Safe Speed Forums

It was partly public and political pressure that forced car makers to worry about safety.

If you look back a few pages you'll see some details of the Cornell project.

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

A young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless, in a world of criminals who operate above the law.

"Keep 'em peeled!"

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

And you have given me some ideas too. Brilliant. Thanks.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Actually, how many of us really know how quickly we can stop (under control) and therefore what speed we should be doing. That “being able to stop in the distance we can see to be clear” rule is only working on our ‘gut-feelings’ but based on what? Almost certainly not experience.

My original point was that generally, roads are a constant, reaction times are a constant but car technology isn’t. Therefore ‘normal’ driving is based on the technology advances and not the conditions, which may not necessarily mean we are safer.

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished

I looked back and did a search Handy but couldn't find what you're referring to. (slow connection doesn't help)

I find it hard to believe that a car manufacturer would fit seat belts if they believed they're no good or of only limited use. These companies invest millions/billions in tests of every sort.

So, if after all the cost time and trouble of the R&D, seat belts proved to be of no benefit they would surely declare this or explain their findings to the body who are all for them? They would only make something in the name of safety.

(This is why Volvo won't make Gatso Cameras or you won't see a Toyota Truvelo)

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Actually most of us must be pretty good at judging how quickly we can stop because we don't keep crashing into things. I reckon it's almost entirely experience that allows us to do it and it's one of the reasons why experienced drivers tend to crash less than new drivers.

Doesn’t experience mean that ‘harsh’ braking is never (hardly ever) used? When was the last time you practiced a full-blown emergency stop?

I’m thinking of a spirited drive around our rural twisties. We need to judge our speed such that we could stop safely if a stationary tractor was just around the corner. How do we make the judgement? We don’t practice braking big-time on bends.

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished

Last weekend when a suicidal Pheasant leaped in front of my Kawasaki. My knuckles went white and my pants nearly went brown. Well, you did ask.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Cynical hat on:

Perhaps it is a cunning marketing strategy to convince us that their car is ‘safest’?
As Handy said, there is great pressure to maximise safety, so they’re of course going to go to lengths to try to convince us that their car is seemingly the safest, or at least compliant to the dominant dogma surrounding it, regardless of whether it really is safe or not.
“The customer is always right!”

Ahh, but we're not planning emergency braking are we? The most we ever plan for is 'firm braking' on the road, and we constantly practice the braking plans that we have chosen.

The possibility of emergency braking remains and gives us a substantial margin for error.



I don't think so. The whole thing is a 'closed loop' with the driver (/rider) as regulator. Improve any other part of the system and the driver might reasonably be expected to take advantage. I know I do.

Taking the example of a superior car, I know I'll drive it faster and harder than an inferior car - because I can. I can't tell you if I use all the advantantage (meaning no gain in margin) or not. I'd like to think that I use most of the advantage and leave myself with a net benefit, but it's hard to know.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Nooo Nooo

And stand to have all that egg on their face when it's revealed, as these things always are, that it was just a marketing ploy?

That's the stuff of politicians, not car manufacturers.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Really? Where do the tobacco companies figure in this argument?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I dunno. The rule doesn't specify the rate at which we should be able to stop.

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished

I think you've just shot down your original claim then. You can't have it both ways!



What makes you think I don't drive without a belt anyway? I agree, the number of times one is likely to get caught in most places is minimal. I've been ignoring the seat belt law for 24 years, and in that time I've had six, maybe seven tickets. Deduct the amount of time I've spent driving old cars which are quite legally without seat belts at all, and the time I've spent living in a jurisdiction with no primary seat belt law enforcement, and it still works out at a pretty low average. I returned to England 11 years ago, and I can tell you that since then I've received precisely two citations -- One about 9 years ago and the other a year ago last month.



Yes, I was born in 1966. I remember the Jimmy Savile ads from my childhood, of course, although I don't recall the Shaw Taylor ones first time around. I have some of them among a collection of old public information films though, plus a couple of the very first "You Know It Makes Sense" belt campaigns.



Indicative maybe, but by itself it proves nothing. If you searched hard enough you could probably come up with accidents in which three belted occupants were dead and one unbelted survived.

I've certainly seen reports of crashes with two occupants in which the buckled person died, the unbuckled one survived.

Cars aren't an addiction. Also, off the top of my head, didn't the biggest tobacco company in the world, Marbourgh, have to pay out millions some years ago?

(Can't remember how to spell it cuz I don't smoke.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

If we only ever plan for 'firm braking', where does that leave us with the stationary tractor just round the corner. Is that possibility really taken into account when we judge our speed?

In not, the possibility of 'emergency braking' remains, but we really don't know how well we will perform under those conditions.

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished

Sure - but we plan braking within our personal comfort zone and constantly test our plans. These tests refine our judgement.

On the quiet roads of North Scotland I reckon I encounter an obstruction just round a blind bend about 3 times a year. It's never been a real scare, and it's never been a crash where some other driver couldn't stop.

I reckon we're (i.e. national population of drivers) better at it than you give us credit for.

Perhaps you should arrange to try your own version of my video test and see what results you get? I'll place my bet here and now that you would be pleasantly surprised.

You might like to consider the views on http://www.safespeed.org.uk/inattention.html and http://www.safespeed.org.uk/braking.html Where I'm suggesting that the possibility of harder braking than the plan is a great place to keep your margin for error.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

You might be surprised at just how political (i.e. slippery) company directors can be, when in competition or in the deep smelly stuff.

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewt ... c&start=31

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

A young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless, in a world of criminals who operate above the law.

Sure, but in the same way tobaco companies etc. have to pay out, imagine how big the pay out would be from all those who will argue the car hurt their neck and want compensation.

It's suicide for any company to have something like this happen. Look how quick they are to recall models which get through the QA net...

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.