Safe Speed Forums

I would suggest, that given optimum conditions etc, that 40 would be reasonable in a 40 zone.

Wouldn't you?

The limit went from 30mph to 40mph, there was 3-or 4 lanes on the road, the road was clear ahead, I accelerated to 40mph, overshot it for a second, lifted off the accelerator to let it fall to 40mph and got flashed.
If you think this momentary blip of 'illegality' was dangerous, please feel free to say.

It was a fair stretch of road, It was late, I'd worked 12 hours, I wanted to get home, I'd set the cruise control to 40mph.

Just so you know, the few cars behind me was doing practically the same speed and accelerated fiercly past me once the camera had been passed.

_________________
Every car needs a H.U.D. (especially now).

Yes, in the same way that = 80 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood is reasonable , and > 80 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres is not. But given inaccuracy in speedo, camera and human perceptions, maybe, dare I say it, a little margin might be in order?

_________________
I stole this .sig

You'd think so, wouldn't you... Isn't this (just one of many) the problem with digital speed enforcement though - there's no discretion, you're either below the trigger speed or above it, so in a camera-infested area (especially ones where the local SCP has reduced the trigger threshold below the 10%+2 recommendation) the effective limit is several mph below what's painted on the road signs. Why should one driver be more at risk of prosecution than another driver if they both momentarily allow their speed to drift up slightly due to changing road conditions, if both drivers were driving at a legal speed prior to that drift? Related to this, why should one driver be more at risk of prosecution than another, simply because they were driving a vehicle with a more accurate speedo...

Basingwerk, 35 might be reasonable in a 40 zone under certain conditions, but if a road is unsafe at 40 in even optimum conditions then it shouldn't be a 40 limit. On the other hand, if 40 is perfectly safe for the average motorist in the average vehicle in decent conditions, then why shouldn't drivers take full advantage of the limit? Considering the way in which limits are reduced for no good reason (and yes, in some cases there really is no good engineering-based reason), isn't it to be expected that motorists will want to get as much out of the limits as is possible? Or would you just like to see us revert to a blanket 5MPH limit applied on all roads to all vehicles, and be done with the whole notion that drivers are, generally, more than capable of deciding what speed feels safe and appropriate for the conditions at hand?

Yep, for those reasons a little margin both ways might be in order (and hopefully has been).

I'm not a speeder, I drive carefully, and actually well under the speed limit usually. Going off what you're suggesting, if you yourself have, on any occasion blipped 2mph over the limit more than 4 times in the last 3 years, then feel free to burn your licence.

Different case for drink driving altogether I think. Better to have no alcohol in your system at all, than to attempt to push a limit (that has different effects on different people anyway).

_________________
Every car needs a H.U.D. (especially now).

So you don't think a momentory 42 is a "little margin"?

Well, I have some sympathy, because I sometimes do up to 42 in the 40 zone, due to my own neglect. Strangely, where I live, there is a section of road which winds up a slight gradient, and for some reason, in my Toyota, I just can't seem to keep it down to under the limit. I can't figure out the psycho-engineering dynamics which makes this happen. Its easier to keep it under the line in my Ford, so maybe its the comfort factor, or the engine revs or something. I'd like an audible alarm that told me when I'm over the limit so that I don't ever risk a ticket, even on the odd occasion when I would otheriwse drift over the limit.

If the law says that 40 is the absolute top limit, and a calibrated instrument says I was doing more, I wouldn't be angry or worried about it. Big deal - a speeding ticket!

_________________
I stole this .sig

Well, come on then basingwerk. I'm your ordinary road user, I'm your man. Have you changed your stance to provoke more argument? You do not seem to be showing any sympathy...

It isn't fair. I know someone who was caught doing 58mph in a 30mph zone and he received 3 penalty points.
From what you say, I should be treat the same, so my crime is the same.

My hobby is cars. I'm young, I have an expensive-to-insure car that I'm restoring to take to a racetrack one day. I do not need an extra £300+ in insurance payouts over the next 3 years.

The system should reward me for keeping my speed down in general, not penalise me for a pathetic tolerance over a tiny distance on a 4-lane, empty road.

I'm not 100% against cameras, and I agree with the ACPO guidelines. This is unreasonable though. If you want people to go considerably slower than the current limit, don't attempt to change the mentailty of all the drivers, just lower the limit and allow a small tolerance for human error.




It's the same story all-over for the pro-camera lobby:
Speed kills.
The limit is the law, if you break it you deserve the punishment.
Therefore they'd happily see zero tolerance throught the country.
4-strokes, you're banned.
And as one person said to me yesterday ' I'd have people glued to their speedos'
And of course they cannot cannot keep to this law themselves, and will gladly accept all punishments.

So a policy they cannot even themselves obey, they will apply to everyone.

It's impossible to argue with people who think like computers.

_________________
Every car needs a H.U.D. (especially now).

Whover said that they'd have everyone glued to their speedos clearly knows damn all about driving. If you spend all your time in the vehicle staring at the speedo, then you're paying no attention to the road conditions. That's what I would call inattention. AND INATTENTION IS A MAJOR CAUSE OF ACCIDENTS!

About the only thing we agree on is that too many see speed limit as the target. Unfortuantely, this also leads to a lot sticking to said limit - even when road conditions dictate you should be choosing a safe speed to proceed which could just well be below the speed limit.

However, when road and conditions are safe - then there is no reason why driver should not proceed at the 40 mph in 40 mph zone.

This why you get tailgated so much, basingwerk mate? You had to "make progress" on your test when all was said and done - they expected you to drive at speed limit. In fact - cops tend to smell "booze" at 35 mph in 40 mph! They do that in Germany too!



He should be allowed his 10% at least. Heck - basingwerk - even Switzerland allows 3mph above. -- across the entire speed limit range.

So 33 mph in 30 mph, 43 in 40 mph and so on.... They do not think it is fair either - and they are prissy so-sos over there. Wife and family are bunch of rebels - but then they are a reet fondue of nationalities in the make-up!

Which is what I have been telling you now for months! Gradient, road surface, polish, dust, camber, type of tryes you use --- all affect the speed. That is why ZERO tolerance is UNACCEPTABLE - especially given that this can affect people's insurances, job prospects and mobility.




Why do you think even IN GEAR has "useful gadgets" in his cars! That is why we all have them. Sure - we can hold a car at low/high speeds - but that is "safety net". You need them today!



Not big deal mate - leading to uninsured surge, DWD surge, not protecting anyone. The measures they have published today on unsinsured problem today - confiscate car? How the ***** does a scamera do this? We need BiBs - end of story!

You would not be saying this if did get a ticket for trivial overspeed. That is one quarter of way to losing your licence, increases your premiums, and remember - your car's speedo is not accurate to that level of accuracy. Get a "useful gadget" - you will see how far out it can be!

Buy an Audi - they have 2 audible alarms you can set to alert you when you go over th specified speed.

I recall being instructed that repeatedly doing less than 27-28mph in a 30 (WHERE SAFE TO DO SO) would result in a driving test failure for hesitance.

If there's a problem on a particular road change the limit, don't go for zero tolerance and attempt to change the thinking of millions of motorists.

Or you could retrofit buzzers to millions of cars. If you think 'why, it's the motorists problem/job?', it's not - the aim's to slow them down, not catch them out.


What's the big problem with labeling '25' or 35 on a sign?

_________________
Every car needs a H.U.D. (especially now).

I've no idea about the actual speeds, but I do know two people who failed tests for hesitation. I guess they were so determined not to fail for driving too fast that they over compensated. Hands up here I failed first time for speeding. I didn't see the 30 lollipop (long time ago now, so I can't honestly say something was blocking it, it may have been me). Suddenly realised that there wern't repeaters, and thought oh it, failed this one.

Layout changes might work just as well, but of course, that costs more and dents the prospects of tapping drivers for 60 quid apiece.

It'd be a good idea, but UK speedos are in 10mph increments so it's not just a matter of changing the signs.

Edit: Incidentally, I like your sig. Very true.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

I nearly failed my test for hesitation (2 out of 3 strokes in the box). The tester said I'd passed, but I'd 'better get a move on, out there'.

Regarding my sig, I imported and fitted a digital speedo and HUD to my car (the option was only available in Japan and the US) and it's teriffic. I get 1mph increments and I never need to look down at the readout on the dash at all. I don't know why more cars don't come with this (mine's 15 years old now). It's not exactly complicated electronics (a V.F.D. 3-digit display and a mirror).
Doesn't make it impossible to blip over the limit of course (so even if the Vectra had come with one, I'd have still comitted the 'crime').

_________________
Every car needs a H.U.D. (especially now).

Serious? You can get aftermarket HUDs? Well, if you really don't have to be a genius to fit it I'd be up for one. Got a URL about it?

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

My HUD was an original manufacturers part for my car. They just only released it for the US and Japanese versions of the model . It still took quite a bit of rewiring though, due to slight model variances (LHD etc).

A company called Defi do an aftermarket HUD using the same VFD technology though:
http://www.defi-shop.com/product/vsd/vsd_top.html

Imagine it's a bit more then the £70 I paid for mine off Ebay USA though.

_________________
Every car needs a H.U.D. (especially now).

Yes, in the same way that = 80 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood is reasonable , and > 80 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres is not. But given inaccuracy in speedo, camera and human perceptions, maybe, dare I say it, a little margin might be in order?[/quote]

A little margin upover is in order, as manufacturers must not supply a vehicle which has a speedo that reads low. Most have a built-in error of around 10% at 30mph. I have timed mine against a wagon's calibrated tacho, and almost every car I've had in the last 10 years read well over 60 at the wagon's limited 56mph. One of the reasons Pratnerships SHOULD allow at least 10%.............

AFAIK, even modern speedos are not absolute instruments, and are subject to calibration errors. I reckon these should be quite small, the main areas of error probably coming from wheel circumference change (read tyre size and wear) and clock inaccuracies (assuming they use a clock or capacitor circuit to integrate the wheel rev readings, which, for example, may be read by sensor from a toothed wheel or other similar set-up). 10% seems a little high, but I get the idea. Clocks (can be) accurate, so it comes down to change in tyre circumference. Rough calculations suggest to me a tolerance band of around 6% in the maximum variation. If this were offset on a worst-case basis so that the speedo reads high, you would, worst case, be doing around 28 mph when your speedo says 30 mph. These are very rough calcualtions, of course, but this seems a respectable speed to me, quite close to the absolute limit, so this is no reason for the Pratnerships to allow 10%, because the speedo inaccuracy over stating the speed, thus working in the drivers favour anyway.

On the other had, I wonder what tolerance margins are published for the camera measurement instruments themselves?

_________________
I stole this .sig

10% seems about typical at lower speeds, with the accuracy increasing as you get faster. Cross-checking my Omega speedo with a GPS receiver shows a 10% error at 30 (indicated - actual speed = 27), dropping to 4% at 70 (actual speed = 67).



Always assuming that what you think is 30 on the speedo actually IS 30 on the speedo... It doesn't take much of a change in the drivers eyeline to cause the needle to shift relative to the dial markings - i.e. parallax error. I can easily "change" my speed just by moving my head, and you'd get a similar effect when different people drive the same car - my girlfriend has a completely different seating position to mine (there's a 10 inch difference in our heights...), so her view of the speedo is from a significantly different angle.