Safe Speed Forums

I don't think a 75mph limit goes far enough- people can still break the law.
Why stop with vans?!!!!!! All motor vehicles should be limited to 69.99999 mph. I think it is a wonderful idea! Trucks never crash and they are limited, the motorway follows so freely and easily around the trucks when they over take each other. It will reduce congestion too.




Moderator message:

These posts have been split from this thread (Vehicle Leasing harassment), following:

LingsCars wrote:

Actually, a limit on van speed will do a lot of good.

_________________
Oct 11 Birmingham Half Marathon. I am running for the British Heart Foundation.
http://www.justgiving.com/Rob-Taylor

Hahaha, you lot and your weird opinions. You are so cute the way you trot out the same opinions that magically get rejected by thinking people in office, when they decide to create a safe environment on the roads. You may as well pretend you want every safety feature imaginable, and then, with luck - you will get the opposite (what you really want).

Politicians and local planners take one look at this organisation, and they simply do the opposite. Makes sense.

Slow down these vans and it will be a great contribution to road safety.

Ling

_________________
I am Ling!
Visit www.LINGsCARS.com
I am car sales whirlwind. I like speed cameras.
Rent new car from me, save £££s.

Hi Ling,do you have evidence or a reason for this statement or is it just something that you have dreamt up?

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

Yes, I did get a physics qualification in China.

3 tonnes of van (perhaps containing 1 tonne of loose or poorly secured cargo) is far safer travelling at (say) 70mph than (say) 80mph, because, should any avoidance swerving or sudden braking or (say) a blow out take place, the chances of a recovery at the lower speed is exponentially greater.

As there tends to be other road users around when vehicles lose control, it is helpful to them too that the speed is generally lower.

As we all know (from reputation based on truth) that white van man is alive and well, calming him down will do GOOD.

Just drive a bit slower, take it a bit easier... and suddenly things get a lot safer. It's all just common sense.

Don't tell me SafeSpeed have evidence that vans travelling FASTER are safer?

Ling

_________________
I am Ling!
Visit www.LINGsCARS.com
I am car sales whirlwind. I like speed cameras.
Rent new car from me, save £££s.

And I told you all this years ago, but an organisation that uses "SS" as it's logo will not win hearts and minds.

You just won't listen. "SS" means... what? Oh, yes, I hear jackboots approaching.

I know you have it in a road sign, but honestly - you use red and black which are all the colours of the Nazi and right wing symbols the world over.

You just won't listen to me, eh? You just don't see it, do you?

==

Talking about the logo, not for a minute suggesting anyone has these tendencies. But, it is as crazy as calling an organisation KKK.

_________________
I am Ling!
Visit www.LINGsCARS.com
I am car sales whirlwind. I like speed cameras.
Rent new car from me, save £££s.

when I see vans with the sticker on the back that says that the vehicle has been limited to 70 2 things spring to mind. Firstly, the speed limit for vans is 60 and secondly I wonder if the management has volunteered to have their company cars limited to 70 too.

Not on motorways. It's 70.

Also depends on the van, on ordinary roads.

_________________
I am Ling!
Visit www.LINGsCARS.com
I am car sales whirlwind. I like speed cameras.
Rent new car from me, save £££s.

I think it is a matter of time. It will come, with black boxes, and stuff.

It is for the greater good.

In the 60s and 70s you would probably have been arguing against seat belts too.

Also, ESP should be made compulsory on new vehicles.

_________________
I am Ling!
Visit www.LINGsCARS.com
I am car sales whirlwind. I like speed cameras.
Rent new car from me, save £££s.

I love the way people use physics, or any science discipline in their arguments to belittle others.

Well done you understand what momentum is. However road safety is a lot more complicated than simple velocity X mass. I am not going to even pretend I understand it all (I only have a degree in chemistry and teach science). However I suspect psychology is a more significant factor.

Why obsess with speed? Oh it is the only thing you can really control. You can control the minds of drivers (yet).

I hate the speed kills attitude because it does not focus on collision reduction. It reduces the severity of collision. If you limited every vehicle on the world you would still have collisions, and deaths.
It does not even attempt to deal with core issue; it attempts to reduce it, which depending on which statistics (another thing I don’t pretend to understand) you look at it has not had a significant impact.

Reducing speed limits does not change driver attitude, I think it makes it worse… Do people pay attention to a limit reduction?

The issue is not speed it is the driver. How many near miss/crash stories have you heard where the person starts “I was driving at (within) the speed limit……” so in some ways it removes a little responsibility on the part of drivers.

I think limits are a very useful thing to ensure that drivers are travelling at roughly the same speed. However they are not the be and end all of road safety

_________________
Oct 11 Birmingham Half Marathon. I am running for the British Heart Foundation.
http://www.justgiving.com/Rob-Taylor

Hello again Ling.



To turn the argument upside down: there is no evidence such speed limiters will benefit road safety. In fact there is a compelling argument that allows the reverse of this. So why propose to alter something without basis to support it?

When considered in isolation, it is true that higher speeds will result with more damage. In the real world, other factors must be considered, factors such as fatigue (something I had already pointed out to you). On roads where your desired 75mph limiter could have any effect (which just so happen to be the safest type of road), fatigue already claims a greater portion (24%: [table 1.1: DfT Road Safety Research Report No. 52] than exceeding the speed limit (for all roads) which itself dwarfs mechanical failures; so it makes one wonder if some folks have really thought this through.


A circular argument, be it an old one!
I had already questioned you about that within the post I linked; you never acknowledged it.
So yet again: what is 'a bit'? Where should the line be drawn? Is 20mph ‘a bit’?

It is already known that the great majority of motorway drivers want to see that limit raised, so I don't see your proposal as being overly popular...
So do any of the vehicles you lease have such 75mph limiters?

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

it is... from 2012 (or was it 2014 can't quite remember)

The way things are going ,crystal balls could be the next to be included in vehicle requirements - if some of the footballers in the midlands had half the feinting skills of their driving counterparts then the Football league tables ( at all levels) would be dominated by Midlands teams .

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

The sort of remark one would expect from a driver of limited experience.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

Our Sprinter is lighter than a Range Rover and has to go 10mph slower, has a lower cog too. And stiffer suspension. Probably more reliable too. And more economical

My car has none of that passive safety sh*te, which is probably why I reversed it into a concrete post on my drive last week

Oh dear Ling!

Still, I have to say, you never fail to disappoint in the amusement department!

First of all (not that I'd want to let mere "facts" get in the way of a good "opinion"), I hate to disappoint you, but this has nothing to do with safety. It's about emissions.

Don't believe me?

Well, I thought not, but here's the first couple of articles that come up if you Google for it:

http://www.automotiveworld.com/news/com ... d-limiters

and

http://www.businessgreen.com/business-g ... d-limiters

As anyone of even pretty moderate intellect ought to be able to work out, "limiting" a vehicle's speed to something in excess of the fastest speed limit already in force in the country isn't exactly going to achieve much is it?

I also feel that I ought to point out that the "thinking people in office" (I love that phrase!!! ), far from looking at this website and doing the opposite (flattering though that thought might be!), are merely "considering" it. I've no doubt that they will end up imposing it, but (a) it won't be on safety grounds and 9b) it won't be because we don't want them to.


Now about your other claims:

This physics qualification... would you be so kind as to explain to me WHY a reduction in speed brings about an "exponential" improvement in the chance of recovery? I don't believe it does anything of the sort, but I'd be keen to see your evidence!

You beat me to it!

Yes, all true, ESC will be rolled out to pretty much everything with wheels on, thanks to the introduction of the "General Safety Regulation". There is no single introduction date because it's all tied up with where it's a newly approved vehicle type or one that's already in production (they obviously get longer to comply). It also varies depending on what category of vehicle. My personal view is that it probably CAN make a positive contribution to safety, but as has been said, it's MUCH more complicated than just "physics" because (as we've seen so many times before), you can't separate the psychological effects of this from the pure mechanics. People are likely to adapt ther driving styles once they know they've got it.

Hmmmm......

Wasn't it the Toyota aygo/Peugeot 106/Citroen C1 cars equipped with ESC which had to have an ...err... safety recall?
Whilst the same cars without were ....now what's the word.... safe.

I think it's clear from reading the above stuff that one of the biggest problems facing this organisation is the disparity of views.

You (in general, plural) also ignore common sense facts. Like (for instance) the person with the Range Rover ignoring the fact that their Sprinter could probably be carrying 2 tonnes of unsecured load in the back which, when shifted by inertia can easily compromise the safety and stability of the van. This is unlikely to occur with cars. Ignore that their tyres are of a construction biased towards durability, not grip and performance. If you put those Sprinter tyres on a Range Rover, it would have far inferior controllability. Ignore the fact that therefore the brakes are less efficient. Ignore the fact that the van is more affected by wind and weather.

Also, if vans are measured against cars, their general stability and performance in extreme situations is much poorer, due to higher centres of gravity amongst other things mentioned.

Yet, we see vans being driven aggressively every day, by largely untrained drivers (untrained in how to cope with extreme situations), in a rush, under pressure of work. Vans are far more likely to be overloaded than cars. Probably more likely to be less well maintained, too, as the wear and tear on them is greater. In most cases lower speed limits on normal roads are ignored by van drivers and are not really enforced as it's difficult for the police to do that.

Really, the biggest thing is the grief and distress caused by death and injury. Yet that is put to one side so you can "prove" your holier-than-thou attitudes to your (plural) superior driving skills can overcome the basic fact that a van travelling at 50mph is easier to control in extremis than one travelling at 60mph. Of course! If *YOU* were driving with your fantastic skills, the van would be safe at 100mph, with a tonne of load 0.5m away from the back of the driver's head. No way *YOU* would lose control, eh?

I say, a general reduction in speed is a GOOD thing, does not affect anyone's life in real terms (except perhaps saves it) and there is no God-given right to travel at ANY speed.

You can tell what the general population thinks of your one-trick agenda by listening to see if road safety (and more specifically, criticism of the UK speed control measures) has been an issue in the General Election. It has not. Which means that normal people are generally satisfied with the direction it is taking - a steady but relentless clamping down on the "freedom" do do what you want and the move towards a much more controlled environment. A good thing when lightly trained people are in charge of 1.5-3.5 tonnes of inertia with wheels. Why don't you listen to the (silent) majority? Is that an oxymoron? Whatever...

Apart from anything else, a reduction in speed can give a far NICER journey as the stress level is clicked down a few notches. You can see this on stretches of Motorway where average speed cameras are in operation. People stop competing, drive slower and it becomes more relaxing and less stressful. True, lower speeds also mean less pollution (or CO2) and less fuel consumption, less road wear, and less wear on vehicles and tyres, as well as less ambulances.

Bring it on. SafeSpeed's voice is being ignored, as a voice of a loony one-trick issue fringe. Great.

In addition, you are a bunch of middle-class, male, anglo-saxon white, educated people (with a few caravan-dwelling ex-hippies thrown in) - a very narrow band of brothers whose lives are dominated by their rant against the state on this single issue. I wonder why little support from other parts of the community, women, students, immigrants etc?

Because they all see your cause as a tiny side-issue that (in general) they disagree with. There are far more important issues in life to funnel your energy into. About time people in "SS" (achtung!) smelt the coffee. You need to accept you have comprehensively lost your battle.

Ling

_________________
I am Ling!
Visit www.LINGsCARS.com
I am car sales whirlwind. I like speed cameras.
Rent new car from me, save £££s.

Hello Steve

Your point above is why SS people need to look in the mirror. If 99% of the population is told "can you slow down a bit", they understand exactly what "a bit" relates to.

But SS-ers don't. You want it defined, perhaps to decimal points?

"A bit" is universally understood by everyone else. It even works in Chinese, so it probably works in every other language too. "slow down a bit" is perfectly understandable. You have probably said it yourself, hundreds of times. It can relate to almost any activity, including driving. As can "take it easy".

So simple Which bit of "a bit" don't you get?

(I would say that this would probably make a very effective motorway sign: "ROADWORKS AHEAD - PLEASE SLOW DOWN A BIT" or "NARROW LANES - PLEASE TAKE IT EASY" - if it were up to me, this common language request would be in use along with other messages like "TIRED? A COFFEE WOULD BE NICE" - I think real-language messages on those big illuminated signs, as well as 3-part jokes over a couple of miles when nothing is happening... instead of instructions and orders would work very well)

Ling

_________________
I am Ling!
Visit www.LINGsCARS.com
I am car sales whirlwind. I like speed cameras.
Rent new car from me, save £££s.