This Stupid Country!
03 February 2005, 11:33 PM
#31
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: North Yorks, MY03 PPP, now run a Mondeo ST TDCI 06
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
God there are a load of half witted do gooders on Snet these days. FFS drive at the speed you feel safe at, but don't slate someone for driving at a speed you think is unacceptable, just because you obey the law at all times.
It is quite safe to drive at 150 in the right conditions, just as it is not safe to drive past a school at 8.50 on a weekday morning doing 30 MPH, even though the law says it is okay.
Go join the f*ckin green revolution and act like 90% of the population, following their leader.
And yes I wwill drive without insurance, if any sort of speed limiting device is fitted to my car. The fine is less that the yearly premium!
T*ats
It is quite safe to drive at 150 in the right conditions, just as it is not safe to drive past a school at 8.50 on a weekday morning doing 30 MPH, even though the law says it is okay.
Go join the f*ckin green revolution and act like 90% of the population, following their leader.
And yes I wwill drive without insurance, if any sort of speed limiting device is fitted to my car. The fine is less that the yearly premium!
T*ats
03 February 2005, 11:48 PM
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Surrey/London borders.
Posts: 8,300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Robertio
Can you define what criteria should be placed on a bit of tarmac before you would declare it safe to travel along at 150mph?
In a car which takes 18 seconds to get from 70 to 150 you don't need a huge stretch of tarmac to safely get to this speed, and from memory 100 yards is enough to haul a suitable car back down to 70 again. Given this information, would you not agree that a one mile stretch of clear, well surfaced road with perfect visability is sufficient? Can think of a few of these in the UK. Does the same criteria apply to a car that can do 70-150 in 10 seconds, or something like a scoob taking 40 seconds?
In a car which takes 18 seconds to get from 70 to 150 you don't need a huge stretch of tarmac to safely get to this speed, and from memory 100 yards is enough to haul a suitable car back down to 70 again. Given this information, would you not agree that a one mile stretch of clear, well surfaced road with perfect visability is sufficient? Can think of a few of these in the UK. Does the same criteria apply to a car that can do 70-150 in 10 seconds, or something like a scoob taking 40 seconds?
Kin 'ell - think about it. Not rocket science..................
04 February 2005, 10:40 AM
#33
At 150mph it takes 24secs to do one mile, if it's clear and straight you can see a good five miles, and concentrate on hazards a good 2miles ahead, assuming an empty road with minimal hazard. that gives you more than enough time to react.
Much above 150 things start to happen very fast, and i'm not comfertable on anything less than a deserted motorway. I'm sure some people find this happens at a higher speed, some lower.
The M6 toll and the motorway from glasgow to carlsile are two roads I know of in this country that could be de-restricted at certain times of the day/year.
Much above 150 things start to happen very fast, and i'm not comfertable on anything less than a deserted motorway. I'm sure some people find this happens at a higher speed, some lower.
The M6 toll and the motorway from glasgow to carlsile are two roads I know of in this country that could be de-restricted at certain times of the day/year.
04 February 2005, 11:03 AM
#34
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 9,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
its just SOOOOOO not going to happen.
there is NO WAy you are going to able to do twice the speed that others are happy to do, just not going to happen. You can moan all you like. NO ONE with enough brains to get in a position of power will allow it.
T
there is NO WAy you are going to able to do twice the speed that others are happy to do, just not going to happen. You can moan all you like. NO ONE with enough brains to get in a position of power will allow it.
T
04 February 2005, 11:35 AM
#35
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RB5 245,
I was concerned about your attitude towards the law. If you want to live in a civilised society then you have to accept rules and restrictions. The speed limits are indeed based on the abilities of an average driver and car, and are there to protect lives. There is nothing "pants" about that, just plain common sense. if a speed limit is set, it is just not possible to say its alright for some to drive at high three figure speeds if the road is clear. That just cannot be administrated. And how would you define someone as being safe to drive at speeds like that.
If such speeds were generally allowed, how would you feel about some clown with no experience and little ability screaming along at 150+ on the same piece of road as yourself?
At that sort of 3 figure speed, as you said yourself, things arrive very quickly. Let me tell you I have got a lot of experience at considerably higher speeds myself. You talk about empty roads, but others can suddenly appear as if from nowhere at that kind of relative speed.
Whatever you say, you cannot justify driving on a public road as fast as that. Apart from the fact it is against the law. I don't advocate lawlessness, however you might feel about that, and thats what I was really irritated about as much as anything. If you like the idea of a "Mad Max" society, you would soon get fed up of that believe me.
No one in this country has the right to be so arrogant as to feel they are above the law.
Scoobcrissy,
Would you like to explain your unecessarily rude and childish remark about life in the context of this thread.
Les
I was concerned about your attitude towards the law. If you want to live in a civilised society then you have to accept rules and restrictions. The speed limits are indeed based on the abilities of an average driver and car, and are there to protect lives. There is nothing "pants" about that, just plain common sense. if a speed limit is set, it is just not possible to say its alright for some to drive at high three figure speeds if the road is clear. That just cannot be administrated. And how would you define someone as being safe to drive at speeds like that.
If such speeds were generally allowed, how would you feel about some clown with no experience and little ability screaming along at 150+ on the same piece of road as yourself?
At that sort of 3 figure speed, as you said yourself, things arrive very quickly. Let me tell you I have got a lot of experience at considerably higher speeds myself. You talk about empty roads, but others can suddenly appear as if from nowhere at that kind of relative speed.
Whatever you say, you cannot justify driving on a public road as fast as that. Apart from the fact it is against the law. I don't advocate lawlessness, however you might feel about that, and thats what I was really irritated about as much as anything. If you like the idea of a "Mad Max" society, you would soon get fed up of that believe me.
No one in this country has the right to be so arrogant as to feel they are above the law.
Scoobcrissy,
Would you like to explain your unecessarily rude and childish remark about life in the context of this thread.
Les
04 February 2005, 01:47 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While these are very good points Les and I don't disagree with them I suspect that a lot of comments in support of driving very fast are based upon a fundamental frustration with current speed limit enforcement and that fact that in some areas limits are clearly being set to entrap motorists.
While there is no doubt that it is necessary for people to have a respect for the law and to abide by it there are also situations where the law may be wrong and may require change. We might cite substantial instances of this such as giving women the vote or slavery for example. In many cases of law that is now viewed as wrong people had to stand up and be counted in order to get it changed.
What is also worrying is that the fundamental rights of motorists in law, such as the right to silence or the right not to incriminate yourself, are being removed with worryingly little resistance from the 23 million license holders in this country.
These matters are much more fundamental than being able to travel at 70mph or 150mph on a motorway and while we have a lot of people willing to admit to wanting to drive at 150mph we have surprisingly few who are actually involved in the fight to keep their fundamental rights to a free and open trial should they be caught, or even to any trial at all. Anyone who feels strongly about this should certainly consider joining an organisation such as the Association of British Drivers. The membership fee is less than a round of beers and they are fighting for a fair deal for drivers.
Chavs who break into your house are still entitled to a free trial where they don't have to admit guilt before entering the court room for example, generally law abiding motorists who may only have been a few miles per hour over the limit are not entitled to such a fundamental right any more.
While there is no doubt that it is necessary for people to have a respect for the law and to abide by it there are also situations where the law may be wrong and may require change. We might cite substantial instances of this such as giving women the vote or slavery for example. In many cases of law that is now viewed as wrong people had to stand up and be counted in order to get it changed.
What is also worrying is that the fundamental rights of motorists in law, such as the right to silence or the right not to incriminate yourself, are being removed with worryingly little resistance from the 23 million license holders in this country.
These matters are much more fundamental than being able to travel at 70mph or 150mph on a motorway and while we have a lot of people willing to admit to wanting to drive at 150mph we have surprisingly few who are actually involved in the fight to keep their fundamental rights to a free and open trial should they be caught, or even to any trial at all. Anyone who feels strongly about this should certainly consider joining an organisation such as the Association of British Drivers. The membership fee is less than a round of beers and they are fighting for a fair deal for drivers.
Chavs who break into your house are still entitled to a free trial where they don't have to admit guilt before entering the court room for example, generally law abiding motorists who may only have been a few miles per hour over the limit are not entitled to such a fundamental right any more.
04 February 2005, 02:04 PM
#37
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 4,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RB5_245
At 150mph it takes 24secs to do one mile, if it's clear and straight you can see a good five miles, and concentrate on hazards a good 2miles ahead, assuming an empty road with minimal hazard. that gives you more than enough time to react.
What would happen say, if you hit a patch of diesel that wasn't visible from your driving position? Or some debris that really shouldn't be on the road, but as we all know, can occasionally be there and be on you before you know it (and that's at legal speeds)?
04 February 2005, 03:32 PM
#38
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with a lot of what you say as well Hedgehog, I also think that the present habits of entrapment are very bad and also that drivers are being very poorly treated in many ways. I also deplore the withdrawal of legal protection as you have described.
In all honesty though, I think the major reason for wishing to drive faster is purely because people just want to do it for the sake of enjoyment rather than frustration at the speed restrictions. I like driving fast as much as the next man but I personally feel that very high speeds are wrong on our crowded roads and are unfair on the other road users.
Of course if there is no traffic about and the road is in good condition, then it is safe to drive faster, within reason, but it is not possible to legislate for that since not all drivers would be capable of driving fast in safety. Therefore the law states the allowable speed and if you exceed that you are liable of course to get caught eventually.
I also believe that the motorway speed limit should be increased, maybe to 85 mph. But I cannot see a government being too keen to risk the ensuing criticism.
There is no place on public roads for three figure speeds, no one can justify a case for that.
The real answer, as I have said often enough, is to do some track days. You can go as fast as you dare and at least you can expect the others to be travelling in the same direction-most of the time anyway! You might even learn something about how to really drive fast as well. And you can't get "done" for it.
It won't be too long I think, that as restrictions become tighter and tighter on the roads, a track day is the only way you can get any enjoyment out of driving at all.
Les
In all honesty though, I think the major reason for wishing to drive faster is purely because people just want to do it for the sake of enjoyment rather than frustration at the speed restrictions. I like driving fast as much as the next man but I personally feel that very high speeds are wrong on our crowded roads and are unfair on the other road users.
Of course if there is no traffic about and the road is in good condition, then it is safe to drive faster, within reason, but it is not possible to legislate for that since not all drivers would be capable of driving fast in safety. Therefore the law states the allowable speed and if you exceed that you are liable of course to get caught eventually.
I also believe that the motorway speed limit should be increased, maybe to 85 mph. But I cannot see a government being too keen to risk the ensuing criticism.
There is no place on public roads for three figure speeds, no one can justify a case for that.
The real answer, as I have said often enough, is to do some track days. You can go as fast as you dare and at least you can expect the others to be travelling in the same direction-most of the time anyway! You might even learn something about how to really drive fast as well. And you can't get "done" for it.
It won't be too long I think, that as restrictions become tighter and tighter on the roads, a track day is the only way you can get any enjoyment out of driving at all.
Les
04 February 2005, 06:30 PM
#39
Les, to comment on posts we've both made. I don't seriously expect to be able to drive on british roads at 150mph, and if the speed limits were removed tina turner is not going to take over the world an replace the courts with fights to the death.
There is a middle ground. People are not so stupid as to not be able to tell the difference between night and day, rain or sun.
As far as motoring folklore goes, the head of the commitee to set up speed limits did not even drive herself (don't know if this is true, but it's how the story goes
).
The guidlines on stopping distances are not realistic in todays cars, which was a factor to setting the speed limits. On top of that factor in increased reliability and amazingly better handling of todays cars. These fact's are ignored by road safety people as far as I see.
Take the example of a driver, a good ferw years ago now was caught about 150ish in england in an NSX. He could not be charged with driving dangerously, simply because he wasn't. Therefor by charging him at all, you are in my mind, taking away basic freedoms.
Why not take an example from our leaders tony b and george w. If you don't like something attack it, diplomacy doesn't work
I'm a law abiding citizen, but if law's can't be justified and nothing is being done about it.....
BTW i'm off to spain at 5am tommorow so that's the last of my apparently infuriating banter
There is a middle ground. People are not so stupid as to not be able to tell the difference between night and day, rain or sun.
As far as motoring folklore goes, the head of the commitee to set up speed limits did not even drive herself (don't know if this is true, but it's how the story goes
).The guidlines on stopping distances are not realistic in todays cars, which was a factor to setting the speed limits. On top of that factor in increased reliability and amazingly better handling of todays cars. These fact's are ignored by road safety people as far as I see.
Take the example of a driver, a good ferw years ago now was caught about 150ish in england in an NSX. He could not be charged with driving dangerously, simply because he wasn't. Therefor by charging him at all, you are in my mind, taking away basic freedoms.
Why not take an example from our leaders tony b and george w. If you don't like something attack it, diplomacy doesn't work
I'm a law abiding citizen, but if law's can't be justified and nothing is being done about it.....
BTW i'm off to spain at 5am tommorow so that's the last of my apparently infuriating banter
04 February 2005, 06:47 PM
#40
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The poliotical wing of Chip Sengravy.
Posts: 6,129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and if the speed limits were removed tina turner is not going to take over the world an replace the courts with fights to the death.
04 February 2005, 07:11 PM
#41
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 9,844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by fatherpierre
The car may well take ^ long to lower its speed. But the car is controlled by a person that has to react in time, in order to make the car reduce in that period.........
Kin 'ell - think about it. Not rocket science..................
Kin 'ell - think about it. Not rocket science..................
Even if it was a case of you wanting to stay at 150mph, you are talking approx 3,000ft to get from 70-150 (assuming 18 sec). You are then travelling at 220ft/s. Oh no, you've just remembered about that gatso up ahead. Say you have the slowest reaction time in the world and take 3 seconds to track down the brake pedal that's you up to 3,660ft then add on the 300ft it takes you to get back down to 70 giving you approx 4,000ft. Still over 20% shy of the previously mentioned mile.
The comment about using a race track to drive quickly has one huge drawback - there isn't a track in the UK where you can max out most cars. Bruntingthorpe is the longest available bit of tarmac, but even 2 miles isn't enough to max out a std UK scoob.
[notice how some of us can resist sticking insulting remarks in our posts]
04 February 2005, 07:26 PM
#42
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Tellins, Home of Super Leagues finest, and where a "split" is not all it seems.
Posts: 5,504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RB5 245 - ya a bloody plonka - Mr high n mighty above the law - class 1 idiot...
Its the pot hole you didnt know was there, the branch thats falled onto that stretch of road, the nail through your tyre, the diesel spilt that wasnt there before and then the complete and utter carnage a car hurtling off the motroway at 150mph would do. I take it your entire family are dead or you couldnt give a flying fork about how theyd react to you being a slop of blood on the spade of the incident trucks sweeping the motorway?
At less than half that speed (the speed limit - oh yeah the law) you would have a massively increassed chance of seeing many of those hazards and avoiding them or controlling your car etc...
Arrogant childish and selfish would some you up... Im off down the pub now...If Ihear sirens go past I'll think of your campaign and smile....
Its the pot hole you didnt know was there, the branch thats falled onto that stretch of road, the nail through your tyre, the diesel spilt that wasnt there before and then the complete and utter carnage a car hurtling off the motroway at 150mph would do. I take it your entire family are dead or you couldnt give a flying fork about how theyd react to you being a slop of blood on the spade of the incident trucks sweeping the motorway?
At less than half that speed (the speed limit - oh yeah the law) you would have a massively increassed chance of seeing many of those hazards and avoiding them or controlling your car etc...
Arrogant childish and selfish would some you up... Im off down the pub now...If Ihear sirens go past I'll think of your campaign and smile....
04 February 2005, 11:03 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Surrey/London borders.
Posts: 8,300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Robertio
At no point did I say anything about sustaining 150mph - simply accelerating up to it and slowing back down. Therefore you are already anticipating it, in the case of my quicker car it is on the limiter in 4th at 150, so you just keep half an eye on the rev counter and stand on the brakes at the right moment.
Even if it was a case of you wanting to stay at 150mph, you are talking approx 3,000ft to get from 70-150 (assuming 18 sec). You are then travelling at 220ft/s. Oh no, you've just remembered about that gatso up ahead. Say you have the slowest reaction time in the world and take 3 seconds to track down the brake pedal that's you up to 3,660ft then add on the 300ft it takes you to get back down to 70 giving you approx 4,000ft. Still over 20% shy of the previously mentioned mile.
The comment about using a race track to drive quickly has one huge drawback - there isn't a track in the UK where you can max out most cars. Bruntingthorpe is the longest available bit of tarmac, but even 2 miles isn't enough to max out a std UK scoob.
[notice how some of us can resist sticking insulting remarks in our posts]
Even if it was a case of you wanting to stay at 150mph, you are talking approx 3,000ft to get from 70-150 (assuming 18 sec). You are then travelling at 220ft/s. Oh no, you've just remembered about that gatso up ahead. Say you have the slowest reaction time in the world and take 3 seconds to track down the brake pedal that's you up to 3,660ft then add on the 300ft it takes you to get back down to 70 giving you approx 4,000ft. Still over 20% shy of the previously mentioned mile.
The comment about using a race track to drive quickly has one huge drawback - there isn't a track in the UK where you can max out most cars. Bruntingthorpe is the longest available bit of tarmac, but even 2 miles isn't enough to max out a std UK scoob.
[notice how some of us can resist sticking insulting remarks in our posts]
05 February 2005, 10:31 AM
#45
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I studied that reply from RB5 245 and could not find any argument to justify his attitude towards the law with respect to speed limits.
One point you made RB5 was that speed limits were set when cars were not so advanced in the performance and braking stakes. Thats true but the traffic is many many times heavier than it was and as Fatherpierre said, human reaction times have not changed and that is the most significant factor IMO.
The bit about the person who set the speed limits not being a driver-well if you don't know about that for sure-why mention it?
Robertio,
Very good to see you resisted the insulting bit, it does tend to weaken the argument anyway as well as achieving nothing.
The reasons against driving at such speeds are covered well enough already, the point is of course, it is a particularly selfish way to behave on public roads.
The point about driving on a track is not just to see how fast you can go down a straight, that is something that takes no skill whatsoever, you just hold the steering wheel and floor the car!
The real skill in driving is in braking as late as possible, getting through the corners on the limit in safety, leaving the corner as fast as you can, getting the power down quickly, using the gearbox properly, getting round a lap in a good time, and being well aware what is happening around you at the same time and being able to adapt your driving to what other cars are doing on the track. When you have got all that sorted then you might be justified in considering yourself to be a skillful driver.
This is the sort of driving that you can only do safely and fairly on a racing track. The public roads are not the place for that.
Most of the racing drivers I know would not dream of driving like that on public roads. They don't feel they have to prove anything by terrorising other motorists.
Les
One point you made RB5 was that speed limits were set when cars were not so advanced in the performance and braking stakes. Thats true but the traffic is many many times heavier than it was and as Fatherpierre said, human reaction times have not changed and that is the most significant factor IMO.
The bit about the person who set the speed limits not being a driver-well if you don't know about that for sure-why mention it?
Robertio,
Very good to see you resisted the insulting bit, it does tend to weaken the argument anyway as well as achieving nothing.
The reasons against driving at such speeds are covered well enough already, the point is of course, it is a particularly selfish way to behave on public roads.
The point about driving on a track is not just to see how fast you can go down a straight, that is something that takes no skill whatsoever, you just hold the steering wheel and floor the car!
The real skill in driving is in braking as late as possible, getting through the corners on the limit in safety, leaving the corner as fast as you can, getting the power down quickly, using the gearbox properly, getting round a lap in a good time, and being well aware what is happening around you at the same time and being able to adapt your driving to what other cars are doing on the track. When you have got all that sorted then you might be justified in considering yourself to be a skillful driver.
This is the sort of driving that you can only do safely and fairly on a racing track. The public roads are not the place for that.
Most of the racing drivers I know would not dream of driving like that on public roads. They don't feel they have to prove anything by terrorising other motorists.
Les
05 February 2005, 06:04 PM
#46
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 9,844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by fatherpierre
If you have to keep half an eye on anything but the road then you are significantly increasing your risk of a crash and killing yourself and (more importantly, someone else) through your speed.
If you prefer 150mph comes just over 1 second after the shift buzzer sounds, so it is possible for me to anticipate and brake again from 150 without taking even half an eye off the view ahead. Not that I really see what this has to do with the original query of why there is no road in the UK where it would be safe to travel at 150 in the right conditions.
05 February 2005, 06:48 PM
#47
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 9,844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Leslie
Robertio,
Very good to see you resisted the insulting bit, it does tend to weaken the argument anyway as well as achieving nothing.
The reasons against driving at such speeds are covered well enough already, the point is of course, it is a particularly selfish way to behave on public roads.
The point about driving on a track is not just to see how fast you can go down a straight, that is something that takes no skill whatsoever, you just hold the steering wheel and floor the car!
The real skill in driving is in braking as late as possible, getting through the corners on the limit in safety, leaving the corner as fast as you can, getting the power down quickly, using the gearbox properly, getting round a lap in a good time, and being well aware what is happening around you at the same time and being able to adapt your driving to what other cars are doing on the track. When you have got all that sorted then you might be justified in considering yourself to be a skillful driver.
This is the sort of driving that you can only do safely and fairly on a racing track. The public roads are not the place for that.
Most of the racing drivers I know would not dream of driving like that on public roads. They don't feel they have to prove anything by terrorising other motorists.
Les
Very good to see you resisted the insulting bit, it does tend to weaken the argument anyway as well as achieving nothing.
The reasons against driving at such speeds are covered well enough already, the point is of course, it is a particularly selfish way to behave on public roads.
The point about driving on a track is not just to see how fast you can go down a straight, that is something that takes no skill whatsoever, you just hold the steering wheel and floor the car!
The real skill in driving is in braking as late as possible, getting through the corners on the limit in safety, leaving the corner as fast as you can, getting the power down quickly, using the gearbox properly, getting round a lap in a good time, and being well aware what is happening around you at the same time and being able to adapt your driving to what other cars are doing on the track. When you have got all that sorted then you might be justified in considering yourself to be a skillful driver.
This is the sort of driving that you can only do safely and fairly on a racing track. The public roads are not the place for that.
Most of the racing drivers I know would not dream of driving like that on public roads. They don't feel they have to prove anything by terrorising other motorists.
Les
The same applies to people who say driving 1/4 mile is easy, they are the people who have never tried to do it in a really powerful car. Accelerating from 30-70 in an ordinary family hatchback on a clear well surfaced road is a pretty much a case of putting your foot down, what about when in a quick RWD car - it breaks traction at 30 and is still spinning its wheels at 70? is that so simple that anyone can do it without leaving the tarmac?
Agreed about tracks, but no one has mentioned anything to do with cornering, merely obtaining a certain speed on a stretch of tarmac. If you are at Spa or 'ring in August pop over, you are more than welcome to passenger around (likewise if you are ever up at Knockhill, unfortunately noise regs kind of restrict which tracks I can use).
FWIW I don't drive quickly on the road. I used to many years ago, but due to the now ridiculous over the top anti-speeding policing I don't anymore. In '03 I (may have) exceeded 100mph 3 times and one of those was in front of an unmarked car (only other vehicle on the road). I was kindly given some points, and was told that what I did was not in any way dangerous (given the conditions it was of no risk to anyone) but the law was the law...
I still have yet to see why doing 150 on a clear suitable stretch of road is perceived as being always dangerous to so many SN'ers. If you are driving a properly prepared car at well within both its limits and your own there is no more risk than doing half that speed. On a clear dry road where there is nothing to hit, no other people where is the risk? In the past I have used sections of tarmac for setting up cars where you drive along the same stretch over and over again. On your second+ run along the tarmac it is not as if a pothole is going to magically appear, or a mystical diesel spill drop in front of you (I can't remember the last time I came across a diesel spill on motorway, roundabout or back road yes) so where are the risks?
Selfish? in the regard you are doing it for yourself then yes. But so is eating, you sitting at home eating that snack isn't of benefit to anyone else. As regards it having a negative effect on anyone else then no, done in the right environment it has no effect on anyone else.
06 February 2005, 09:29 AM
#48
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robertio,
Yes I have driven at those sorts of speeds, regularly, and I do know all the circuits you mention, and a good many more as well. I would also like to drive faster on the roads as I used to as well, but the traffic is too concentrated now, at most times of the day.
Your description of the need to concentrate at very high speeds is absolutely right and is a good indication why the public roads are not the place to do it. An inexperienced driver trying that would be a danger to others even if the road looked clear at the time for the reasons I stated in my earlier post. More than one car doing it at the same time on the same road is even more risky.
You have been very lucky as far as diesel spills etc are concerned, there have been 3 bikers killed around here in recent times because of those and I have also been off my bike for the same reason with rain on top of diesel. Very nasty when commercial drivers overfill their vehicles and either dont do the cap up properly or even bother to fit it! I have seen a few car crashes caused by that as well.
I always found it was much better and safer to set my cars up on an airfield or a track. A lot easier to do the suspension settings and gear ratio's etc of course. I find it strange that you cannot see the obvious risks if everyone was to drive around at those sorts of speeds etc. which is what you appear to be advocating. Or do you mean its ok for you to do it as long as no one else is?
Can't see the worth of your comparison with eating. If you are having a meal, it may not benefit anyone else, but it is not putting anyone else at risk either. However, 3 figure speeds on a public road may well do so and it is very selfish to risk someone else's possible wellbeing for your own edification.
Les
Yes I have driven at those sorts of speeds, regularly, and I do know all the circuits you mention, and a good many more as well. I would also like to drive faster on the roads as I used to as well, but the traffic is too concentrated now, at most times of the day.
Your description of the need to concentrate at very high speeds is absolutely right and is a good indication why the public roads are not the place to do it. An inexperienced driver trying that would be a danger to others even if the road looked clear at the time for the reasons I stated in my earlier post. More than one car doing it at the same time on the same road is even more risky.
You have been very lucky as far as diesel spills etc are concerned, there have been 3 bikers killed around here in recent times because of those and I have also been off my bike for the same reason with rain on top of diesel. Very nasty when commercial drivers overfill their vehicles and either dont do the cap up properly or even bother to fit it! I have seen a few car crashes caused by that as well.
I always found it was much better and safer to set my cars up on an airfield or a track. A lot easier to do the suspension settings and gear ratio's etc of course. I find it strange that you cannot see the obvious risks if everyone was to drive around at those sorts of speeds etc. which is what you appear to be advocating. Or do you mean its ok for you to do it as long as no one else is?
Can't see the worth of your comparison with eating. If you are having a meal, it may not benefit anyone else, but it is not putting anyone else at risk either. However, 3 figure speeds on a public road may well do so and it is very selfish to risk someone else's possible wellbeing for your own edification.
Les
06 February 2005, 09:35 AM
#49
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TheBigMan
Wanna drive fast??? Go to the Nordschleife.
06 February 2005, 11:03 AM
#50
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 9,844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Leslie
You have been very lucky as far as diesel spills etc are concerned, there have been 3 bikers killed around here in recent times because of those and I have also been off my bike for the same reason with rain on top of diesel. Very nasty when commercial drivers overfill their vehicles and either dont do the cap up properly or even bother to fit it! I have seen a few car crashes caused by that as well.
I always found it was much better and safer to set my cars up on an airfield or a track. A lot easier to do the suspension settings and gear ratio's etc of course. I find it strange that you cannot see the obvious risks if everyone was to drive around at those sorts of speeds etc. which is what you appear to be advocating. Or do you mean its ok for you to do it as long as no one else is?
Can't see the worth of your comparison with eating. If you are having a meal, it may not benefit anyone else, but it is not putting anyone else at risk either. However, 3 figure speeds on a public road may well do so and it is very selfish to risk someone else's possible wellbeing for your own edification.
Les
I always found it was much better and safer to set my cars up on an airfield or a track. A lot easier to do the suspension settings and gear ratio's etc of course. I find it strange that you cannot see the obvious risks if everyone was to drive around at those sorts of speeds etc. which is what you appear to be advocating. Or do you mean its ok for you to do it as long as no one else is?
Can't see the worth of your comparison with eating. If you are having a meal, it may not benefit anyone else, but it is not putting anyone else at risk either. However, 3 figure speeds on a public road may well do so and it is very selfish to risk someone else's possible wellbeing for your own edification.
Les
I'm actually fairly certain we share a similar outlook, just expressed in a different manner.
Setting up a car on an airfield or track is all well in good if that is the environment is it being setup for and the customer has enough money to pay for the hire of it. Unfortunately most people I know can't afford this every time they change their springs, etc. and use their cars on the tarmac that is (generously at times) called road. Does also introduce the top end mapping problem - the only area in the UK where a lot of cars can max out is on road. You map a car for someone using third gear on-track, they take it away and try to v-max it and bang, it becomes your fault because it was OK before. Whether or not anyone agrees with it many people do do this.
I have never said it is OK for everyone to drive around flat out, nor have I said it is OK for me to do so. All I have said is that in the right conditions it is not the hugely high risk it is perceived to be by a few people around here who it seems fail to understand that not everyone is the same. I can't ski therefore for me to try skiing downhill at 40mph would be paramount to suicide, but for someone who can it is of no real danger.
In the right conditions you are not of risk to anyone else, if there is no one else around then there is no one else to hit / become involved. So the same as eating, there is a very remote chance something could go wrong, but again you could choke on the snack. Everything everyone does carries a level of risk and can have a resulting impact on other people, but in the right circumstances 150 need not be of any more risk than enjoyig a pizza.
06 February 2005, 11:15 AM
#51
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hedgehog you argue rationally and well mate (I need post nothing further 
). Good work fella!
D
[PS Chip you in the same street as me - blue Scoob parked soooo tight to the wall????)
). Good work fella!D
[PS Chip you in the same street as me - blue Scoob parked soooo tight to the wall????)
06 February 2005, 03:56 PM
#54
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Cardiff. Wales
Posts: 11,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Diesel
Hedgehog you argue rationally and well mate (I need post nothing further ). Good work fella!
D
[PS Chip you in the same street as me - blue Scoob parked soooo tight to the wall????)
). Good work fella!D
[PS Chip you in the same street as me - blue Scoob parked soooo tight to the wall????)
Chip
07 February 2005, 12:35 PM
#55
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many things are rare King RA, but it does not mean they don't exist. When you do hit one some time , you will understand exactly what Diesel and I meant!
Yes Robertio, I am sure that we have many ideas in common over driving really fast. I would enjoy the trip round the Ring and Spa with you-as long as I could have a go as well
We just have to agree to differ about the question of high three figure speeds on public roads.
Les
Yes Robertio, I am sure that we have many ideas in common over driving really fast. I would enjoy the trip round the Ring and Spa with you-as long as I could have a go as well
We just have to agree to differ about the question of high three figure speeds on public roads.
Les
07 February 2005, 12:57 PM
#56
as long as noone else is hurt i say let him crash & die fine by me though i would prefer you not waste emergency services time when they could be attending an important call
07 February 2005, 03:28 PM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Robertio
Can you define what criteria should be placed on a bit of tarmac before you would declare it safe to travel along at 150mph?
In a car which takes 18 seconds to get from 70 to 150 you don't need a huge stretch of tarmac to safely get to this speed, and from memory 100 yards is enough to haul a suitable car back down to 70 again. Given this information, would you not agree that a one mile stretch of clear, well surfaced road with perfect visability is sufficient? Can think of a few of these in the UK. Does the same criteria apply to a car that can do 70-150 in 10 seconds, or something like a scoob taking 40 seconds?
In a car which takes 18 seconds to get from 70 to 150 you don't need a huge stretch of tarmac to safely get to this speed, and from memory 100 yards is enough to haul a suitable car back down to 70 again. Given this information, would you not agree that a one mile stretch of clear, well surfaced road with perfect visability is sufficient? Can think of a few of these in the UK. Does the same criteria apply to a car that can do 70-150 in 10 seconds, or something like a scoob taking 40 seconds?
On public roads it is unsuitable. Roads are transport links - not racetracks. I've learnt this the hard way.
07 February 2005, 03:32 PM
#58
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is simple. If the limit was, say, 150mph then loads of people would all be doing 120, 130 all at the same time, with some tootling along at 50. The law is designed to protect us as a vast majority of people are incapable of basing their actions on any sort of logic. Yes, on an empty road 150 is probably quite ok and safe to do - however, when the road is not empty it becomes lethal with too many varying speeds and differentiating vehicles with regards to performance.
Having a variable limit is also un-workable - how does one define "clear" or "congested"????
Simple - the limit is 70, police seem to tolerate upto 80/85 as they do (in some cases) posess common sense.
Having a limit of stupid speeds will be dangerous when the road is not clear - it's too simplistic to say "my car is fast, solid and can handle it".
Having a variable limit is also un-workable - how does one define "clear" or "congested"????
Simple - the limit is 70, police seem to tolerate upto 80/85 as they do (in some cases) posess common sense.
Having a limit of stupid speeds will be dangerous when the road is not clear - it's too simplistic to say "my car is fast, solid and can handle it".
Last edited by TheBigMan; 07 February 2005 at 03:35 PM.
07 February 2005, 03:45 PM
#60
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by InvisibleMan
doesnt matter how fast you go its still wont be fast enough for some, youll still get some **** doing 155 wanting to pass just to queue jump by one car....
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Sub-Subaru
General Technical
1
28 September 2015 12:47 PM
