How fast do you drive on the motorway?

[Zoe]

Look, if you don't play the game don't try and change the rules. You don't have a car, you don't have a licence, you are speaking from theory.

That is irrelevent to this conversation. Even people that don't drive can find themselves affected by recklessness like driving at 120 mph I don't care what you think but anyone that drives at that speed deserved to be banned. Quite simply you are putting lives at risk. I expect there are a fair few people in the dft that don't drive but that doesn't stop them setting transport policy. Driving at 120 mph is completely unacceptable. At the end of the day you can't deny physics.

 

[Oswyntail]

Driving an automatic as a preference is perfectly fine once you've passed your test, but I actually think ALL drivers should be tought to drive a manual and have to pass a test in a manual as a matter of course, unless they have a valid medical reason not to. Driving a manual requires a higher level of skill and therefore is better for all road users. ....

Totally disagree. Everyone should learn on automatics, because then they can concentrate on "road sense". Only when they have enough of that to be confident should they be allowed the distraction of manuals. You are right, there is a higher level of skill, and I can think of no other activity where anyone would advocate taking beginners straight to a higher level.

 

[Striker]

Totally disagree. Everyone should learn on automatics, because then they can concentrate on "road sense". Only when they have enough of that to be confident should they be allowed the distraction of manuals. You are right, there is a higher level of skill, and I can think of no other activity where anyone would advocate taking beginners straight to a higher level.

You talk about driving manuals as being a "higher level" but it becomes second nature as it's so easy to do. Anybody who is not capable of driving a manual quite frankly shouldn't be on the road. Why does everything have to be made so EASY? We shouldn't always cater for the lowest common denominator. Maybe if we didn't the standard of driving would improve.

 

[ainsworth74]

You talk about driving manuals as being a "higher level" but it becomes second nature as it's so easy to do.

Agree with that, definitely think it's better to learn a manual rather than an automatic. When I had my first lesson my instructor made me shift through all the gears for a good 5 minutes or so until I could do it without looking down, then whilst we were creeping around a quiet industrial estate if my eyes even twitched towards looking at the gears he gave my an earful. After about an hour changing gears was pretty much second nature. It really isn't that hard. As it is I can now drive a manual and an automatic having taken one test rather than learning on an automatic and then having to learn a manual. Much simpler and not particularly hard.

 

[jon0844]

Driving at 120 mph is completely unacceptable. At the end of the day you can't deny physics.

What do you say about all those Germans driving over 120mph right at this very second?

Care to explain the physics?

On that basis, should we be slowing all trains down to 70mph? What about planes? Lethal things doing over 500mph..

You talk about driving manuals as being a "higher level" but it becomes second nature as it's so easy to do.

Absolutely. Of course you need to learn to change gear, just as you need to learn clutch control (to me, that would be harder to get used to than changing gear, but people like Zoe haven't mentioned that small detail) but you soon do learn it.

It's hardly difficult to change gear, given any half-decent box will make it easy to move from one to the next, guiding you as you go.

 

[GearJammer]

recklessness like driving at 120 mph

Driving at 120mph is'nt reckless, its what and where you do 120mph that could be deemed reckless!

For the record ive done it only 2 or 3 times, in the summer at about 4am on a deserted motorway when there was enough light to see that the road was clear, no it was'nt legal, but there was no harm in it, and it was done in a car that was more than capable, you may not like it, others may not like it, but tough i did it!

Like Striker said, i take your comments with a pinch of salt, ive took many driving tests and done hundreds of thousands, if not millions of miles in my time on the road (and thats while sometimes having to use SIXTEEN gears) without any accidents that could be put down to speed, i don't need someone like you who does'nt drive to tell me how to suck eggs, nor do i think that somebody who is'nt quilified to drive should be saying that professional people should be banned!

 

[jon0844]

I was stopped on the M4 not far from Basingstoke, at around 3am, by police who had followed way behind using VASCAR. I think I probably peaked at around 126mph, having been the only one on the road (well, besides the cop car some considerable distance behind).

Totally illegal, I'll accept.

When I was stopped, having eventually slowed down after they got closer, they weren't particularly angry with me. They invited me into the back of the police car, and didn't even show the video. I accepted immediately, and they said I had to be careful for OTHER motorists who might not have been expecting me to go so fast. Fair point.

In the end, they stated they would report me for doing 96mph - which would almost certainly result in a large fine (it was over £300) and 6 penalty points, but not a ban that would have been almost certain for anything over 120mph!

We almost shook hands and off I went, and did indeed get 6 points (SP60) and a high fine. I pleaded guilty by post and never attended court.

That was a long time ago and I've not had points since. Nor do I ever drive at that speed even at night, but I will exceed 70mph and accept I may well get more points at some time.

What I would say is that I won't drive fast in built-up areas, or where I can't see clearly, or in poor road conditions. Yet many people seem content to drive at the speed limit when I'd be thinking 'woah, slow down'.

At least in Germany, when you are given the right to go fast, people don't see the need to go flat out everywhere (sure, there are clearly still some w**kers that will) and those people in cars that can do 150mph (myself included ) happily tolerate those going slower. Over here, someone doing 100mph+ is almost certainly going to fit in the w**ker category and be tailgating dangerously, flashing lights, hooting or suddenly undertaking without warning.

BTW, I'm all for an increase in the motorway speed limit.

 

[GB]

As I said in an earlier post, just becuase you haven't seen a hazzard doesn't mean there isn't one there... even if you have percieved the road to be clear.

 

[GearJammer]

No offence but going on that theory you would'nt get out of bed in the morning!

 

[jon0844]

I drive defensively and believe (and you may well argue against, and given you don't know me or my driving skills can happily do so) that I can see hazards ahead - or potential hazards.

An empty motorway is an empty motorway. The risks are a tyre blow out, or debris being thrown over (or indeed a vehicle breaking through the central barrier) from the other side. I suppose you could factor in a diesel spill, or someone throwing something over a bridge, or suddenly hitting fog, or heavy rain, animals.. (the list goes on) but by and large, a lot of these things won't be much better or worse depending on the speed you are doing.

A lot of these things simply won't happen either, ever - or not to you. Any more than a train driver would proceed with caution in case there's a big lump of concrete around the next bend.

The German autobahns, which I don't get to drive on nearly enough, have a very, very low accident rate. So, speed can't be the sole issue - given they have all the same risks mentioned above, yet you are legally letting people 'speed' during the day and in peak hours.

Driving in town has many, many more hazards - quite likely involving OTHER motorists and pedestrians. Any half-decent driver isn't just looking at other motorists but imagining every possible move they could make, and looking at tell-tale signs that will likely tip you off that someone who is hesitating will suddenly brake THEN turn (and maybe THEN indicate!). Of course, driving - like any other skill - isn't something any of us could detail perfectly on a forum.

However, at the very least, those who try and talk about driving might at least have a licence and drive themselves.

 

[90019]

However, at the very least, those who try and talk about driving might at least have a licence and drive themselves.

I find it interesting how some people who have never driven a car on a public road seem to think that they know better than people who have been driving for years and even than professional drivers.

 

[SS4]

I find it interesting how some people who have never driven a car on a public road seem to think that they know better than people who have been driving for years and even than professional drivers.

Indeed, I have no experience driving (don't hold a licence) and I would never think to overrule someone who can drive.

That being said, you don't need to be a driver to understand that tailgating, and doing ~40mph on a 30mph road in icy conditions is not the wisest idea

 

[Zoe]

You also don't need to be a driver to understand that the speed limit is 70 mph. If it was as safe to drive at 120 mph and it didn't have a negative impact on the environment then it would be legal.

 

[jon0844]

But it IS legal in some places (not just Germany, but that's nearest). You seem to be continuing to ignore this simple fact. Even Sweden, where they're very safety conscious raised the speed limits on many roads in the last few years. 120kph = 75mph. Elsewhere in Europe, even France, it's 130kph. And, get this, in towns - that 30kph limit actually lets you LEGALLY do 31mph.

Quick - alerty the Daily Mail. You have people here saying that doing just 1mph over the limit should result in a ban, yet those evil European are risking life and limb by doing OVER 31mph. Let's leave Europe immediately. Won't ANYBODY think of the children?

I would agree that there's an impact on the environment at very high speeds (not least your bank balance if you're doing 155mph in a car that is going to be doing something like 8-10mpg with super unleaded costing £1.40+ a litre), but that would apply even at 70mph.

It was considered by the last Government that we should have an upper limit of 50mph (not that I think anyone ever thought it was a serious idea) on roads, including motorways, but if the gearing is set up right, I'm sure you can limit the impact of driving in 6th (or 7th) gear at 80mph over another car driving at 40mph in 3rd or 4th.

 

[SS4]

You also don't need to be a driver to understand that the speed limit is 70 mph. If it was as safe to drive at 120 mph and it didn't have a negative impact on the environment then it would be legal.

Petrol is a very dangerous substance (highly volatile and highly flammable - mix it with a spark from metal and you can guess the result) but we still use it to power a lot of cars.

As I understand it (from what drivers have told me) driving at higher speed is more fuel efficient and the 5th/6th gear more efficient than 4th/5th respectively. As drag increases with the speed squared (although surface area is a bigger contributor) there could well be an upper cap on this efficiency fuel use. I'd appreciate a (regular) driver's opinion on this though.

I would say that 120mph is reductio ad absurdum for this argument as few would want 120mph on the road, more like 90mph. Stopping distances would have to be increased (stopping distance is proportional to the speed squared) though. If safety was an issue it'd surely be more sensible to make country lanes 40 or 50 instead of 70.

 

[GB]

A lot of these things simply won't happen either, ever - or not to you.

Quite frankly the attitude of "it wont happen to me" is probably one of the worst attitudes you can have on the road. Anything can happen to you, me or anyone else.

No offence but going on that theory you would'nt get out of bed in the morning!

It is not a theory it is fact.

 

[Zoe]

I would say that 120mph is reductio ad absurdum for this argument as few would want 120mph on the road, more like 90mph. Stopping distances would have to be increased (stopping distance is proportional to the speed squared) though. If safety was an issue it'd surely be more sensible to make country lanes 40 or 50 instead of 70.

Derestricted country lanes are 60 not 70. As for 120 mph, there are people in this thread claiming that it's safe to drive at 120 mph. If it really was safe then why is there a speed limit?

 

[SS4]

Derestricted country lanes are 60 not 70. As for 120 mph, there are people in this thread claiming that it's safe to drive at 120 mph. If it really was safe then why is there a speed limit?

I stand corrected on the country lines (there aren't many in Birmingham ). The 70mph speed limit was introduced decades ago, when cars were less reliable and have fewer safety features (they also didn't have catalytic converters) than modern cars. I don't support going up to 120mph (conservation of momentum and sharp deceleration put me off it yet we don't all drive at 40 for safety) yet certainly support another look at the law

 

[jon0844]

Zoe, you are aware that EVEN THOUGH we got this arbitrary speed limit imposed on us (before that, it WAS unrestricted in the UK - hence the 'no limit' signs we still have, which now mean National Speed Limit - whatever that might be), roads are still constructed for a much higher speed limit if the limit were to be raised.

Even bends on motorways are designed for very high speeds, as I am sure that planners always expected (or hoped) that limits would rise.

It does seem that some people, especially those timid drivers you'd rather like to see taken off the roads, are the ones who argue most against raising limits. Naturally, they may keep to the limit but cause all the problems, like hogging lanes, pulling out in front of faster vehicles, straddling two lanes, driving in lane 2 on a dual carriageway as they're turning right next Thursday etc.

But, for these people, it's hard to prove their skills are poor (they won't, after all, have to take another test) yet very easy to look at a needle on a dial. A needle that is, in any case, under-reading on all cars anyway - so those people who dare to do 35mph in town are in fact doing 31mph.. which is, funnily enough, the limit in Europe.

Oh dear, it's confusing. And if the limit IS raised to 80mph, what ever will people say who have said that anything over 70mph is lethal and drivers should be thrown in jail for life?

 

[Striker]

I was stopped on the M4 not far from Basingstoke, at around 3am, by police who had followed way behind using VASCAR. I think I probably peaked at around 126mph, having been the only one on the road (well, besides the cop car some considerable distance behind).

Totally illegal, I'll accept.

When I was stopped, having eventually slowed down after they got closer, they weren't particularly angry with me. They invited me into the back of the police car, and didn't even show the video. I accepted immediately, and they said I had to be careful for OTHER motorists who might not have been expecting me to go so fast. Fair point.

In the end, they stated they would report me for doing 96mph - which would almost certainly result in a large fine (it was over £300) and 6 penalty points, but not a ban that would have been almost certain for anything over 120mph!

We almost shook hands and off I went, and did indeed get 6 points (SP60) and a high fine. I pleaded guilty by post and never attended court.

That was a long time ago and I've not had points since. Nor do I ever drive at that speed even at night, but I will exceed 70mph and accept I may well get more points at some time.

What I would say is that I won't drive fast in built-up areas, or where I can't see clearly, or in poor road conditions. Yet many people seem content to drive at the speed limit when I'd be thinking 'woah, slow down'.

At least in Germany, when you are given the right to go fast, people don't see the need to go flat out everywhere (sure, there are clearly still some w**kers that will) and those people in cars that can do 150mph (myself included ) happily tolerate those going slower. Over here, someone doing 100mph+ is almost certainly going to fit in the w**ker category and be tailgating dangerously, flashing lights, hooting or suddenly undertaking without warning.

BTW, I'm all for an increase in the motorway speed limit.

Best post you've ever made.

The German autobahns, which I don't get to drive on nearly enough, have a very, very low accident rate. So, speed can't be the sole issue - given they have all the same risks mentioned above, yet you are legally letting people 'speed' during the day and in peak hours.

The thing is, even with the right to drive at very high speeds on the autobahn, what you find is that very few do it and probably drive around 70-80mph. But they know that there is a possibility that someone IS doing that speed, so people use their mirrors and their lane discipline is impeccable. I don't always drive at high speed on the autobahn as the fuel consumption is particularly high and the levels of concentration required are much higher than driving at 80mph, but I know that when conditions allow I can do around 150mph quite legally. Nobody thinks it's dangerous. I'm in a car designed to drive faster than that. And I only reach those speeds on a particularly well sighted autobahn with good sight lines.

They say a law is a good law if the vast majority would comply with it anyway. If murder was legal do people think that everybody would go around killing each other? No they wouldn't. But over 90% regularly break the motorway speed limit, so 70mph is not publicly seen as a good law. However, if the speed limit was abolished on British motorways I don't think you'd have people regularly doing over 100mph. No, it would be like Germany in that most people would probably find 80mph is a nice, comfortable speed.

 

[Oswyntail]

You talk about driving manuals as being a "higher level" but it becomes second nature as it's so easy to do. Anybody who is not capable of driving a manual quite frankly shouldn't be on the road. Why does everything have to be made so EASY? We shouldn't always cater for the lowest common denominator. Maybe if we didn't the standard of driving would improve.

"Higher level" was a direct quote from you. Make your mind up
And can everyone get off Zoe's back. What she says is generally sensible and she upholds the law. I would suggest that the reason we have lower limits than other countries might be to do with the higher proportion of prats there are on our roads Same reason British holidaymakers abroad have a poor image, likewise football fans.

 

[me123]

Even bends on motorways are designed for very high speeds, as I am sure that planners always expected (or hoped) that limits would rise.

Now, I have to take exception to that. I drive on the M8, which at one point has a 60mph speed limit. In that section, there are a number of pretty tight bends where 60mph is enough, thank you very much. And there's a pretty hair-raising bend on the M90, which I'll link to if and when Google Maps starts working (bloody ****s at Vermin Media ). Not all roads are designed to be taken at a higher speed limit, and it would be foolish to assume that the road was designed for anything higher than the 70mph limit (or whatever the limit is on that road). Indeed, it's often foolish to assume that the road is even suitable for the speed limit; remember, it's not a "guideline".

You cannot justify high speeds by saying that "the designers probably designed the roads for a higher speed limit at some time in the future".

 

[Striker]

Now, I have to take exception to that. I drive on the M8, which at one point has a 60mph speed limit. In that section, there are a number of pretty tight bends where 60mph is enough

Which is why there is a 60mph speed limit.

The point JonMorris was making referred to sections of motorway where the national speed limit applied (i.e. 70mph). The section that you refer to would always be 60mph even if all of a sudden the roads agency decided to abolish the 70mph national speed limit.

Indeed, it's often foolish to assume that the road is even suitable for the speed limit; remember, it's not a "guideline".

Which is precisely my point. Good drivers don't need telling what a safe speed is. They know what feels "right", based on how far they can see, the weather, the braking performance of the car they're driving etc.

 

[OxtedL]

At some point, though, you have to draw the line between "good driver" and "complacent driver who has become used to driving fast and is not paying full attention to the road". Which is where the law needs to be clear.

Therefore, 70mph is the cutoff until such a time as the law changes (as if) simples. NO SPEEDING.

 

[HST Power]

At some point, though, you have to draw the line between "good driver" and "complacent driver who has become used to driving fast and is not paying full attention to the road". Which is where the law needs to be clear.

If someone repeatedly offends they can potentially be told to retake their driving test, as well as having to pay massive penalties and gaining points on their license.

 

[me123]

Which is why there is a 60mph speed limit.

The point JonMorris was making referred to sections of motorway where the national speed limit applied (i.e. 70mph). The section that you refer to would always be 60mph even if all of a sudden the roads agency decided to abolish the 70mph national speed limit.

OK, try the M90. You managed to forget that when replying to me. Some very tight bends, not really suitable for 70mph, yet no reduction in speed limit. Are you trying to tell me that they've been designed for higher speed limits?

The speed limit is an absolute limit for the road, and does not necessarily take certain parts of the road into account, and definitely does not take variable traffic conditions into account. I still maintain that, regardless of what you think, you should not exceed the speed limit. 70mph is fast enough.

 

[90019]

OK, try the M90.

Which bit of the M90?

I've travelled up it plenty of times and can't think which bit you're referring to.

 

[Sam Bentley]

You talk about driving manuals as being a "higher level" but it becomes second nature as it's so easy to do. Anybody who is not capable of driving a manual quite frankly shouldn't be on the road. Why does everything have to be made so EASY? We shouldn't always cater for the lowest common denominator. Maybe if we didn't the standard of driving would improve.

what about someone with only one leg? are you saying they shouldn't be allowed to drive?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Derestricted country lanes are 60 not 70. As for 120 mph, there are people in this thread claiming that it's safe to drive at 120 mph. If it really was safe then why is there a speed limit?

usual problem of politicians, usually left wing scum, seeing motorists as an easy target

 

[OxtedL]

Ah. It appears we have a person who perhaps has some right wing views in our midst :roll:.

Just to make sure, can we screen your views on the EU, immigration and the Coalition Government?

 

[Nick W]

You appear to have missed the bit about indicating your intention to change lanes. Generally, as 90019 suggests, someone in lane 3 will usually ease off slightly to let you join the flow - with a little bit of awareness of what's around you, and some forward planning, you should be able to do so smoothly without changing gear or having to force your way into a gap that's not big enough or any of that business, and without any significant delay to the chap that's let you out. Never had any problems myself, especially as I try to anticipate what's coming so I can get out into lane 3 before I've had to slow down for the vehicles ahead of me (so I'm not far off matching the speed of the chaps in lane 3 anyway).

Ah, I was (no longer drive) one of the "new school" drivers who would only indicate after having checked the mirror, and prior to checking the blind spot, and moving out. If someone in lane 2 was indicating when I was in lane 3 I'd slow down for fear of them pulling out in front of me rather than to let them out.

(I'm very much against people slowing down or not moving when it's their right of way because it's against the law (obstruction) and the Highway Code and occasionally leads to people being involved in accidents or being killed. Obviously I'm very quick to drop the anchors (while cycling) rather than swerve if something unexpected happens, and in stop start traffic I'd not block the junction, which is in line with the Highway Code.)