Safe Speed Forums

Quite apart from the simple fact that you are wrong...

Does anyone drive at a constant speed in an urban area? And if not why not?

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

Ah, OK, sorry.

Any misuse is too much, IMO. And the level of misuse seems to vary from region to region - in some areas drivers might only rarely see an iffy 30, whereas in others drivers might be faced with them every day (particularly if they happen to live in/commute through one of those villages with extended limits).




Depends on the circumstances. As I see it we have three basic scenarios:

1. The driver knows full well what the limit is, but chooses to exceed it anyway. Most reasonable drivers would consider 30 an acceptable limit for that stretch of road, and would have no sympathy for someone who got caught exceeding it.

2. The driver knows full well what the limit is, but chooses to exceed it anyway on the argument that it's safer to do so than not to do so. Most reasonable drivers would concur, would also consider that the limit really should be revised upwards, and would probably also be less than impressed if the local scamps decided to enforce it.

3. The driver genuinely believes the limit is higher, due to inadequate/improperly maintained/badly placed/etc signage. Most reasonable drivers would also have difficulty in knowing that the limit really was 30 along that stretch of road, and would be downright incensed if the scamps tried to penalise anyone.





I know that with new/newish tyres it's out by 1mph at 30, rising linearly to 3mph out at 70. What that doesn't even begin to tell me is how accurate or otherwise anyone else's speedo is...

_________________
Chris

I recently drove a courtesy car that read 33 on a TOMTOM 510 (accuracy confirmed by other means) while the speedo indicated 30. The GPS read 24 at a speedo indicated 20. Needless to say I warned the garage about it!


Yes. It is about remaining reasonably predictable to the other road users, which in the described example includes the young.


As has been said: people are not going to respect a limit if it is imposed for the wrong reason. This makes for less predictability. If drivers really aren’t obeying a 30 (for whatever reason), they’ll almost certainly exceed a 20 by an even greater margin. That's not good for those who base their actions on what is expected from others.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

You didn't answer the other two questions which would help to illuminate the reason why you are wrong.

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

This is also disproved by studies from more enlightened days when many suburban 30 limits on high standard roads were increased to 40, and actual speeds showed little or no increase, and in some cases even a decline.

People choose a speed that seems "right" to them, they don't simply aim to do a set percentage over the speed limit.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

In what way has it "come off the rails"? And if you think it has then perhaps you should take a good long look at your first response.



I don't need to be either! I can simply look at the current situation where there are 20-limits and also the current situation with all other limits.



But you've just effectively backed my observation of why we're going to end up with 20-limits - that legal limits allow a pretty significant latitude both ways, so policy must take that into consideration. And when I talk about a modern car, I don't necessarily mean one built in the last few years.



Yes!



Well hey, we could all wonder about your mental state when you misread your own link, so if I was you I wouldn't talk about things like that.



Because many people I believe aim roughly to keep to the speed limit. So I only expect them to 'suddenly snap' into line in that sense.



Yes!!!

But to say "calculated" or "logical fallacy" here is wrong of course - people aim to drive at within a certain amount above the limit.



I completely disagree.



You really don't understand other people's thinking do you. They would do that because they want to drive at the maximum speed they think is reasonable considering the speed limit. (By the way, in Britain "behaviour" has a "u" in it.)



And that's exactly what I say, but my original post was just an observation of what will actually happen.



So you really think that most people on here wouldn't moan if they were stopped whilst doing 37 in a 30? Really?

To give my own reply, on what evidence do you say that this is wrong?

No, people obviously won't drive at a constant speed if things around them are changing, which is less likely on the motorway. But having said that, in my experience, in an urban area or residential area a lot of people do drive above the limit by a fairly constant amount. If your experience is different then fine, but my original post was just giving my opinion of why we're going to end up with 20-limits all over the place.

They're misused everywhere in Somerset!

_________________
Save a cow - eat a vegetarian

And Oxfordshire, and a growing number of other places.



Look at all those houses

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

In 40 mph sections on motorways (before they introduced average speed cameras) people travel at 45 - 50mph, a clear demonstration that they are driving at the max speed limit + what they think is an acceptable tolerance (which always seems to be about 5 - 10 mph).

Frankly, in some motorway 40 mph zones when the road is clear it would be perfectly safe to travel at 70mph +, but people don't.

Why?

On NSL sections of motorways, people often travel at 85-90, which is well into prosecution territory...

On NSL sections of single carriageway roads, people often travel at 40, which is bloody frustrating if you end up stuck behind them...


So no, I don't think people do by and large drive to some globally predetermined tolerance, I think people drive to whatever they feel most comfortable doing - the level of comfort being determined by

1. the vehicle they're driving
2. their level of confidence
3. the road/weather conditions
4. the risk of being caught




Presumably you mean in the absence of cameras? My feeling is that, especially on motorways, people will drive at a speed which doesn't make them stand out too much from anyone else around them - point 4 above. If the rest of the traffic is doing 60-70 and one person is blatting along at 90, they'll be the one vehicle that any trafpol or talivan in the area is gonna be focussed on... OTOH, if you're in a line of traffic all doing around 85-90, then you might still get picked off by a particularly quick on the trigger talivan operator, or you might just get unlucky, but you're not drawing nearly as much attention to your speed.

So, in temporary limits where enough people will be doing 40ish, even if it's obvious that doing NSL+ wouldn't be a safety risk it'd still feel like a huge risk to your licence to be in the minority travelling significantly faster than the pack.

_________________
Chris

Heh, can you really not see; look harder!



So you have access to super-secret special stats on the enforcement of all limits that noone else is privvy to? (sic)



I think you must have misread my post, try again. The significant latitude is only one way, and it pertains to speedo tolerances, not enforcement thresholds.

One of my cars is a 1970 Triumph Spitfire, is that still a modern car, despite not being built in the past few years?



So wait, you think you scored a point about spelling over understanding, and that will win you a get out of jail free card whenever your argument falls down? Get real pal!



I would love to see the evidence on which you are basing this assertion, please do feel free to present it at any point!



Of course you are at liberty to disagree, in equal measure to your liberty to be wrong!

If, as you seem to believe, there is a significant group of drivers out there who drive along not only fixated with their speedos, but also fixated with keeping them xmph over the limit at all times, then current road safety policy has failed to an even greater degree than we have previously imagined. We would have people not only obsessed with the figure on their speedo, but also with keeping it a particular number of mph over the legal limit.

Truly it beggars belief. I wish there was an emoticon for sticking one's tongue in one's lower lip and slapping it, but the icon community seem deficient in that respect!



Clearly it doesn't always, because despite my choice of spelling, you still understood the meaning...again...well done!



What you think will actually happen.



Clearly you misunderstand the nature of this community once again if you think that I can speak for the majority (despite the fact that so many seem to agree with my points so far) but I do have a fairly high level of confidence that someone coming on here posting that they have been caught completely fair-and-square doing 37mph in a 30mph limit without mitigating factors would be given short shrift.



Quoted for emphasis and your prior ignorance.

You only notice those that drive at 40 because you get stuck behind them.

But they are increasing in number. A worrying trend.

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

Yes, and your point is what? You're claiming that people drive to some threshold above the limit, my experience is that a growing number of people do just the opposite-drive to a fixed speed regardless of the actual limit. And yes, it is a growing number-more often than not I now find myself encountering such a driver, and it's usually a different vehicle each time...

_________________
Chris

Enough already, Robin, either explain why you think it has "come off the rails" and why that is my fault and not yours, or stop commenting.



I don't need access to super-secret special stats; I can just look around me. At the end of the day, Robin, I'm only giving my observation and my belief of what will happen. You see things differently.



So am I right in thinking that you believe that we shouldn't have 20-limits because some old cars will over-read and so the driver will end up doing only 12? If that's the case, then tough. Most cars' speedos aren't out by anything as much as that (I believe). And you're getting away from the point that we are going to end up with 20-limits because too many people IMO moan if they are caught in the high 30s in a 30 zone.



No.

(Might I suggest that if you are terribly worried about the speedo being widely out that you make the effort and get it checked.)



I did score a point about your understanding of your own link. You then got very annoyed about it and started lying about my view of it's importance.

In all seriousness, Robin, talking about the mental state of your opponent is utterly pathetic. My mental state is perfectly fine. Your big problem is that you find it just so very hard to appreciate that people might genuinely see things differently from you. You really need to have a good long think about that.



Robin, why are you being so obsessive? My original post on this thread was a short one, giving my observation of the situation. Why have you felt it so necessary to engage in a long drawn out argument over it when it is just my, well, observation?



Here we go again, you think that anyone who thinks differently to you must be wrong. How childish.



Robin, you are completely failing to read properly what I say. Shall we talk about your mental state? I said quite clearly that to use the word "calculation" was wrong. Sheesh! I don't believe that "there is a significant group of drivers out there who drive along not only fixated with their speedos, but also fixated with keeping them xmph over the limit at all times". I have said, like this other poster, that they drive what they see as a reasonable amount above the speed limit. Which is why I think they would moan if caught doing, SAY, 37 in a 30. And therefore why we are going to end up with 20-limits all over the place.




Truly it beggars belief in that you are more keen to come out with some quick response than to actually read, take in, and then consider what I have said.



Of course I understood the meaning, but that is still an incorrect spelling for British English.



That's right, what I think will actually happen. But why are you saying that now? I said quite clearly in my very first post that they were "my thoughts" on the subject. Did you not really read that?



I don't misunderstand the nature of this community; in fact, I would say that I understand it just too well. The point here is that the people on this site are virtually always going to come up with some mitigating factor. Which is why, again (and in my opinion of course), we are going to end up with 20-limits all over the place.



Well let me repeat something then: "The point here is that the people on this site are virtually always going to come up with some mitigating factor."

Hmm.. the Moggie's speedo .. we cannot correct this. It under-reads by 5 mph at low speeds to a whopping 8 mph at higher speeds. We did fit a replacement only to find the same problem. We use one of the Road Angels in all of our classic harem now as the speedos in all of them are not at all as accurate as our moderns who under-read across the range by 3/4 mph and this appears standard to ALL modern cars from the oldest "moderns" across our large combined family .. as in a 1998 Vauxhall Vectra and a 2000 VW Passat.

By the way.. think you might find that most here are very much careful in all urbans/residentials

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

Lets cut to the chase then.

It doesn't matter what you think. Road safety policy is already screwed enough because it was based on assumptions and guesses.

It doesn't matter how many speedos you think are how accurate, the law mandates certain limits for accuracy and, whilst those are extant, then further policy must be based on them.

It doesn't matter how you think the zones will be enforced, there are already laws and guidelines about enforcement, and in the absence of replacements, that is how they must be enforced.

Isn't it just so dreadfully inconvenient when the facts get in the way?





These don't read like opinions do they! If you're trying to convey your mere thoughts, perhaps you should make this clearer through your use of language, which brings me nicely to my next point:

If you want to argue the relative merits of English vs. North American spellings, I suggest you go to languagepedant.com and find someone who cares. You're making assumptions about my nationality which are incorrect. The most vital aspect of language is that it must be understood, in this I have clearly succeeded, whilst you have been found deficient.

You also erroneously assume that people here are lawbreakers, who will whinge and wheedle to avoid taking their medicine if caught bang to rights. Perhaps you should look at the plank in your own eye before trying to spot a "closed minded" speck in others'!

Essentially, the crux of your argument seems to be that people who drive a little faster than 30mph in 30 limits are doing so because they are intentionally breaking the law "but only by a little bit". You suppose that in a 20 limit, that "little bit" would be small enough to keep them under 30mph. Thus you seem to be saying that 20s should become a proxy for 30s because people will then stay within a limit of 30mph.

You say this is merely your opinion, and of course you are entitled to it. It is so riddled with errors, however, that I fear you may struggle to find support or evidence for it. Some have already been pointed out to you, and I am sure that plenty of people here will be glad to highlight the others in due course; I may even do so myself, but for this evening I think this will do quite nicely!

Firstly, I've just written a post replying and this bloody site has lost it. So let me try and remember what I wrote but don't waste your time pulling me up on some petty detail because I can't be bothered.


I have never said that it does matter what I think. All I have been doing all along is giving my opinion. If you look back at my very first post you will see that I mentioned giving "my thoughts".



Which is fine, but because the police take that into account, to actually get people driving at less than 30mph we are going to end up with 20-limits (in my opinion as usual).



Have you ever told your local police this? What did they say? "Okay, Robin, you've spotted someone driving at 35 in a 30, we'll be right there."



Yes, like limited police resources, Robin?



I have been clear through my use of language but it's been you who has repeatedly not understood. For example, what do you think of the fact that you went on about people "calculating" their speed when that was clearly not what I was talking about? And what do you expect me to do, write "in my opinion" after every single sentence? The fact is that in my very first post I mentioned "my thoughts". Yes?



I'm really not bothered.



No I'm not, Robin. And I couldn't care less where you're from.



So you don't actually give any examples...



And here we go again, you trying to find fault in your opponent before you will accept any fault in yourself. You misread your own link before and then got annoyed when I pulled you up over it. You've thought that I was talking about motorists calculating their speed when I clearly wasn't.

As for being caught "bang to rights", you are not simply talking about breaking the law. You're talking about something completely different: breaking the law when there aren't any 'mitigating' factors.



Firstly, where do these quoted bits come from? Secondly, what point are you trying to make by putting them in quotes?



That's right. Remember me talking about driving at 37 in a 30? Yes? Well, apply that to a 20.



And this sentence shows how you have been failing to understand where I'm coming from right from the start: I am not saying that 20s should become a proxy for 30s but that (in my opinion as usual) they will.



Er, the increasing number of 20-zones? And what errors?