On the one hand, well Der!

On the other, if 70 means 80, then 80 means 90

Best petrol consumption is normally around 60 IIRC, (unless diesel is different). You will know I am not a car expert of course

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1479106,00.html

Just wondering....

Mo

only 80? Can't we push for higher still?

I think that the public would have to prove that they can drive at 80 , stick to the limits and not crash too often before any further increases are approved.

This would be a sensible move IMO. It's obvious that on certain roads at certain times it can be safe to drive at 80 so why not allow it. Likewise on the same roads at other times a lower limit would be sensible so why not impose it.

Still amazes me how people do 85/90 nearly bumper to bumper in the wet/sometimes in the fog on the motorway.Do they have x ray vision ?

I'm in no way perfect but I concentrate and drive as sensible as I can when on a motorway.Not much room for error at those speeds.Don't think we have a nation of motoring geniuses for some reason.

Are autobahn drivers more sensible despite the higher speeds or is it chaos?

Limit should be 90, but enforced with no lee-way.

Or have French style limits, one for good conditions, the lower one for bad conditions. With signs indicating which one is in force.

Limit should be 90, but enforced with no lee-way.

I agree, How about uping the limit for use LGV driver's

I agree - 90 limit with HGV's limited to 70 not 56.

Still amazes me how people do 85/90 nearly bumper to bumper in the wet/sometimes in the fog on the motorway.Do they have x ray vision ?

I'm in no way perfect but I concentrate and drive as sensible as I can when on a motorway.Not much room for error at those speeds.Don't think we have a nation of motoring geniuses for some reason.

Are autobahn drivers more sensible despite the higher speeds or is it chaos?

On the autoban they have tailgate cameras monitoring the roads and fine you if you are caught (in freeflow conditions) not leaving 2 chevrons, or being inside the box with another car. I have some pictures from that in a magazine or book.

They also have far superiour camera monitoring and gantry systems, and this permits hard shoulder driving.

Are autobahn drivers more sensible despite the higher speeds or is it chaos?

Apparently it's chaos as they have a 75% higher motorway death toll than the U.K. :eek:

This is according to BBC news though so I can't vouch for it's accuracy.

Apparently it's chaos as they have a 75% higher motorway death toll than the U.K. :eek:

This is according to BBC news though so I can't vouch for it's accuracy.

The statistic is genuine , but it's typical radio 1 to suggest that would be the outcome if the uk adopted a well enforced 80 mph limit. It's very different from germany where they have cars doing 60 and 160 sharing the same road.

I agree the limit should be raised, I think 80 would be sensible, with more stringent monitoring of motorists travelling faster (although I feel this somehow goes against the government's current trend of increasing speed cameras/un-manned monitoring and reducing traffic police numbers).

I feel motorway driving should become a required part of the driving test, after the current standard test has been passed. This could be achieved by making the PassPlus system compulsory?

Tailgating and lane discipline in general also needs to be looked at and sorted out. Maybe this will start to improve if all learners are taught how to use a motorway correctly? I would also agree with the adoption of the French variable speed limit for wet/poor weather. I think that's a good idea.

Just a few of my thoughts

Steve

Personally, I think a limit of 90 - 100mph would be better for modern cars on modern motorways. This may lead to a fairly large speed differential between cars and HGV's (even if you raise the HGV speed limit, I don't think many companies will raise their limiters, as I think the limit for lorries is actually 60mph anyway, but companies choose 56mph to save on fuel... but correct me if I'm wrong!), but in all honesty, even with the limit raised I don't think there will be that many people travelling much faster than they already do on the motorways because of fuel efficiency... think about it, the 85th percentile speed on our motorways is already 85mph, all we would be doing is legalising the speeds that the majority of the motorway users travel at, leaving the police free to catch the wreckless drivers...

:rant:...or better still, take the statement from me I've been waiting for them to take since MARCH regarding an assult, or get back to me about a complaint I raised about one of their van drivers (travelling in excess of 70mph as well as doing what I complained about) I made back in FEB! :rant:

Personally, I think a limit of 90 - 100mph would be better for modern cars on modern motorways

Would never get through that. Modern machinery is easily capable of it, but I doubt the majority of motorists are :eek:

The debate about 80 has been going on ages, never mind thinking of a bigger number

Steve

I personally think 70 mph is about right, I don't mind if the limit goes up to 80mph. But I would definitely against 90 (or even more) mph limit. Think about being in a small vehicle, which only capable to do 60-70 (machine limitation, driver desire or baby on board!?), being passed by something travelling 110-120 mph is very SCARY. It happen to me all the time, and I don't like the feel of it that my car being rocked. Besides, to judge the time allowed to change to faster lane is more difficult, if you expect people on fast lane probably travelling almost 2 times faster than you do.

HGV's are limited to exactly 90km/h --> 56mph. This speed is taken from the tachograph and is supposed to be accurate to wothin 5%, as opposed to 10% on car speedo's.

By removing the limiter you eliminate the 1/4mph difference between HGVs leading to 10 mile overtakes.

HGV's are limited to exactly 90km/h --> 56mph. This speed is taken from the tachograph and is supposed to be accurate to wothin 5%' date=' as opposed to 10% on car speedo's.

By removing the limiter you eliminate the 1/4mph difference between HGVs leading to 10 mile overtakes.[/quote']

Wasn't there talk of taking the european speed of 52mph for LGV and above???

I only ask as I have started to see "Limited to 52mph" on the back of some fuel artics.

I don't have a problem with 80 where it's sensible to do so, since most people do that anyway, but if 80 were to mean 90, then not so good IMO.

FWIW I'm against HGV's being allowed to go faster. This based on having seen a car, when being overtaken by an HGV, got caught in its downdraft and rolled several times, landing in the fast lane of the oncoming traffic. The occupants (mum + 2 kids) were very lucky on that occasion (the car wasn't of course). We all stood in the middle of the motorway further up waving towels and anything we could to prevent the nutters doing a ton from instigating a pile-up. We got a severe telling-off by the emergency services (when they finally arrived), I might add.

Mo

Wasn't there talk of taking the european speed of 52mph for LGV and above???

I only ask as I have started to see "Limited to 52mph" on the back of some fuel artics.

When the Europeon's limit their trucks!! They all seem to travel faster than the limit, on the M25 anyway!!

The is no difference between travelling at 80 or 90, and as modern cars are so well equipped these days a maximum speed limit of 90 would be sensible. However, it should be backed up by much more stringent enforcement of that new limit, as well as compulsary motorway driving testing included in the test. They should also make it an offence to sit in any outer lane if the inside lane/s are empty. That should stop the idiot doing 50 in the middle lane.

Perhaps this could be takien even further and iclude any viehecle frothe outside lane if its displaying a "Child on board" type sticker.

Why do people think it should change others driving around them when they were designed as a warning to emergency services in the event of an accident..nothing more.

We were promised a crackdown on middle lane hoggers but nothing seems to have happened.There was a bit of a press campaign that fizzled out

The is no difference between travelling at 80 or 90' date=' and as modern cars are so well equipped these days a maximum speed limit of 90 would be sensible. However, it should be backed up by much more stringent enforcement of that new limit, as well as compulsary motorway driving testing included in the test. They should also make it an offence to sit in any outer lane if the inside lane/s are empty. That should stop the idiot doing 50 in the middle lane.

Perhaps this could be takien even further and iclude any viehecle frothe outside lane if its displaying a "Child on board" type sticker.

[b']Why do people think it should change others driving around them when they were designed as a warning to emergency services in the event of an accident..nothing more.

[/b]

(my bold)

:confused: If re Child on Board, I thought this was to help avoid tailgating since the driver would not wish to brake harshly, though more usually relevant to town driving.

On the motorway, a car is a car and should drive safely according to road conditions, the car's power and its occupants (whether babies or heavy people and boot load), irrespective of any stickers. Perhaps I'm being idealistic, but otherwise we could all put a sticker of our choice in the back window Though how one would even see a sticker when approaching from behind at "n" mph ...?

But perhaps you are talking about something else entirely, in which case, as you were

Mo

AFAIK, The "Baby on Board" sticker thing initiated from an accident where there was a baby on board, and the fire and rescue service didn't realise and left the baby in the car. Hence the sticker.

It certainly isn't meant to be a "please drive carefully near my baby" or "I can park my car wherever I like" sticker.

I think 80 on a motorway is certainly realistic. However, I think In practise people travelling at 80 are generally ignored by police for the speeding offence. Also speedos at such high speeds are quite inaccurate, leading to inevitable problems... I quite like it as it is, but there should certainly be more regulation on lane hogs, tailgating and other extrememly dangerous behaviour...

Just my tuppence worth.

Yep, that was my understanding of its dervivation

HGV's are limited to exactly 90km/h --> 56mph. This speed is taken from the tachograph and is supposed to be accurate to wothin 5%' date=' as opposed to 10% on car speedo's.

By removing the limiter you eliminate the 1/4mph difference between HGVs leading to 10 mile overtakes.[/quote']

The worst offenders are the half HGV's which obviously arent restricted - I was surprised to see a Royal Mail truck steady cruising at 75-80MPH the other day... That truck would take a decade to stop if it had to.

Also van drivers - those new Merc vans can shift, anything upto 90ish. This coupled with the teenager behind the wheel is dangerous to say the least. :eek:

I agree with the good comments already made - the limit should be related to size of vehicle, road conditions and amount of traffic.

C