Revised Highway Code (DRAFT)

[robert.saunders]

I'm conscious I've made reference to the revised Code a few times on recent posts - should anyone wish to read it, here is a link

Consultation has ended on this and this version is not the final copy, but it gives a flavour of what to expect.

Hope helps

Rob

 

[hawk20]

I'm conscious I've made reference to the revised Code a few times on recent posts - should anyone wish to read it, here is a link

Consultation has ended on this and this version is not the final copy, but it gives a flavour of what to expect.

Hope helps

Rob

Wish you would put this on general interest.

 

[glojo]

I'm conscious I've made reference to the revised Code a few times on recent posts - should anyone wish to read it, here is a link

Consultation has ended on this and this version is not the final copy, but it gives a flavour of what to expect.

Hope helps

Rob

My pet hate in the Highway Code is the archaic stopping distances that are carved in stone and non negotiable. A Morris 1000 with cable operated drum brakes will allegedly stop in exactly the same distance as a state of the art Mercedes-Benz SLR (with SBC ) I agree that certain parts of the overall stopping distance might be accurate, but I am talking specifically about the actual braking distance. This must surely be flexible and depends on far too many parameters?

Nice link
Thanks very much but where are the missing pages?

Regards
John

 

[league67]

Glojo, nail head.

After a year or so in E, driven friends escort over last weekend - anyone who even mentions anything about stopping distances being the same is mentally challenged (was that PC?). Driving 911 just confirmed that even more.

Noone is exempt from laws of physics but they are having far more variables then we were led to believe.

Voya

 

[BonzoDog]

My pet hate in the Highway Code is the archaic stopping distances that are carved in stone and non negotiable. A Morris 1000 with cable operated drum brakes will allegedly stop in exactly the same distance as a state of the art Mercedes-Benz SLR (with SBC ) I agree that certain parts of the overall stopping distance might be accurate, but I am talking specifically about the actual braking distance. This must surely be flexible and depends on far too many parameters?

Nice link
Thanks very much but where are the missing pages?

Regards
John

I always considered myself to be a practical, mechanicaly adept person but I always had trouble visualising the reality of 130 ft or 85 feet in terms of braking distance. I always thought that there shoudl be an easier way of expressing this more relevant to the driving situation.

 

[Sp!ke]

Time in seconds would be a better option... or average car lengths. (whatever that is)

It may be that you can stop much quicker than the official braking distances but can the person behind you?

 

[hawk20]

Time in seconds would be a better option... or average car lengths. (whatever that is)

It may be that you can stop much quicker than the official braking distances but can the person behind you?

Highway code suggests 2 seconds from car in front and gives average car lengths, too. 13 car lengths at 50 and nearly double that, 24 lengths, at 70mph.

Good question you ask. Not all cars have ABS etc. Pays to stop at a pace others can match especially in nose to tail motorway traffic. Worth noting that cars with tyres with over 3mm of tread can stop 60% quicker than cars with the legal minimum of 1.6mm. So in the wet it pays to leave big distances so someone less well shod behind you can stop without ramming you.

 

[pammy]

So in the wet it pays to leave big distances so someone less well shod behind you can stop without ramming you.

I'm struggling with this concept - how does your distance from the car in front stop someone ramming you from behind?

 

[hawk20]

I'm struggling with this concept - how does your distance from the car in front stop someone ramming you from behind?

Good question. Because the closer you drive the harder you have to brake if they stop suddenly. But if you leave a big gap, you can slow down at a reasonable pace, even if they stop suddenly.

Saw 5 in a nose to tail pile up two days ago on the M27. Happens all the time. Too close. No margin for error, or other people's slowness, poor brakes or worn tyres.

 

[Benzowner]

Good question. Because the closer you drive the harder you have to brake if they stop suddenly. But if you leave a big gap, you can slow down at a reasonable pace, even if they stop suddenly.

But you leave a gap on motorways and someone moves in oh, and ABS will not make you stop quicker, it helps you keep control of the vehicle

 

[Swiss Toni]

I'm struggling with this concept - how does your distance from the car in front stop someone ramming you from behind?

I figure that...

If you drive too close to the car in front, you have to brake either as heavily or heavier than them.

If you leave a safe gap, you can add the option of slowing at a much softer rate - and so giving the car behind you more time to react and in turn also giving them the option of slowing at a softer rate.



I had a Volvo 740 and a Toyota MR2 at one time, the stopping distance from 60mph on the MR2 was good (Motor Magazine used to include the data in their road tests) but the Volvo was incredible - far better than most cars on the road.
I guess the biggest factor is always going to be the monkey behind the wheel rather than the size of the discs, but this was something of an eye-opener for me.

That the distances quoted in the HWC seem archaic is not in doubt, but for what it is worth, they are far more accurate than is being suggested here...

If primed and ready, we can all stop in a distance far shorter than those quoted in the HWC, but in the real world, what actually happens is something different.

Reaction time is less about moving your foot to the the brake and pressing hard, more about pressing hard enough.

The TRRL and Collision Investigators repeatedly show that even with the best kit in the world, drivers usually underestimate their "peril" even in a PANIC situation - few drivers actually make full use of their brakes soon enough (and ABS allows you to stand on the anchors!).

Finally, £400 on a defensive driving course (where you learn how to brake ON THE ROAD, not on a Race Track!) is money well spent, more so than tinted windows and a beaded seat cover imho.

 

[fredfloggle]

My pet hate in the Highway Code is the archaic stopping distances that are carved in stone and non negotiable. A Morris 1000 with cable operated drum brakes will allegedly stop in exactly the same distance as a state of the art Mercedes-Benz SLR (with SBC ) I agree that certain parts of the overall stopping distance might be accurate, but I am talking specifically about the actual braking distance. This must surely be flexible and depends on far too many parameters?

Nice link
Thanks very much but where are the missing pages?

Regards
John

If everyone drove as if the car they were driving could only stop like a Minor 1000 , we may end up with a bit more space between cars .

 

[fredfloggle]

But you leave a gap on motorways and someone moves in oh, and ABS will not make you stop quicker, it helps you keep control of the vehicle

And there was me thinking it would - the automatic version of cadence braking - maximum braking force being generated just before the wheel locked up - I though ABS tried to do just that , nearly lock up the wheel and release it .

 

[crockers]

I'm struggling with this concept - how does your distance from the car in front stop someone ramming you from behind?

I always work on the premise that if I dont have to bang on the brakes then the guy behind cant hit me ....so if he gets too close ...i just make sure the gap betweem me and the guy infront is increased so as not to be in danger.....:bannana:

 

[pammy]

I always work on the premise that if I dont have to bang on the brakes then the guy behind cant hit me ....so if he gets too close ...i just make sure the gap betweem me and the guy infront is increased so as not to be in danger.....:bannana:

I get your thinking - I still think there's a flaw as a couple of you have said that by you leaving a big gap in front of you, you won't/can't get hit from behind - that's just not true. It might reduce the risk but cannot guarantee to prevent it altogether

 

[Dryce]

And there was me thinking it would - the automatic version of cadence braking - maximum braking force being generated just before the wheel locked up - I though ABS tried to do just that , nearly lock up the wheel and release it .

I was always told that cadence braking increased stopping distance.

 

[Swiss Toni]

I was always told that cadence braking increased stopping distance.

Because it is a manual system, if done well, it reduces the distance compared to locked wheels (on MOST surfaces - not uncompressed snow or gravel on metalled road) increases it compared to electronic ABS.

Either way, most cars now have ABS that removes the need for that particular skill.

 

[glojo]

I was always told that cadence braking increased stopping distance.

Crikey!! Cadence braking is only necessary when the wheels have locked. It could well be that locked, skidding wheels on a perfectly dry, and CLEAN surface MIGHT stop quicker? In my experience though, when driving on a public road, cadence braking is superior to locked wheels and electronic gadgets operating the braking system will be even more efficient.

Regarding Swiss Toni's comments:
I have always been very specific in what I was talking about and my criticism is solely to do with the GROSS inaccuracy of the actual braking distance. The thinking distance is not an part of my complaint, it never was and I do not consider myself knowledgeable to comment.

Braking distances might have been reviewed but they were based on vehicles with all round drum brakes and a very archaic system of applying them. In my opinion a modern 40+tonne LGV will stop far quicker than the published Highway code distance? (Thinking distance will still probably be the same)

I just get annoyed when the actual BRAKING distances are still taken as the holy grail, but no one has dared to challenge them? Rant, rant

I totally 100% agree with Swiss Toni about leaving ample room from the car in front WHEN IT IS PRACTICAL to do so. Sharp braking because we are too close quite simply causes the wave effect I have discussed on a different thread. If we leave ample space we can assess the degree of braking required to match our speed with the vehicle in front.

Too much attention to the car behind will simply distract us and divert attention from where we should be looking?

John

 

[hawk20]

But you leave a gap on motorways and someone moves in oh, and ABS will not make you stop quicker, it helps you keep control of the vehicle

Numerous tests have shown ABS does make you stop quicker. Without it the wheels lock and that greatly increases the braking distance. You can mimic ABS by doing machine gun braking to prevent locking (on, off, on, off etc) but nobody can do it as fast or as well as ABS

 

[hawk20]

I get your thinking - I still think there's a flaw as a couple of you have said that by you leaving a big gap in front of you, you won't/can't get hit from behind - that's just not true. It might reduce the risk but cannot guarantee to prevent it altogether

Neither I nor Swiss Toni are saying that by leaving a large gap in front of you, you won't or can't get hit from behind? What we are both saying is the guy behind is less likely to ram you if you leave a sensible gap so that you can avoid having to stop abruptly. And less likely is good.

And the answer to Geoff's point about if you leave a sensible gap people will move into it is this (you won't like it):- If they do that you should drop back and maintain a safe distance between you and the vehicle in front of you. It is precisely because people drive too close to stop others 'filling the gap' that there are so many nose to tail accidents on motorways.