How Fast Can We Go?

[IBIZA]

I guess its worth remembering that until a few years ago, fuel consumption figures in the UK were based on urban/56MPH/75MPH - although the latter was based on an illegal speed in the UK?!?!?!

 

[Ian B Walker]

Have you ever witnessed two limited trucks trying to pass each other on a motorway? It could be dangerous if all cars were so limited.

 

[hawk20]

Have you ever witnessed two limited trucks trying to pass each other on a motorway? It could be dangerous if all cars were so limited.

I agree that is a real problem. But so is having cars doing 90 or even 100 plus despite 70mpk speed limit. So either the govt will wheel out average speed cameras over the motorway and dual carriageway network and we will all be held to 70 that way, or they will go for limiters.

What is certain, is that if people go on speeding, the govt will go on wheeling out cameras or other measures. I don't like it any more than you do. Just observing what is happening.

 

[stats007]

You need to change the way you're thinking - the speed limit is 30 years out of date. It's perfectly safe to drive at 100mph on most motorways in modern cars.

 

[R2D2]

Speed limits need to move in two directions. 20mph in urban streets should be heavily enforced so that the saxo brigade are stopped from driving past our local school at 60mph. At the other end 70mph on the motorway seems very slow in our cars and I would like the limit raised a bit but being passed by the Scooby gang at 130mph is also not very safe.

My personal best 151mph in a 400bhp Maserati Coupe........................

















but I did at Millbrooke Testing ground not the M2.

 

[DieselE]

I agree that is a real problem. But so is having cars doing 90 or even 100 plus despite 70mpk speed limit.

On the M40 and the M5, when traffic is flowing freely the middle lane traffic is moving at around 80mph and the outside lane 85-90. You do see some cars doing around 100mph but overall they do not seem to be going excessively fast compared to everyone else.

I was down in your neck of the woods recently and the M3 traffic certainly seems to move a lot slower.

When the 70mph limit was set it was close to the maximum speed of most cars of the time. The motorways might need a speed limit of 125mph to stop the total nutters but we should not forget that they are the safest roads in the country. For both motorways and ordinary roads we need to get drivers to adapt their speed for the prevailing conditions rather than thinking because they are not exceeding the legal limit they must be driving safely.

 

[hawk20]

You need to change the way you're thinking - the speed limit is 30 years out of date. It's perfectly safe to drive at 100mph on most motorways in modern cars.

Sadly you are wrong on this one, as time will tell. My thinking is irrelevant. You need to accept that the green lobby is taking over all the arguments. Politics is now totally infected with the green bug. Almost all politicians now think they are on a mission to save the world. A higher speed limit is not going to happen for environmental reasons, not now and not ever, at least not in our lifetimes. What is going to happen, if people go on speeding -and they will- is that average speed cameras will cover huge sections of our motorways and dual carriageways. Cameras that can be bedded in cats-eyes are already in being. The M3 and M27 are now permanently being patrolled by unmarked police cars. More will come.

And given that surveys have shown that about a quarter of cars have at least one worn tyre (lately the police have been stopping the traffic a lot round here and doing tyre checks), and an amazing percentage of motorists admit to not checking their tyre pressures on a weekly basis, let alone daily, there is no case that can sensibly made that it is safe to let all and sundry drive at 100 mph or whatever. Remember that a car with tyres with 3mm of tread can stop in the wet, in 60% of the distance taken by a car with tyres at the legal minimum of 1.6mm.

Motorists are sadly not like pilots that go through a routine of checks every trip. If there is a charge for the air when they stop for petrol, they drive on; or if it is raining; or if there is a queue at the air machine. (in case you hadn't guessed these are all excuses given to our local police by motorists with grossly under-inflated tyres). You personally may be fine at 100mph plus, but nobody who has seen the surveys of motorists tyres, or seen surveys of when the average motorist last had a proper service, or seen how many thousands of cars have not been in for recalls to be done, could possibly argue that the average motorist, let alone the bottom quartile of motorists could safely be allowed out at 100 mph.

So on safety grounds alone, it is not going to happen. And that is before you look at the fuel consumption and CO2 emissions at 100 mph compared with at 70 mph.

 

[glojo]

I certainly agree with Hawk20 over the Green Lobby influencing decisions. Who can remember the rationing of fuel and the temporary speed limits?

I don't agree with it and find it ironic the huge gas guzzlers used by the very people that tell us how to live, breath and eat. 'Do as I say, not as I do' has never been more apt. Smoking ban being just the latest exemption in some areas of the Palace of Westminster.

John

 

[BonzoDog]

I certainly agree with Hawk20 over the Green Lobby influencing decisions. Who can remember the rationing of fuel and the temporary speed limits?


John

Me.
And cars with three gears, the first not having synchromesh. dodgy wipers, the introduction of heaters and not just bald tyres but tyres with the weave showing through - and starting handles.
Agree with hawk20. This is 2007 and things have moved on. Hedonismin some forms appears to be the order of teh day but not in motoring.
And as I have said previously, even Germany, which has one of the strongets green lobbies in Europe will not be able to resist a universal speed limit for too much longer. It is already happening by stealth anyway.
What is the point of driving fast anyway? It is an act of, I guess, enjoyment or maybe sometimes it is possibly out of frsutration, trying to make an appointment.
It certainly makes little difference to journey times but the hidden cost, is increased stress on the driver, possibly on his passengers and increased risk to them and other road users. There is also the cost to teh community in clearing up accidents and the effect or otherwise on all of the additional gunge chucked out.

 

[scumbag]

before getting hung up and debate about limiters and speed limits, the authourites check the average speed limit in areas that warrant it.

This is when they enforce the speed limit in those areas.

so you need to find out what the average speed limit on the whole of the motoway nextwork is. That would give you an idea of what the national speed limit would change to if indeed it needs to change.

The 155mph limit is an industry agreement and a lot of manufacturers who make cars are heppy to limit there mass produced cars capable of this speed to it. Bentley dont and neither do Aston, Ferrari or Porsche. Very few VW products will make this speed, and any AUDI ones are limited to it. So VAG are playing the game.

One way to get a lower industry agreement is to impose and fuel effieciency level on them, which they have all agreed voluntarily to do anyway, although it comes under the guise of the Carbon emissions agreement.

You will still be able to buy V8's but they will be less polluting than of old.

And just for Hawks benefit. AMG will derestrict your merc for you, and Brabus knock up an SL capable of 219MPH so the argument about how much Mercedes tried to be sensible doesnt fully wash.

BMW even electronically limit the Rolls Royce to 149mph so that Riff Raff may admire the car whilst its occupants sit in near silent luxury, which leads you to understand the car would suffer wind noise above this speed.

The Maybachs are restricted to 177mph.

Anyway, I dont think you are alowed to mention a cars top speed or its acceleration in the UK adverts anymore.

Anyone for the 161mph vauxhall vectra?

 

[glojo]

Anyone for the 161mph vauxhall vectra?

How do you know it can reach 161mph?

My own thoughts are the green lobby will resist any raising of speed limits even though cars are far, far safer than when the current speed limits were introduced. I see no logic to fitting a limiter that would govern the speed to comply with the maximum national speed limit.

John

 

[Rose Chap]

Lets face it, the green lobby won't be happy till we're all back to riding around on oxen and living in houses from mud.

A little off topic, but I was listening to the radio this morning and it was reported that Boeing have produced an airliner made mostly from aluminium and carbon fibre, making it very light and very fuel efficient. Its by all accounts pretty green.

The environmentalists take on this? Do they congratulate Boeing for its corporate and social responsibility? Do they praise the technological advancements it represents? No. They say "It will use less fuel which will lower the cost of air travel which will mean more people will fly more often."

Life as a green must be so depressing.

 

[stats007]

Sadly you are wrong on this one, as time will tell. My thinking is irrelevant.

You're right in your latter statement. We'll agree to disagree on the former.

 

[BonzoDog]

Lets face it, the green lobby won't be happy till we're all back to riding around on oxen and living in houses from mud.

A little off topic, but I was listening to the radio this morning and it was reported that Boeing have produced an airliner made mostly from aluminium and carbon fibre, making it very light and very fuel efficient. Its by all accounts pretty green.

The environmentalists take on this? Do they congratulate Boeing for its corporate and social responsibility? Do they praise the technological advancements it represents? No. They say "It will use less fuel which will lower the cost of air travel which will mean more people will fly more often."

Life as a green must be so depressing.

787 is a great plane and I think Boeing's gamble looks like it has paid off whereby Airbus has not been as far thinking.
The problem, if it is a problem, with flying today is that the airlines have finally become competitive and realised that passengers are their customers and need to be cultivated in traditional ways. Thus the number of people flying will increase as a result of that and increasing wealth.
Personally the more this happens, the more I want to keep away from the hoardes.
The greater problem though, is not climate change, in my belief, but population growth and increasing longevity which will lead to over population. That will mean that our relatively brief period of peace will be shattered by war which will fulfill its natural aim of drastically reducing the population. Ironically I think that attempts to prevent climate change will only cause the alternative to happen sooner and therefore I feel we should be looking at solving the greater problem which, historically we have never been able to do, as, like driving fast cars, mankind also seems to like fighting wars.
Peace, as we used to say in the sixties.

 

[kikkthecat]

All arguments aside this was in the Times more than 2 years ago.

Link

Strangely enough it was proposed by the EU energy minister based on green issues and nothing to do with safety.
Someone might have whispered in his ear to hang on until there has been more revenue raised from green taxes etc before pushing it but I doubt very much that it's gone away.

 

[scumbag]

How do you know it can reach 161mph?

John

I seem to remember a interweb link to some web site that had this info on it, but top gear had it on and its been round their track too.

The have limited the vxr8 saloon to 155mph when the coupe could top 180mph apparently.

 

[hawk20]

Politics is now totally infected with the green bug. Almost all politicians now think they are on a mission to save the world. .

And not just politics. Try this news item: -

FIA president, Max Mosley, is talking about a green revolution for F1 and has targeted 2011 as the date by which he wants his changes implemented. Under his proposal F1 teams will switch to eco-friendly 2.2-litre turbocharged V6 engines that would run on bio-fuel. However, the engines would develop roughly 770 horsepower, around 100 less than the present 2.4-litre V8 engines. Maximum revs would also be cut by approximately 9,000rpm, which would mean the cars would also create less noise pollution.

 

[BonzoDog]

And not just politics. Try this news item: -

FIA president, Max Mosley, is talking about a green revolution for F1 and has targeted 2011 as the date by which he wants his changes implemented. Under his proposal F1 teams will switch to eco-friendly 2.2-litre turbocharged V6 engines that would run on bio-fuel. However, the engines would develop roughly 770 horsepower, around 100 less than the present 2.4-litre V8 engines. Maximum revs would also be cut by approximately 9,000rpm, which would mean the cars would also create less noise pollution.

and a news article in the FT last week quoted the President of Nestlé as saying that food prices would rise as a reuslt of increasing demand form developing countries and the demands to transfer some agricultural production to bio-fuel production.

 

[stats007]

And not just politics. Try this news item: -

FIA president, Max Mosley, is talking about a green revolution for F1 and has targeted 2011 as the date by which he wants his changes implemented. Under his proposal F1 teams will switch to eco-friendly 2.2-litre turbocharged V6 engines that would run on bio-fuel. However, the engines would develop roughly 770 horsepower, around 100 less than the present 2.4-litre V8 engines. Maximum revs would also be cut by approximately 9,000rpm, which would mean the cars would also create less noise pollution.

What crap.

The huge logistical operation involved in F1 dwarfs the emissions the cars actually make.

 

[glojo]

I dread where this is going and perhaps there needs to be a breakaway formula. I wonder what how the noise of a Ducati Gp bike compares with an F1 car and will they also go the same way? Oops forgot, Gp motor bikes actually RACE against each other.

John