scanny77 wrote:
i noticed a lot of that the other day up north. signs for sharp bends and for not very sharp bends. you do feel like a bit of a tit when you cant see how sharp the bend is so you slow down to find out you neednt have bothered. still, better to slow down than to wind up in a field
Yep, and how many times do you need to be made to feel a bit of a tit before you start ignoring the sharp bend signs, including that one that actually meant it.
Then you end up in a field.
Obviously most folk here wouldn't fall for it, but amongst the masses, it's bound to happen.
I have a rule of thumb, that when a sharp bend sign states an advisory maximum speed limit then in an average car it's usually safe to double that number, visibility, weather etc. permitting. Obviously I don't just plough into the bend at the speed I've calculated (well maybe if I already know the bend in question and that it's safe to do so), but someone somewhere is going to do exactly that having reached the same conclusion I did, then one day they'll encounter the one bend in the country where the advisory speed is actually correct, then they'll end up in the field.
Basically what I'm trying to say is that duff information is more harmful than no information, as it devalues all information provided through that medium. This applies as much to bend warning signs as it does to matrix signs and to party political broadcasts.
On a slightly related note, I'd be interested to know how well the advisory speeds on those signs tie in with what you would do when driving a HGV (assuming a normal load, not something really fragile, or liquid)