Andrew Bangham - 1mph Over the Speed Limit - Prosecution

[prc68]

Not in the UK, but my 2 cents and experiences from Portugal:

We had (and still have in comparison) very lax enforcement in the 90's, but I guess they figured out it was a great way of collecting extra money and they're now pretty much everywhere..!
I understand excessive speed kills, but I normally only see speeding enforcement on the highway and they are normally on downhill grades where cars normally speed up. I don't find them enforcing in towns and near schools. So I think the entire "safety" theory that they're always claiming is a pretty much BS.
A perfect example:
Just 2 weeks ago Traffic report came out that pedestrian deaths went up last year by 16% within urban limits.
In an interview and when asked, the minister's proposal was to add further fixed radar's on our highway system ?!?!

[NigelDay]

Originally Posted by AndyJudge

Years ago I was pulled over on a deserted motorway at 3am doing 90+ mph.
Cars today are now easily able to exceed the limit & stop in a shorter distance than quoted in the highway code (I'm talking motorway) provided they are correctly maintained & the driver is fit to drive.

"On 22nd December, 1965 a temporary maximum speed limit of 70mph (112kmph) was introduced on Britain’s motorways. The experiment initially lasted four months but the limit was made permanent in 1967." Excerpt from Wikipedia. https://www.historyhit.com/1965-intr...d-limit-in-uk/

To put this in perspective, I checked the performance of the Ford Cortina MkII (1966-70) in the 1967 crossflow engine guise. 1300cc (82mph), 1600cc (88mph), 1600cc GT/E (98mph). My father had a 1600GT. We thought it was rather fast at the time, but a 0-60 in 12.5 seconds is very relaxed in today's world. Driving an XC60 at 90mph on a deserted motorway is quiet and safe, but if Mr Plod catches you more than once, you will be taking a taxi for a few weeks. I can't ever remember what it was like in the 1600GT at 90mph, but I'm sure it was a more 'exciting' and risky experience.

If Governments want to show some determination to cut speeding, why don't they impose speed limiters on cars. I'm not suggesting 70mph because European limits are higher, but something like 100mph would set an absolute 'barrier'. Then manufacturers can focus on the far more useful performance indicator, that is in-gear acceleration.

[Ninja59]

Originally Posted by AndyJudge

Years ago I was pulled over on a deserted motorway at 3am doing 90+ mph.

Road conditions were perfect, literally no traffic, me totally sober & alert.

Policeman who spoke to me gave me the ticking off saying the limit is 70mph no matter what time of day & conditions. I must be seen to uphold the law but.... take this as a warning, please try & stick closer to the limit.

After delivering the lecture he then proceeded to have a chat about the car & what was it like to drive ( One of the early Impreza's into the UK).

Cars today are now easily able to exceed the limit & stop in a shorter distance than quoted in the highway code (I'm talking motorway) provided they are correctly maintained & the driver is fit to drive. The Motorway limits should be made variable so when conditions allow 80Mph is permitted but when the conditions are incorrect it gets lowered (as per other countries in Europe)

I'm all for limits around town & accident blackspots etc.. but the limits need some tolerance to allow for inaccuracies in speedo etc..

Don't Police traffic cars have to have their speed measurement devices calibrated on a weekly basis & the calibration details entered into the log ? for just this reason to remove any inaccuracies.

I do actually approve of the approach in bold, but in fairness I just think the driving in the UK is not of sufficient standards no matter what figures and stats can show.

In regards to technology yes, but there is two other problems I can immediately come up for a reason as to why about the level of speed and braking modern cars have. One is simply the level of traffic that we have in certain areas and I go back to the bit about sufficient standards of driving as most I see are just incompetent about any form of keeping a safe reasonable distance from the vehicle in front.

In so far that a proportion of the drivers bizarrely around here speed to catch up to the vehicle in front then tailgate it. Or even more strangely they allow someone out then tailgate the ****e out of them. Weird.

[Ninja59]

Originally Posted by tt82

I used to spend time at a Conference Centre where they did Speed Awareness Courses. Many times I would get talking to the Instructors who took the course. A few told me that they used cruise control almost all the time to avoid going over the limit. I think with modern cars that have cruise control or speed limiters, it is very hard to argue that you went over the speed limit accidentally. I see many posts from various police forces where they refer to the fatal 4



1 mph over a limit does not constitute excessive speed. Whilst I can not complain if I am caught speeding, whatever I may be over the limit, I can rightfully question whether the police would be better off using their resources to catch those committing the fatal 4 acts, as opposed to those slightly straying over the limit.

You see I hate this phrase "Fatal 4", I have seen it referred to as the "Fatal 5" as well.

Unfortunately, none of these draw reference to keeping a safe distance from the vehicle and driving to the conditions (even if some do not know what this actually means which is probably true in some cases).

[rippedoffagain]

Originally Posted by AndyJudge

Cars today are now easily able to exceed the limit & stop in a shorter distance than quoted in the highway code (I'm talking motorway) provided they are correctly maintained

Yep. Shame human technology hasn't really advanced at the same rate. We've still got roughly the same reaction time as previous generations. The laws of physics sadly haven't advanced either. Sadly, a car doing 90 will still cover a lot more distance in the time it takes the driver to react than a similar car with a similar driver doing 70. But at least once that foot has migrated from throttle to brake, the car will indeed respond better than its 1970s counterpart.

[GreenBrick]

Many cars (SUVs and off-roaders) now have higher centres of gravity than they used to, so will react worse in a swerve (moose/elk test etc.) which is why many accidents in the USA end up in roll overs. Many owners of these vehicles forget they are in a truck not a car, because in a straight line they perform as well. If we increase the speed limits on motorways then we can only do it for cars and not off-roaders and other taller vehicles. I've seen a friend's range rover go round a corner too quickly, and it wasn't pretty.

[green van man]

Originally Posted by GreenBrick

Many cars (SUVs and off-roaders) now have higher centres of gravity than they used to, so will react worse in a swerve (moose/elk test etc.) which is why many accidents in the USA end up in roll overs. Many owners of these vehicles forget they are in a truck not a car, because in a straight line they perform as well. If we increase the speed limits on ymotorways then we can only do it for cars and not off-roaders and other taller vehicles. I've seen a friend's range rover go round a corner too quickly, and it wasn't pretty.

I fully concur, driving a landrover on 85% aspect tyres I am accutly aware that even a simple puncture will drop that corner by 6" and sudden changes of direction are a white knuckle at least and easily a brown trouser event. Even at 60 it takes a lot of awareness to proceed safely. It is a car you have to drive, just point and forget will bite you.

Paul.

[The Thong]

Originally Posted by Ninja59

You see I hate this phrase "Fatal 4", I have seen it referred to as the "Fatal 5" as well.

Unfortunately, none of these draw reference to keeping a safe distance from the vehicle and driving to the conditions (even if some do not know what this actually means which is probably true in some cases).

Driving around the M25 this morning...... Lane Hogging, undertaking are the first obvious offences. A Toyota Avensis with both rear tail light bulbs out so the drivers using the fog lamp instead while on the front of the car the drivers side headlamp is out so he’s using the front fogs to make up for that. I see this a lot now, cont be bothered to change a light bulb so just flick on the fogs instead. It amazes me that someone spouts on about speeding when there’s other offences be carried out on our roads. Until we have a clear police presence on our roads this will just continue to happen. Saying that, Since Bangham’s outpourings last week I’ve seen a marked drop in the overall road speed on traffic on the Motorways.....

TT

[NigelDay]

It should be compulsory for new cars to have blown light bulb detection (like the Canbus on Volvos). Then it would be very easy to hit drivers with fines for failed bulbs.

[bokabil]

I find the Swiss way quite reasonable... The speed measured is subtracted with the camera-tolerance, and you end up with the table below.

20-over in the autobahn will get you a slap in the wrist, probably in the order of CHF 200. But in a 30-limited zone, you'll pay the equivalent of 30-days income, rich or poor, it will hurt in similar proportion plus suspended license for 1 month if I not mistaken.