31

also creative, theres a lot of stuff that is breaking the law, but a lot of people still do it, including yourself.

Cr8tive · 16 Jun 2003 at 13:45

also creative, theres a lot of stuff that is breaking the law, but a lot of people still do it, including yourself.

Heh, how have I broke the law?

Just because there's X amount of people doing it doesn't make it ok. You should know better than to try to use that argument. There's a lot of people the world over killing people, does that make it ok to do it too? There's a lot of people that take drugs, is it okay to do that? There's a lot of paedophile's out there, does that make it ok? Where do you draw line? If everyone in the world thought "well there's lots of people doing this, so shall I" for every little thing, you'd have anarchy.

Just for reference. Braking distance on a new Porsche 911 in good conditions:

60-0mph: 119ft. 80-0mph: 208ft.

So for that extra 20mph it takes nearly twice the distance to stop. And don't forget that at the higher speed your reaction time is also less

Matteh · 16 Jun 2003 at 13:55

i dont mean that breaking the law is at all ok. the impression im getting from you is that you consider yourself to be fairly perfect in as far as law abiding goes, and you also have not accepted one argument from anyone on this board. it seems to me you are on somewhat of a high horse...

as for a lot of ppl breaking the law... ever had a drink underage? simple, and a lot of people do it, still against the law though. tho thats getting off topic, so we will leave that there.

Mr Blonde · 16 Jun 2003 at 13:59

Re: Boxster-S stopped.
My brother is always very well dressed, ie expensive suit, good hair cut, shirt and tie. He's well spoken, looks middle aged and he's white. I realise that many coppers would be less understanding and congenial the more removed you are from the above.

Cr8tive · 16 Jun 2003 at 14:06

I agree that more careless drivers should be punished

Is that not agreeing? It was about 8 posts ago.

Not everyone's perfect and 100% law abiding, but just cos others do it doesn't make it okay. And if you break the law, then you'd better be prepared for the consequences (that's aimed at the people who think jail time for the idiot in the M3 is harsh).

Underage drinking? Some things you can't compare. We're talking about driving 1.5 tons of metal at ridiculously high speeds. At 100mph, should you lose control and plow into someone's house, then you're likely to end up dead, along with the people sat watching TV at the time. If you hit at 30mph then you may only end up through the garden wall, scratched and bruised. See my point? When you increase the speed you increase the damage caused, you increase the chances of killing someone, your braking distance increases, your reaction time is reduced, etc.

cossey3 · 16 Jun 2003 at 14:25

Originally posted by Cr8tive
Heh, how have I broke the law?

Just because there's X amount of people doing it doesn't make it ok. You should know better than to try to use that argument. There's a lot of people the world over killing people, does that make it ok to do it too? There's a lot of people that take drugs, is it okay to do that? There's a lot of paedophile's out there, does that make it ok? Where do you draw line? If everyone in the world thought "well there's lots of people doing this, so shall I" for every little thing, you'd have anarchy.

Just for reference. Braking distance on a new Porsche 911 in good conditions:

60-0mph: 119ft. 80-0mph: 208ft.

So for that extra 20mph it takes nearly twice the distance to stop. And don't forget that at the higher speed your reaction time is also less

at 208ft which is 62m that it significantly less than the 75m in the highway code for 70-0 and even if you take into cosideration that the porsche will have travelled futher in the reaction time 30m as opposed to 21m then the total for the porker is 3.6m shorter than the 70-0 in the highway code.

Matteh · 16 Jun 2003 at 14:26

still a law tho mate... although i agree it doesnt compare. im not talking about increasing speeds on residential roads, in fact i think they should be dropped in some places (outside schools etc., down to 20mph maybe?) but on motorways they could be raised. i understand the way you are thinking, but as a motorway user i simply dont agree, and its not because i want to go faster. i actually dont get much pleasure from driving on the roads at all, purely because of the number of inconsiderate ***** there are out there now. if i want to drive fast and throw my car about, i go on a trackday. if you drive your 1.5 tons of metal responsibly and consideratly then there would be no problem with upping the speeds on motorways a bit. unfortunatly not everyone drives like that.

Cr8tive · 16 Jun 2003 at 14:32

What you're not thinking of about though, is what MIGHT happen. You COULD get into a crash and the damage caused would be greater than if you were going slower. Also, if you increase the limits then the people who will still insist on breaking the limit will be going EVEN faster. An example is the incident on the motorway last week. Can't imagine it would be fun trying to dodge tanks at 100mph+.

Matteh · 16 Jun 2003 at 14:36

mate, if i had hit one of those tanks at 70 i probably wouldnt be debating this point with you now. a crash at 70 will be serious. no matter what you drive. driving is a risk, its a risk a lot of people have to take. if i didnt have to drive everyday i wouldnt, as i said i get very little pleasure from road driving. if i could give up driving i would. the fact of the matter is that until this countrys public transport system is in a fit state to get me where i need to go on time, every time, like my car does, i will continue to drive.

if i thought about what might happen every time i did something, would i switch on the gas to cook something? i might cause an explosion. would i leave my house? i might get hit by a bus.

cossey3 · 16 Jun 2003 at 15:11

there is practically no difference between crashing at 70 or 100 you are dead in either and if you rasie the limit you will remove the argument about limits being out of date etc so then if the new limit was 100 you could have being caught at 105 a six point offence and have 110 as a minimum ban and a huge fine (linked to income to stop the ultra rich ppl from thinking it is a soft option)

Yas786 · 16 Jun 2003 at 15:32

Originally posted by Cr8tive
You don't condone it... you're saying you'll be speeding. It's ok for you to speed but not others? lol. The point is, it's still breaking the law. Why do you think you have the right to do that?

The guy with the Boxster-S was lucky, the police usually like to harasspeople in flash cars, a friend of mine is always getting stopped in his 911, police just love an excuse to mess about with that car.

sorry no comment...i really can be bothered to sit here and justify my actions or how i think to someone on a forum whom i dont know...lets just say this....all my mates know how well and safe a driver i am...and if they were in the same position as i was with them getting a brand new m3 then they also have said that they would give it a proper workout on a lonley stretch of road...

anyways enuff is enuff for me...lol...im entitled to my opinion...just like u are m8...

[TW]Fox · 16 Jun 2003 at 16:39

Originally posted by Cr8tive
I meant in the argument FOR increased speed limits. ie, why can't i go faster, my brakes are far better than in 1960 therefore my stopping distance is better than a Ford Anglia.

It doesn't matter if your stopping distance is 1 inch. In the possibility you are unable to stop, then at 80, 90, 100mph+ the damage caused will be greater.

Rubbish.

What is more likely to get you killed - crashing at 60mph in a Ford Anglia - 10mph below the limit set years ago, or crashing at 90mph in a modern car with airbags etc?

cossey3 · 16 Jun 2003 at 17:40

cars are only crash tested to 40 and not all crashes at that speed are nonlethal a crash at 70 even in a modern car is likely to be lethal

NickK · 16 Jun 2003 at 17:44

Originally posted by Cr8tive
Heh, how have I broke the law?

Just because there's X amount of people doing it doesn't make it ok. You should know better than to try to use that argument. There's a lot of people the world over killing people, does that make it ok to do it too? There's a lot of people that take drugs, is it okay to do that? There's a lot of paedophile's out there, does that make it ok? Where do you draw line? If everyone in the world thought "well there's lots of people doing this, so shall I" for every little thing, you'd have anarchy.

Just for reference. Braking distance on a new Porsche 911 in good conditions:

60-0mph: 119ft. 80-0mph: 208ft.

So for that extra 20mph it takes nearly twice the distance to stop. And don't forget that at the higher speed your reaction time is also less

Also I bet that's a professional test driver that can handle extreme braking conditions.

Dogbreath · 16 Jun 2003 at 17:52

Originally posted by [TW]Fox
Rubbish.

What is more likely to get you killed - crashing at 60mph in a Ford Anglia - 10mph below the limit set years ago, or crashing at 90mph in a modern car with airbags etc?

A modern car at 90mph, (assuming it weighs 50% more than the Anglia, conservative estimate) will have 330% more energy to get rid of than the Anglia at 60mph. Irrespective of crumple zones and airbags, a 90mph collision is very unlikely to be survivable. On balance I think I'd take the Anglia (assuming it's in good condtion), although neither of these scenario's is likely to be good for your health.

daniel_owen_uk · 16 Jun 2003 at 17:59

Just read this post for first time, and this guy is an idiot, past all the irrelevant stopping distances and crap that are being discussed, the guy is doing 156 miles an hour on public roads, if that guys loses control of that care he is gonna do serious damage to himself and other people around him.

I could go on about what an m3 bmw is gonna handle like at that speed but whats the point, at the end of the day the 70mph speed limit is set at that because that is speed that causes less fatalities (its not just there to slow you down). He broke the law (more than once) and deserves to go to prison.

Bear · 16 Jun 2003 at 18:17

Originally posted by [TW]Fox
If the speed limits were rational and thought out people would be less reluctant to adhere on them. The 70mph Motorway speed limit was designed for 1960's cars with all round drum brakes. It still hasn't been updated.

Not true. The speed limit before 70mph was enforced was 80mph. It was reduced under the guise of saving fuel during a fuel shortage and was never put back up.