Motorway Maximum speed ?

[jonny boy]

What's your thoughts on the recent discussion in Parliament on the issue ?

[ChrisRs]

Which was?

[devonutopia]

80. I wouldn't drive 10mph faster on average as a result though - would just be happier on cruise at 80 then.

[jonny boy]

Which was?

Sorry, the debate is ongoing, no official 'decision' yet.

[walkie]

Depends on the traffic imo.

On a clear motorway heading back from Blackpool to MK I've gone between 100-110mph (110mph on the '6 Toll) then when its been busier slowed down to 80mph etc

[apd007]

Thats the problem with blanket limits. 65mph on a wet Monday morning with poor visability down the M6 by Birmingham would be dangerous IMHO but could well be legal, yet 80 down the M5 on a clear sunny Sunday would be illegal.

[andyl]

80mph is reasonable or a variable speed system,dependant on weather/traffic volume etc.

[ScoobyChris]

With the current appalling standard of driving, observation and anticipation on the roads, 70mph is plenty fast enough!

Chris

[johnjohnhealy]

Most people seem to cruise at about 80/90 odd, so I think 80 would be a good compromise, wether people would then cruise at 90/100 is impossible to tell though!

I've said it before though - I think we should adopt KPH in our cars and on our roads, as in the rest of europe.

Not only would this help (to a very marginal degree) to keep down the cost of cars in England but I feel it'd help keep speeds down.

For example, you could have a 100kph speed limit on the motorways, which is a nice round number and makes it seem like your going quite fast, when in reality your only actually doing 62mph (this is just an example, i'm not suggesting a 60mph limit on motorways). It's a psychological thing that I think would work.

[silvrs]

Talked to a traffic cop friend a while back who told me that he believes that mobile safety camera vans are set to 85mph which would explain why SWMBO was caught doing 86mph last year by a van.

When he's on patrol he normally allows people to drive upto 95mph and will stop them above this or at lower speeds if they're driving dangerously or road conditions are poor.

Got pulled over last year after being followed for about 8 miles and got away with a warning. He wouldn't say how fast he'd clocked me but I do remember travelling a tad over 90mph on the speedo which, according to TomTom, the speedo is about +5mph at that speed.

[Emily-Elizabeth]

Cars are so much safer, and with all this ESP EBD ABS WTF that they come with I think the speed limits should rise accordingly.

As far as I can tell - apart from the odd camera van all that is asked is you drive safely - and on a typical motorway how many people are really sticking to 70mph?

In Sooty (fabia) I still drive at the same speeds as I did in Vlad - I just get to that speed lots faster

[Tom_vRS]

I normally cruise around about indicated 80mph, so given speedo error and tolerances with speeding fines, I think is about right.

I see no need to change it from 70mph tbh. At the moment, seems easy to do 90 all day long and not be prosecuted... if the limit was 80, then people would do 100 all day long - and I think 80 would be RIGIDLY enforced.

Leave things as they are is my vote.

[WW_VRS]

No offence intended Emily but that's exactly why people drive like muppets on the road. Electronic gadgets are definitely helpful in their own way, but people rely on them as a 'normal' way of driving. I.e. ESP will 'sort it out anyway' so people drive right on the limit of what it can do. When the ESP one day can't sort it (as mechanical grip is insufficient) they crash and probably end up with severe injuries.

Considering the driving standards etc are bad enough, I can't see how the government would 'get away' with increasing the NSL. Add to that the insurance company hiking up prices, 'green' targets that must be met, and it's even less likely to go up much.

A system like in France with a dual-speed limit of 90/130 (kph) could make sense. Loads of options, but at the moment I'd go for the 'leave it alone' I suppose

[yashicamat]

Considering the driving standards etc are bad enough' date=' I can't see how the government would 'get away' with increasing the NSL. Add to that the insurance company hiking up prices, 'green' targets that must be met, and it's even less likely to go up much.

A system like in France with a dual-speed limit of 90/130 (kph) could make sense. Loads of options, but at the moment I'd go for the 'leave it alone' I suppose [/quote']

I agree. Although I recently saw a video at work which was showing a trial 'variable speed limit' system (was it on the M4?) which, rather than being conditions orientated, it basically detects the traffic flows and slows / speeds traffic accordingly to maintain optimum flow without jams. Seems a good idea to me.

I voted 80 but to be honest, I rarely exceed 75 on the motorway. 80 is a nice cruising speed in good weather, but it is up to people to recognise poor conditions and alter their driving and speed accordingly . . . . unfortunately, a lot don't. :(

[WrightyRS]

I think our speed limits should be variable dependant on time of day mainly.

During the day with our traffic levels and standard of driving 70mph-80mph is more than enough.

At night from say 11pm onwards the limit should be increased to 90-100mph when the traffic levels are lower.

[Emily-Elizabeth]

No offence intended Emily but that's exactly why people drive like muppets on the road. Electronic gadgets are definitely helpful in their own way, but people rely on them as a 'normal' way of driving. I.e. ESP will 'sort it out anyway' so people drive right on the limit of what it can do. When the ESP one day can't sort it (as mechanical grip is insufficient) they crash and probably end up with severe injuries.

You are proberly right, but I have gone from hardly having brakes to having all the vRS safety features, and I would say that I do not think 'I will drive fast because such-n-such will kick in and save me'

Depends on the driver in a lot of ways.

[johnjohnhealy]

remember it's not just that cars have abs, ebd,esp etc etc that make them safer, the levels of grip offered by tyre manufacturers has increased as has the stopping power of braking systems on the most basic of cars, what with modern suspension components etc, and modern road surfaces, that encorage better drainage and higher grip levels, it really is an artificially low limit, it's based on the stopping distance of a Ford Anglia or something like that, how often do you see one of those?

If the limit was being decided today on the same criteria as it was all those years ago, who knows what the limit would be? whats the most popular car on the roads today? and at what speed can it stop in the same distance as the car that was used then?

Dont forget that the standard of driving on our roads *should* be going up too, what with harder driving tests.

[TeflonTom]

i think it should stay at 70mph because there's enough accidents on the roads as it is!

if you travelled on a motorway at 70mph for ones hour you've done 70miles right?? if you are doing 80mph for one hour it's 80miles travelled. so to do 80 miles at 70mph takes 71miniutes... not an awefull lot of difference imho and surely it is much safer and less stressfull and requires less concertration at a lower speed. plus there's less polution at lower speed because there is less load on the engine.

[steviec]

I think our speed limits should be variable dependant on time of day mainly.

During the day with our traffic levels and standard of driving 70mph-80mph is more than enough.

At night from say 11pm onwards the limit should be increased to 90-100mph when the traffic levels are lower.

Only problem with that which you notice especially as winter approaches and dark nights draw in is how many people who can't drive in the dark.

[johnjohnhealy]

Or looking at it another way -

At 80mph, after one hour of driving you are 10 miles nearer where you want to be than if you were doing 70mph.

[Auric Goldfinger]

i think it should stay at 70mph because there's enough accidents on the roads as it is!

if you travelled on a motorway at 70mph for ones hour you've done 70miles right?? if you are doing 80mph for one hour it's 80miles travelled. so to do 80 miles at 70mph takes 71miniutes... not an awefull lot of difference .

Nice reading................ But... Minutes are Important..The extra minute means your boild egg is hard :( and it takes less than a minute to make a baby;) ....yep your right stick to 70.. .I'm off to bed

[TeflonTom]

Or looking at it another way -

At 80mph' date=' after one hour of driving you are 10 miles nearer where you want to be than if you were doing 70mph.[/quote']

yeah but is it really worth it?? how often do you ever sit on the motorway at a constans speed for one whole hour?? or how long do you ever spend a hour on the motorway??

[johnjohnhealy]

Only problem with that which you notice especially as winter approaches and dark nights draw in is how many people who can't drive in the dark.

Always pi**ed me off that one, the people who 'dont like driving at night' or are scared to drive at night, they shouldn't be on the roads.

also driving at night is much easier due to the lack of traffic and tha fact that you can see people coming much sooner because you can see the headlights, also country lanes are easier cos again you can see the light from there headlights round corners etc.

[johnjohnhealy]

yeah but is it really worth it?? how often do you ever sit on the motorway at a constans speed for one whole hour?? or how long do you ever spend a hour on the motorway??

Probably not worth it no, but I like going fast

Living on the south coast means if I want to anywhere (literaly) i've got to spend hours on the motorways! right pain I can tell you.

[TeflonTom]

Living on the south coast means if I want to anywhere (literaly) i've got to spend hours on the motorways! right pain I can tell you.

yeah me too!! where abouts on the south coast if i may so bold as to ask??