How fast do you drive on the motorway?

[Eclipse]

I really can't believe there are people driving at 120+ mph and think its ok:roll:

At those sorts of speeds your thinking time and braking time is substantially increased and if something were to come out in front of you you would have no chance....even on a bike. At night at those speeds you will be driving faster than your headlights can cope and again will have little chance to avoid any sort of incident.

And remember, just becuase YOU havent seen a hazzard it doesnt mean there isnt one lurking in front of you somewhere.

Bikers and drivers that travel at such speeds, pull wheelies, undertake, tailgate or otherwise treat public roads as their own race tracks without a care for anyone else are pricks of the highest order and I don't care how harsh that sounds. I pitty your family when they get a knock at the door from a traffic officer and a familiy liaison officer.

A few fair points there, yes stopping distance is increased considerably so I look very far ahead, I wouldn't go that fast on any unlit road, but the m27 is lit so not quite so bad.

I drive/ride very courtiously around other road users and drive slowly through urban/residential areas even if they appear empty, and for this reason I still have a clean licence. I don't wheelie, undertake, tailgate or race. Anyone who does those things IS endangering lives and I see it every day.

However I am still not getting why me riding at high speed on a deserted motorway, the only risk being to myself is such an appauling act? I think motorways should be derestricted between say midnight - 5am.

 

[Zoe]

I think motorways should be derestricted between say midnight - 5am.

Most motorways already are destricted, the speed limit for cars/bikes on a derestricted motorway is 70 mph.

 

[Nick W]

Two identical cars, one doing 80mph, the second doing 120mph. Both perform an emergency stop at the same time.
What speed is the second car travelling by the time the first one has stopped?
To clarify - identical cars, identical conditions. No real variables, though in reality they wouldn't make too much difference to the figures.

Assuming equal brake force at all speeds, as a first order approximation, 40mph.

More importantly, let's say both cars are next to each other (the faster one is overtaking) and both see an obstruction at the same time. If the car going 80mph stops just in time for an obstruction, let's say it stops 10cm from an overturned lorry across all lanes, the car that was going 120mph will smash into it at 90mph!

Now presumably motorways are designed (in terms of maximum curvature and lower speed limits where it gets curvy) so if you go 70mph and see an obstruction you can stop in time. What happens if you're going 120mph and see an obstruction?

 

[me123]

I've heard similar stories, and Jeremy Clarkson complained about that as well when they did the Auto-Bahn run on TG.

I remember that episode. The idea of a derestricted Autobahn is that you travel at the maximum safe speed for the road ahead. The morons on TG decided to use it as a test track. Although the roads are derestricted, you often won't get going much faster than 70-80 because they can be quite busy roads. You don't drive "as fast as you possibly can" on an Autobahn; you should aim to drive as fast as it is safe to do so.

The lorries issue is one of the reasons I would not increase the speed limit on a two lane motorway. You have to keep your wits about you on these motorways because they do pull out all of the time; if you go any faster you could easily be into the back of them if they pull out.

 

[OxtedL]

I did the maths. The car travelling at 120mph is still travelling at 60mph when the 80mph car has stopped. It travels 122m further. (This all using the figures/methodology for the official highway code figures). That means the 120mph car travels more than double the distance the 80mph car does in stopping.

 

[Donny Dave]

Just a quick word about drafting other vehicles. Depending on the size of the vehicle in front, you can notice the effect to a point about 1 and a half seconds behind them (depending on the size of the vehicle ahead of you). While the benefit will be miniscule then, there is still a gain to be made. Even if you follow 1 second behind a large car (such as a Mondeo) at 70mph you can save a considerable amount of fuel.

Get yourself as the tail-end Charlie in a huge line of traffic, and the gains are very noticable! (I once had a 1.1l Renault 5, and I was keeping up with traffic on the M62. Heading towards Leeds/Bradford from the Manchester direction. I looked at the speedo and noticed I was going 100mph uphill! All that was because I was keeping up with the flow of traffic.)

I'm another one in the 70mph max class. Even then 60 mph is plenty fast and as my religion is orthodox tightwad the fuel burn is infinitely more important than getting there a bit faster. As an example I did Heathrow airport to Newcastle at about 60 mph and less than half a tank of fuel. It still only took about 4½hours. If I went at 70 - 80 it would have taken around 4 hours but used a huge amount more fuel, maybe ¾ of a tank. Not worth the extra £££ to me. I'll stick to 60 ta very much.

If you mean to the Southern outskirts of Newcastle on the A1, then 4 and a half hours is doable, but you still need to average roughly 67mph.

As an example, Heathrow T1 to Newcastle Central is 285.3 miles according to the AA route planner, but that is going via the M4, M25 (mobile carpark) and M1 where there is plenty of places where traffic can and does slow down. Luton, Leicester, Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield are all known bottlenecks along the M1, due to the sheer amount of traffic.

Also on the A1 between Dishforth to just North of Leeming Bar (roughly 13 miles), there is a major upgrade to the carriageway being done, with a 50mph speed limit, enforced by average speed check cameras.

So in order to achieve your 4 and a half hour timings, you need to exceed the 70mph limit for at least 100 miles ....

 

[Eclipse]

Most motorways already are destricted, the speed limit for cars/bikes on a derestricted motorway is 70 mph.

Well done, you know what I meant.

 

[GearJammer]

I wouldn't go that fast on any unlit road, but the m27 is lit so not quite so bad.

The M27 is actually a very good Motorway as far as sighting hazzards and lighting is concerned!
Ive done 120mph on it under the same circumstances, 3am and deserted in the summer.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If you mean to the Southern outskirts of Newcastle on the A1, then 4 and a half hours is doable, but you still need to average roughly 67mph.

As an example, Heathrow T1 to Newcastle Central is 285.3 miles according to the AA route planner, but that is going via the M4, M25 (mobile carpark) and M1 where there is plenty of places where traffic can and does slow down. Luton, Leicester, Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield are all known bottlenecks along the M1, due to the sheer amount of traffic.

Also on the A1 between Dishforth to just North of Leeming Bar (roughly 13 miles), there is a major upgrade to the carriageway being done, with a 50mph speed limit, enforced by average speed check cameras.

So in order to achieve your 4 and a half hour timings, you need to exceed the 70mph limit for at least 100 miles ....

Yes, i drive a HGV and the longest driving stint we can do before a break is required is 4.5 hours and if any trucker said they done Heathrow - Newcastle in 4.5 hours more than few eyebrows would be raised along with accusations of running bent!

 

[Zoe]

Ive done 120mph on it under the same circumstances, 3am and deserted in the summer.

Yet another person that should be banned from driving.

 

[devon_metro]

Yet another person that should be banned from driving.

Sooner ban the people who are absolutely hopeless at driving, cutting you up, braking/accelerating irratically etc. etc..

Driving at 120mph on a deserted motorway most likely with a lot of concentation is far less likely to hurt an innocent motorist whereas the prat on their mobile phone...

 

[flymo]

If you mean to the Southern outskirts of Newcastle on the A1, then 4 and a half hours is doable, but you still need to average roughly 67mph.

I make it average of 63 mph. 285 / 4.5 = approx 63 mph. Very doable in 4½ hours by car, I've done it several times. Can't comment on lorries as I don't drive them. This was from the Avis rental place at Heathrow to the MetroCentre on the A1 via the M4, M25, M1/A1/A1M (not the M18). If it were to Central Newcastle I would be leaving the A1 at the A184 junction and using the Redheugh Bridge. I can't comment on that because I never do it that way.

So in order to achieve your 4 and a half hour timings, you need to exceed the 70mph limit for at least 100 miles ....

Nope, never knowingly exceed the speed limit on a motorway or other roads. Certainly not going to do it for 'at least 100 miles' ! I've done this run a few times and never taken more than 4½ hours. I don't stop at the services just push on through. Maybe I've been lucky and not had the usual jams you mention but those times are what I have done in my experience. Of course other peoples experiences may vary, I can't comment on them I can only tell you mine.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yes, i drive a HGV and the longest driving stint we can do before a break is required is 4.5 hours and if any trucker said they done Heathrow - Newcastle in 4.5 hours more than few eyebrows would be raised along with accusations of running bent!

Just from a purely curious point of view, if you were driving an HGV on the motorway for example, what sort of distance would you be looking to cover in that time, in this case 4½ hours? Purely curious that's all.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

However I am still not getting why me riding at high speed on a deserted motorway, the only risk being to myself is such an appauling act?

And what about when you crash? What about the fire crews who have to cut you out, the police who will have to close the motorway, and send an FLO round to your mother's house to tell her, very sorry, but you died after hitting a barrier or similar after a blowout at 120mph? What about the ambulance crew who might try to resuscitate you, but in the end the trauma is too great and they pronounce you dead.

The risk may only be to yourself but the effects are very far reaching.

 

[Striker]

And what about when you crash? What about the fire crews who have to cut you out, the police who will have to close the motorway, and send an FLO round to your mother's house to tell her, very sorry, but you died after hitting a barrier or similar after a blowout at 120mph? What about the ambulance crew who might try to resuscitate you, but in the end the trauma is too great and they pronounce you dead.

The risk may only be to yourself but the effects are very far reaching.

How is any of the above a "risk"? :roll:

 

[strange6]

What's wrong with driving to the conditions but not over 70?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Don't be ridiculous. Your licence should have been ripped up for that. Let's consider the facts then? Late at night, there'll be the tiredness factor, poor visibility etc etc. It's stupid and irresponsible.

I agree with you, Ralph. What these people don't seem to understand is that speed restrictions are there for a reason. You could be Michael Schumacher in an Enzo, but if you're doing those sort of speeds then the greater chance of a tyre blow-out or some other mechanical failure that could have you in a major crash. We also have drivers in this country who are not used to having people coming down on them at those speeds so again, the chances of you going into somebody who doesn't see you is much greater at those silly speeds.
And may I politely remind people that it is not a good idea to come on these forums and admit to breaking the law. All kinds of people read these forums and it wouldn't take much to have you tracked down and brought before the courts.
Anyway, that's my opinion - like it or not! lol
PS And as a footnote, we all think we're really good drivers and thus over-estimate our ability at the wheel. Until you've been on a police advanced driving course and achieved class 1 status, then believe me, you really are probably over-estimating your ability!

 

[ralphchadkirk]

How is any of the above a "risk"? :roll:

I suggest you read the last sentence. I quite clearly state the risk is to himself but the effects of the risk is far-reaching.

 

[Minilad]

A few fair points there, yes stopping distance is increased considerably so I look very far ahead, I wouldn't go that fast on any unlit road, but the m27 is lit so not quite so bad.

I drive/ride very courtiously around other road users and drive slowly through urban/residential areas even if they appear empty, and for this reason I still have a clean licence. I don't wheelie, undertake, tailgate or race. Anyone who does those things IS endangering lives and I see it every day.

However I am still not getting why me riding at high speed on a deserted motorway, the only risk being to myself is such an appauling act? I think motorways should be derestricted between say midnight - 5am.

If you are really the only person on the road then yes it is only your own life you are risking. But is that risk a big enough one to take just so you can say you have done 120. At that speed I would imagine any slight problem and you would be bouncing down the carriageway on your ass and I wouldn't expect that to end well.
And who's to say there isn't a police car sitting on the side of the road just waiting for someone like yourself to come past. And remember there are cameras everywhere these days and it wouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility that you could be seen and someone sent to intercept you.
Of course at those speeds you would be looking at an automatic ban.
But hey it's your choice to do that sort of speed. Lets hope for your sake none of the above happens and you can carry on bragging about doing it on a internet forum

 

[me123]

Sooner ban the people who are absolutely hopeless at driving, cutting you up, braking/accelerating irratically etc. etc..

Driving at 120mph on a deserted motorway most likely with a lot of concentation is far less likely to hurt an innocent motorist whereas the prat on their mobile phone...

More often than not, I find it's the same people who do these things simultaneously...

 

[Striker]

As much as you're one of the few "good guys" on here, and although speed limits are there for a reason, I don't think that we agree on the reasons. There are many, many speed limits on roads that are simply too low or even too high. But there has to be some uniformity. If someone chooses to break the speed limit when conditions allow, they might be breaking the speed limit and therefore the law, it doesn't necessarily mean they are being reckless or even dangerous.

Anybody who believes that automatically makes somebody reckless has fallen for the propaganda spouted by so called experts.

I agree with you, Ralph. What these people don't seem to understand is that speed restrictions are there for a reason. You could be Michael Schumacher in an Enzo, but if you're doing those sort of speeds then the greater chance of a tyre blow-out or some other mechanical failure that could have you in a major crash. We also have drivers in this country who are not used to having people coming down on them at those speeds so again, the chances of you going into somebody who doesn't see you is much greater at those silly speeds.
And may I politely remind people that it is not a good idea to come on these forums and admit to breaking the law. All kinds of people read these forums and it wouldn't take much to have you tracked down and brought before the courts.
Anyway, that's my opinion - like it or not! lol
PS And as a footnote, we all think we're really good drivers and thus over-estimate our ability at the wheel. Until you've been on a police advanced driving course and achieved class 1 status, then believe me, you really are probably over-estimating your ability!

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Surely if people ARE breaking the law, then by definition they are being reckless...

 

[Minilad]

As much as you're one of the few "good guys" on here, and although speed limits are there for a reason, I don't think that we agree on the reasons. There are many, many speed limits on roads that are simply too low or even too high. But there has to be some uniformity. If someone chooses to break the speed limit when conditions allow, they might be breaking the speed limit and therefore the law, it doesn't necessarily mean they are being reckless or even dangerous.

Anybody who believes that automatically makes somebody reckless has fallen for the propaganda spouted by so called experts.

Surely 120mph on a bike on a public highway is reckless. Leaving aside the fact that no one else is around it wouldn't take much at that speed to cause a problem, patch of oil or debris on the road, pothole, bike malfunction, blowout. And at that speed they would be no coming back. So I think 120 on a public highway has to be considered reckless even if it is just the rider that will cop it

 

[strange6]

As much as you're one of the few "good guys" on here, and although speed limits are there for a reason, I don't think that we agree on the reasons. There are many, many speed limits on roads that are simply too low or even too high. But there has to be some uniformity. If someone chooses to break the speed limit when conditions allow, they might be breaking the speed limit and therefore the law, it doesn't necessarily mean they are being reckless or even dangerous.

Anybody who believes that automatically makes somebody reckless has fallen for the propaganda spouted by so called experts.

Controling a vehicle at high speed is a lot more difficult than at lower speeds. Just one slight twitch of the steering wheel at these sort of speeds can have you flipping over like a rag doll. I'm sorry but this 'if conditions allow' is a load of rubbish. The conditions may look favourable but you never know what you're going to come across on the open road and if you hit something at those speeds (even a small piece of brick or other debris) you're in a lot of trouble. These so called experts that you mention are professional police pursuit drivers so I think they know more about it than you or I.

 

[Zoe]

It's due to these people that think it's completely acceptable to drive at 120 mph that we will likely see average speed cameras extended on the motorway network. These will strictly enforce a 70 mph limit.

 

[strange6]

It's due to these people that think it's completely acceptable to drive at 120 mph that we will likely see average speed cameras extended on the motorway network. These will strictly enforce a 70 mph limit.

I have no problem with SPECS being used on Motorways. They will stop people speeding, that's for sure.

 

[Zoe]

I have no problem with SPECS being used on Motorways. They will stop people speeding, that's for sure.

The only concern is that people will keep looking at the speedometer and not the road. Maybe a better idea would be speed limiters? There is absolutely no legal reason for anyone to go faster than 70 mph in a car. Trucks are limited to 56 mph so why not limit cars?

 

[strange6]

The only concern is that people will keep looking at the speedometer and not the road. Maybe a better idea would be speed limiters? There is absolutely no legal reason for anyone to go faster than 70 mph in a car. Trucks are limited to 56 mph so why not limit cars?

Many cars have cruise control so that wouldn't be a problem. And I normally drive at 60mph on the mortorway and only occasionaly glimpse at the speedo from time to time

 

[Ferret]

Striker - I agree. I have no problem with the limit being 80mph on a dry motorway. What I do have a problem with is it being 40mph past a local RC school to where I live. How the hell can that be right? I would like a full review of speed limits in this country, with more use of variable speed limits on motorways for a start. And I would like to see a 20mph limit in all school areas.

 

[Tomnick]

Shouldn't motorists be driving at an appropriate speed past said school anyway though? 40mph might be entirely sensible in the dead of night, but I'd like to think that most would drive rather slower past the same location at kicking-out time, with kids all over and no doubt cars parked down both sides of the road. One example I know of is a little school out in East Lincolnshire, with a couple of houses adjacent and nothing else, on a dead straight road with excellent visibility all around (about a mile west of Eastville AHB on the Skegness line, for anyone who knows the area). There's a short stretch of 30mph past the school, which is almost universally ignored most of the time - but it'd clearly be foolish to sail through at speed for those few minutes each day when the school run's occurring. Surely we can observe the hazard ourselves though, and judge a safe speed (which would probably be less than 30mph anyway) without having to resort to a speed limit?

I do agree generally though that speed limits are a useful tool if used wisely. I'm just not so keen on blanket speed limits being placed on long sections of road solely due to the presence of a couple of hazards (or just the bad driving of the minority) that we should be able to clearly identify and react to anyway. The vast amount of 50mph limits that have sprung up in rural Derbyshire would probably be abetter example to ilustrate my point!

 

[90019]

I did the maths. The car travelling at 120mph is still travelling at 60mph when the 80mph car has stopped. It travels 122m further. (This all using the figures/methodology for the official highway code figures). That means the 120mph car travels more than double the distance the 80mph car does in stopping.

The figures I have show it as 90mph.

Braking distance from 80 - 320 feet, from 120 - 720 feet

720 - 320 = 400 feet, the braking distance from 90.


I got that from a police pursuit driving trainer.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I have no problem with SPECS being used on Motorways. They will stop people speeding, that's for sure.

No.

I'd like to see SPECS banned - they're too dangerous.
I've had a few near misses in the past couple of years on the A77 with people who are too busy watching their speed rather than concentrating on what's going on around them - both people drifting across lanes and nearly taking me out, or in a couple of cases, almost driving into the back of me.

 

[Striker]

Surely if people ARE breaking the law, then by definition they are being reckless...

No they're not. Police do not stop people for doing 79mph on the motorway as they allow 10% +3mph. Therefore according to you, police must be condoning reckless behaviour.

I live very close to the German border and regularly travel in my car which is capable of much more than 70mph (197mph if you're asking) on the Autobahns, quite happily past German police on many occasions. We could argue all day whether doing 197mph on a public highway is reckless, but doing 80-100mph if the conditions allow, in a car capable of it, is certainly not reckless, and the German law seems to agree with me.

So, do me a favour Ralph, if ever you're in Germany doing 70mph, do please keep to lane 1 so important people can get by old chap.

Surely 120mph on a bike on a public highway is reckless. Leaving aside the fact that no one else is around it wouldn't take much at that speed to cause a problem, patch of oil or debris on the road, pothole, bike malfunction, blowout. And at that speed they would be no coming back. So I think 120 on a public highway has to be considered reckless even if it is just the rider that will cop it

120mph on a bike or a car is reckless. I never said it wasn't.

I have no problem with SPECS being used on Motorways. They will stop people speeding, that's for sure.

Yes, and create a whole load of worse problems in the meantime.

 

[HST Power]

So, do me a favour Ralph, if ever you're in Germany doing 70mph, do please keep to lane 1 so important people can get by old chap.

Apparently the German Police have started issuing penalties to tourists who are doing anything less than 100 in the fast lane!