Speed Bumps

[mbenz76]

Speed bumps are an absolute disgrace. Sorry, but they are.

I do not speed - believe it or not.

I used to be a bit of a boy racer in my younger days, and almost getting caught by a mobile van when I had 9 points already kicked me into touch, so these comments are not from the point of view of someone who wants to do 4 in a 30 zone.

I follow the rules of the road, and drive a legal, unmodified car, purchased froma UK dealer. As was my last car.

The full width speed bumps are more often than not too high to traverse without slowing down substantially.

And in my last car, also a road legal UK family car, I couldn't go over them without slowing to about 5mph first, and even then if I had someone in the back they would often scrape the car.

This is ridiculous. Even without scraping, you would be foolish not to slow for them as you will hit them hard a screw your suspension up at the very least.

So, why on a road with a posted 30 limit are we being slowed down to MUCH less than it? If you want me to drive slower, then change the speed limit. If you fear people will break the limit then put time-over-distance cameras in - these will not only stop the speeding, but will stop the racing between bumps that goes on.

The cushion-type ones being discussed are better for traversing in the car (and it all but misses them if you get a wheel either side).

In the picture posted, the problem is not the bumps or the drivers, it's the parked cars next to the bumps. I would aim for the centre bump in that scenario to minimise potential damage to my car and to allow me to maintain the posted legal speed limit.

To stay on your own side of the road as it stands there is impossibe - with the parked car you MUST cross into the hatched area just to go around them, and that's even if you want to bounce over ther speed bump with two weels. The council need to stop people parking next to speed bumps at the very least, and for a few car lengths either side.

 

[Hi-Ho Silver]

Speed 'bumps' have the same effect as speed traps. They just irritate drivers.

Drivers either rush upto them, brake hard, lump over/ past them to the next one after accelerating towards it or just drive over them as if they weren't there.

Pretty damn pointless if you ask me as the only people who seem to be affected by them are local residents and lowered cars.

As for arguing a class war, re cars with lowered suspension and huge bore exhausts.... oh look, there's some grass growing and if i'm not mistaken, some drying paint too.....

 

[mbenz76]

Not that I care one jot for your chavvy lowered car type - but, if the car is legal and cannpass an MOT in that condition then how can it be allowed to deliberately *******ise roads and prevent a road tax payer being able to drive down it?

 

[corned]

cool... nips out to buy weliant wobbin...

That's not going to be very effective at straddling speed humps!!

 

[raymont]

We have a road approx 1.5 mile long with speed bumps 3 abreast every 20 yds or so. Last week my grumpy old git side came out. Got stuck behind a Land Rover honest a friggin Land Rover slowing down to 5 MPH to go over the bumps. So when the road was clear I overtook straddling the Rt Hand BUMP at 30 MPH (which my w202 does with no problem) and flipped the other driver the finger.Childish I know but made me feel better. Also when I looked in my mirror I saw at least three other cars doing the same. So these speed bumps are counter productive to road safety due to a Numpty in a Land Rover.

I regularly drive along a similar stretch of road. The bumps are such some cars really do have to slow right down to avoid damage. This means that I, and quite a few others, overtake where, in the absence of the bumps, we wouldn't.

I have nothing against these drivers as they have to slow right down to avoid damage to their cars.

It is doubly irritating when people in cars that can clearly take the bumps at 30mph ( and probabaly more ) crawl over them.

 

[Noodle-Pulp]

Is there some problem that prevents anyone from slowing to dead crawl over these speed cushions? If I hit you cos you're on my side of the road - you ain't gonna be best pleased?

 

[mbenz76]

If there is nothing coming or I can clear the bump before the oncomming car arrives then I will cross the line and go over the centre bump to avoid slowing.

Otherwise I will slow and crawl over it.

The point however should not be that but WHY do we have to crawl over them to prevent severe discomfort and damage to our cars? The road speed limit is not 2mph! You should be able to drive over them at any angle at the full limit of the road.

 

[Beetnik]

Unless your car has a wide enough track to completely straddle the humps then you will damage your suspension by straddling them. Suspensions are designed to absorb vertical variations to the road surface. If your tyres run on the edge of the hump then there is a lateral force on them which damages the suspension.

<---- U/-------\U ----> (UU are your wheels, /-------\ is the hump and ----> the force)

If you don't want to damage your suspension then you should cross the hump with one wheel going over the centre of the hump and one in the 'gutter'.

 

[mbenz76]

There are quite a few bumps here where they have been left poorly maintained, so you get erosion of the road surface just befor and just after. The result is you nosedive as you get to the bump and as you exit it. Perfect for trashing the front of your car.

My E350 is quite low on the front. It is as purchased from the dealer and as built by the factory. As such it is perfectly legal and approved for UK roads.

Unfortunately there are roads with some bumps on where I know that I will scrape my car. And I am not prepapred to do that so I avoid them if I can. As a result I am prevented from driving on roads which as a road tax payer I should be able to drive on.

Bumps are nothing short of legalised vandalism of a perfectly good road. If councils used the money they waste on pointless "calming" measure to resurface dodgy roads and put better crossings in etc. then we would all be better off.

If you want to stop people speeding then I maintain that time-over-distance cameras are the best way to do this (other than education of course which doens't seem to work!).

 

[MOCAŠ]

As a result I am prevented from driving on roads which as a road tax payer I should be able to drive on.

Er, you mean Council Tax payer. No such thing as road tax any more, remember:

For anyone who still thinks that car tax revenue is ring-fenced for road improvements, it isn't – since 1937 it has just gone to the government's general coffers, and the Road Fund itself was abolished in 1955.

 

[mbenz76]

It might not be ring-fenced anymore, but I still have to buy road tax (or road fund licence).

 

[mykulmerc]

Unless your car has a wide enough track to completely straddle the humps then you will damage your suspension by straddling them. Suspensions are designed to absorb vertical variations to the road surface. If your tyres run on the edge of the hump then there is a lateral force on them which damages the suspension.

<---- U/-------\U ----> (UU are your wheels, /-------\ is the hump and ----> the force)

If you don't want to damage your suspension then you should cross the hump with one wheel going over the centre of the hump and one in the 'gutter'.

Yes thats the theory I work on.

Also agree with others, than any traffic harming measures should allow cars travel over them at the speed limit without damage.

Unfortunately what we need is one serious accident directly attributable to a speed lump.....one council sued for many £million then no more speed lumps.

Unitl then, sorry chaps but I will slow as much as I need to to protect my car.....I know it anti social behaviour, but if thats the way the politicians/regulators/do-gooders want we behave that way (until the revolution of course!!)

 

[MOCAŠ]

It might not be ring-fenced anymore, but I still have to buy road tax (or road fund licence).

No, you don't. At the risk of sounding like broken record, the amount you pay for your tax disc (or Vehicle Excise Duty) is determined by your car's emissions, engine size or age, and does not cover the cost of using or maintaining local roads. There really is no such thing as "road fund licence" (or road tax) any more.

Road maintenance (apart from on national routes, which aren't known for their speed bumps) is paid for by local authorities out of their Council Tax revenue.

 

[RobertoMercini]

To give a slightly different example, but a good one of when speed-bumps are completely pointless here goes

Where I used to live, a few years ago, tragically a young boy was killed by the driver of a stolen car on one of the side roads. The community at that time was benefitting from a massive injection of government 'new deal' cash, a large amount of which was subsequently poured into speed-bumps, not only on the side road on which he was killed, but the 2 mile long main road that runs through the town. This is less than 3 miles from Manchester city centre and as such sees a lot of traffic.
These speed bumps were shared between the ones pictured on page 3 here, and full-width ones. The full width ones were replaced and re-done twice in the first six months, and after a couple of years the council decided the 3-abreast ones weren't enough and introduced the chicane type pavement poke-outs to go with them.

After the recent winter, lots, if not most of these bumps suffered badly from the issues that most roads did, with cracking etc - only a lot, lot worse.

I shudder to think how much all this cost, including labour, traffic build-up, materials, planning and everything else that comes into it WITHOUT the damage to the cars of the people who have no choice but to use it every day

Here's the clincher - did the council, when ploughing all this money into this hair-brained scheme, stop to think for one second, that this boy was killed by a STOLEN car, and that STOLEN cars don't tend to stop for Police, Pedestrians or for that matter - SPEED BUMPS

Absolute waste of time, effort and money which will continue. Still, at least the garages will be making a few quid out of the extra shockers, suspension systems, tyres and windscreens that will have been required over the years

 

[BTB 500]

As an aside, you can smooth out speed humps by dabbing the brakes momentarily just as you reach them. You want the nose of the car lifting (due to the brakes being released) just as the front wheels go up the slope.

Not suggesting you should take them any faster, but if you get the timing right (my parents' road has humps along the entire length, so I get plenty of practice ) it is noticeably more comfortable.

 

[219]

As an aside, you can smooth out speed humps by dabbing the brakes momentarily just as you reach them. You want the nose of the car lifting (due to the brakes being released) just as the front wheels go up the slope.

Not suggesting you should take them any faster, but if you get the timing right (my parents' road has humps along the entire length, so I get plenty of practice ) it is noticeably more comfortable.

Yes , I find that works quite well . While I can straddle speed cushions in the W126 and continue unaffected at 30 mph , with the full-width bumps I normally slow to around 20 mph for comfort , it is no great drama to go over them at 30 but does result in a bit of a jolt - softer sprung cars like W123 and earlier generations of Mercedes , most Citroens and probably a few others can probably ride over unaffected at 30 too . If a full-width speed bump curves down at the side of the road , it can make a big difference just keeping the nearside wheels on the flat : then you can take the majority of them at 30 mph with little effect .

 

[ianrandom]

They are so annoying. I'm with Noodle Pulp. And thanks for raising the cyclist point. Its terrifying sometimes, as can be traffic islands. I'm fairly regularly clipped. So scary. If i were an old lady or less confident i'd have been done for by now.

In my car, i always thought how discriminating it was. I used to have an old Daimler 420 limo, you could drive over them at ANY speed without discomfort. i drove one recently and it was the same. So if you have loads of money it was ok, i thought.

In balance though, in this area i happened to read the policy on them, and it turns out they are often requested by local residents. I actually saw the point living on a narrow road recently, the bumps had worn amost flat, very narrow road, wing mirrors off all the time anyway, then you get chavs doing 50mph down there because they can. I lived in a family house with toddlers. Very frightening having that just outside the door.

If they could only be more consistent though. As raised above there are often pits in the road where it joins, before or after the bump, resulting in a horrific crash. SO bad for the car and consequently the environment. And all that clutch and brake wear. Ridiculous really.

 

[mbenz76]

Most residents who request them regret the decision.

I used to live in an area blighted by them and the local council put out a paper to residents asking what they thought of them and suggesting alternatives or extra bumps etc.

The council published the results and an overwhelming majority of respondants said they wanted them removed as they didn't work and caused other problems.

The council's response? They put more bumps in. They basically did what they were trying to do at the start.

Don't ask people what they want and then do what suits you.

I'd also like to know the mentality of building out one side if the road opposite a bus stop. So when the bus stops so does traffic in both directions!

 

[Noodle-Pulp]

you get chavs doing 50mph down there because they can. I lived in a family house with toddlers. Very frightening having that just outside the door.

Honestly? This still happens down the road I provided a photo for, 50mph is quite common.

To make things even worse there's also a 2 lane into 1 lane after one of the traffic lights - which prompts every duo stuck at them into a drag race as soon as the green light is lit - often the person in the outside lane stays there (and is on the wrong side of the road for sometime after the lights because the moron on the inside lane won't let him back in).