Safe Speed Forums

Motorways are something of a unique case - the "safe" maxiumum speed varies greatly according to weather conditions and traffic density.

100mph is perfectly safe in a modern car on a relatively empty motorway when it's warm and dry. In fog or heavy rain on a congested motorway, anything above 50mph carries a risk.

Since 70mph falls (roughly) half way between these speeds, one could argue that it is an appropriate "limit", but only if discretion is applied when it comes to enforcement.

Since automated speed cameras cannot exercise discretion, their use on motorways is inappropriate regardless of what static "limit" you set.

_________________
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” - H. L. Mencken

reply: mpaton2004


Yup, the horse is dead! Let's just let it lie....I'm sure the rotting corspe has had enough.

Good banter/debate though. Fair to say that (as usual) most contributers had valid points.

I wonder if there is a forum to debate safety & speed somewhere?

I see that some people agree with the current speed limit of 70.

I disagree with this because it is too slow and misleading.

Here are my propositions :

1) First 2 year driving experience: Current 70 speed limits
2) Normal/standard driver : if first 2 year without accident, good safety record (you set the threshold) Motorway at 80 or 85 MPH
3) experienced driver : X years without accident/ Traffic offence

the upgrade from 2 to 3 would need to pass a new exam with advance driving abilities required. in this case, the one driving faster,all conditions allowing, would be entitled to.

the 70Mph limit dates from the Sixties. At this time, driving and sustaining 70 was a true performance from the car and the driver. Not raising seem unhealthy imho because it distracts road safety resources from other priority measures ( drink/drug/ medecine +driving being one key example)

Max speed should be also dictated by the car. I would set 75% of the vehicule top speed as a reference.

So you think it would be a good idea to tell a Bugatti Veyron owner that they can legally do 187 mph then?

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

what, both of them?

You wouldn't want to meet one coming the opposite way that is out of control at that speed (not that you would know much about it anyway if you were that unfortunate )

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

Good point.

If it was anything like the prototypes, it'd probably be in an uncontrollable spin and on fire as well.

What do you mean?

'too slow' for what? whom? (you presumably)

What is 'misleading' about a speed limit of 70mph?



Are you serious!?

Let us just pause for a moment and be thankful that vchiu isn't the Secretary of State for Transport.

What do you mean?

'too slow' for what? whom? (you presumably)
> Yes, too slow for me and for many of the speeders


What is 'misleading' about a speed limit of 70mph?
> Posing such a low limit on motorways is saying : going beyond the posted speed is the main cause for accidents, so we lower the speed limits and accident figures will be down.
it is like a collision is considered as nearly unavoidable, so instead on stressing how to avoid it, Ministry of Transport stress on how to lower the consequences.


In an other post, I got a reply mentioning the example of a Bugatti Veyron (how many are on the roads anyway?). the question remains also for many 150 mph cars.


I have a Citroen Ami 8 (1978) which top speed is 70 mph. it would not be reasonable to go higher than 55 MpH, altough, it is 100% legal.

Most modern cars can go 110 mph top speed, so setting some legal motorway speed at 75% makes sense

the 75% Rule I proposed is not carved into stone and thresolds can be set this is a matter of discussion

Whereas I would make a good position in the ministry of transport is not the question I raised, but thank you to honor me by considering such an option

Anyway, I think the death toll could be halfed if significant measures for road safety other than low/enforced speed limits could be set-up.

Those are all excellent reasons for thinking the road was hazardous and that one should drive accordingly.

A big lollipop with "30" on it, in and of itself, is not. It may, however, alert one to the fact that there may be hazards that are best dealt with by reducing speed.

In fact, isn't that the original intention of speed limits? To enable the driver to make informed decisions about impending hazards?