https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47715415
You have to say that the sheer volume of traffic on Britain's roads these days is already a great limiter of speed as indeed, are speed cameras and smart/intelligent motorways. How might this affect car buying habits if it comes into force? Also, how will the police replace the lost revenue from fines? They're also speaking about retro-fitting equipment to existing vehicles.
One more article with more information - https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/...-EU-rules.html
Last edited by BSB; 27th March 2019 at 08:26.
Issue I have is how we will marry speed limited ( new) vehicles with older non limited. We have all felt the pressure in a 50 mph average speed section when the tailing vehicle wants to do more. This will happen but potentially concentrated on lanes 2&3.
Lastly does this mean older cars will go up in value like hard to get Rolex ?
There’ll not be an issue running speed limited and non speed limited vehicles on the same road, it already happens (hgvs for example). We could end up with the same situation of one car trying to overtake another at 0.5mph speed difference.Originally Posted by higham5
They’ve already mentioned retrofitting the technology to older vehicles and I think this will become mandatory pretty quickly.
The only question I have is where will the powers that be recoup the list revenue from speeding fines?
I could see that would potentially cause problems but, as stated above, retro-fitting is also being considered in order to level the playing field.
Indeed - I asked this in the OP - my concern directly would be if that means putting up taxes on everyone to recoup a revenue previously gathered from law-breakers.
I very much doubt it and not only from the feasibility aspect.
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
It makes me wonder what the point of buying a powerful car is now as well. Essentially we'll all need cars with a top speed of 70 and no more, well technically that's true now as well I suppose. Also what will the car manufacturers do? Will they still feel the need to produce fast powerful models? As mentioned as well the revenue loss from speeding fines would be sorely missed I suspect.
I wonder if a series of rolling Road blocks would be more effective? Could employ truck drivers driving 2 or 3 abreast every few miles or so.
Sent from my H8314 using Tapatalk
I wonder if they will say I have to retro fit something to my VW Camper so it can actually reach 70mph?
Cheers..
Jase
LOL.... Now that tickled me.
To be honest, it's amazed me they still continue to find a market for such models now what with the huge volume of traffic compared to 20-30 years ago and the ever-increasing use of speed cameras and smart motorway - not to mention the potholes.
You can still override the limiter by pushing down the pedal, so this won’t be an issue. And I doubt you can retrofit every old car with this technology, so it won’t be mandatory (apart from new builds).
As for car manufacturers - Volvo has already said that all their cars will be limited to a maximum speed of 112mph from 2020.
Last edited by Ares; 27th March 2019 at 09:26.
Do they have the technology needed to implement this ?
Last year I went for an Audi S3... so were talking 310bhp, less then 5 secs 0-60, top speed limited 155. This was from a lowly Polo. Although the top speed of 155 is irrelevant in the UK, the ability to just press the accelerator down to get out of trouble caused by idiots is great. So, for example, pensioner that can't decide what to do and tries to cut across - just put your foot down and zoom out his way. Lorry starts to swerve out then just put your foot down and get past him. I can honestly say having that extra performance makes daily driving a lot less stressful.... any trouble and you can quickly get out of the way. Oh, and I admit, it does make for very relaxed cruising at 80+mph on the A66 ;-) Assuming I'm allowed to by the 'offended generation' I'll certainly be going for another performance saloon/hatchback come trade in time.
Maybe, on a watch forum, it’s not so hard to understand. Otherwise we’d all be wearing Swatches.
I think Japanese domestic cars have been limited to 110 ( ish) MPH for decades now?
Cheers..
Jase
The limiters warn you if you exceed them, but it's the driver's choice whether to obey or override. So you'll still be able to punch it when required by the looks of things.
I have wondered for years why the police and government never fitted speed detectors into cars, a simple device can detect when you cross a speed limit and automatically send the police the information who they send you a fine. It would not be hard to implement.
Thank god they have never done this.
A simple black box recorder would be more useful I would have thought.
Cheers..
Jase
Crikey - sounds like you're plagued by such situations - I drive over 40,000 miles per year and can't remember the last time I had to use speed to get me out of a dangerous situation. Perhaps I've just been lucky in that regard. I've seen many more scenarios where other drivers have created danger with too much speed and I'm by no means a slow driver.
I think cars these days are so much more capable than their equivalents of 25-30 years ago that we've not really got much too much to complain about speed-wise anymore, even with the more humble run-of-the-mill fare. In so many ways though, I believe we're much worse off driving experience-wise. Cars are so over-engineered with driving aids that the driver's role has been reduced almost to operator status. I remember selling at a BMW AD in the late eighties when my colleague who was only a few years older than me at the time at 27 or so, surprised me by saying he'd rather have an SE version of a 5 series than a Sport. Nowadays, I can see entirely how comfort is becoming more relevant on today's roads.
I'm completely torn on this but as others have said I do feel the current trend for 'mega-hatches' and 'super saloons' is getting a bit crazy whereby a decent hot hatch today can nudge towards 170 and de-restricted super saloons topping 200. I like the idea of the Japanese agreed limit of 112mph/possibly linked to a track mode for those suitable moments as track days and Autobahns.
After getting two speeding fines last year within the space of a week; both slight lapses of concentration on dual carriageways with average speed cameras (one at 77 and the other at 79) I am now using the speed limiter function on my cars which is a great feature to help prevent similar slip ups on my part, but I do like the fact that even with the limiter set, you can still put your foot down and accelerate out of trouble or make an expedient pass if you give a stomp on the loud peddle.
I do think it could be a good thing overall but I do hate the erosion of personal responsibility and nanny state imposed upon us.
I remember back in my youth, it was always a great feeling to judiciously 'max out' my car or motorbike, but since the change of the millennium I cannot recall a single car I have maxed out and have generally never exceeded the 'Ton' through fear of an instant ban, despite owning some pretty fast cars; a shame really to have so much untapped potential, but legality, good sense, prevailing conditions and good sense all hinder my desire for fun.
This; the only situation I’ve ever come across where “gas it” is a solution to get you out of trouble is off-road motorcycling. I do enjoy having the ability to quickly overtake dithering pensioners when necessary though! I believe that all Honda Jazzes are restricted to 25mph our of the factory!
It’s an age thing but hits everybody at a different age. I can remember not understanding why people bought luxury cars rather than performance, now it’s the other way round. I also now appreciate luxury SUVs and even the X6!
You're all missing the point. In acceding to this piece of leprotic bureaucracy you're letting the do-gooders win. They never do anything really good. they just want the attention. It's like an Easter egg these days: looks nice from the outside but it's empty when you examine it.
You never let the do-gooders win!
I'm not saying you will have crashes all the time if you don't have that extra oomph.... In the last decade I've had two Pandas and a Polo and none of those was exactly what you call speedy and I've NEVER had an RTA despite driving probably 200K miles in that decade. However there are several times where there's been the odd panic braking and frantic indicating situation due to bad driving from other drivers. I had one the other day where the roundabout had two lanes on the exit but some idiot on the inside lane decided to drift across to my lane. If I was in the Polo it would been a brake thing (and hope the guy behind me is paying attention). In the S3 just put your foot down. With the extra oomph it's just a little extra articulation of the right foot and you're past the situation and into clear driving. It also makes it a lot safer pulling out onto busy roads or roundabouts, and I know what you're going to say... 'if the gaps not big enough then don't do it'. Yes but in the S3 those safe gaps are smaller - as long as you turn off that darn stop-start thing!
That is actually part of the same proposed legislation - what are called Electronic Data Recorders - along with alcohol interlocks.
https://etsc.eu/etsc-welcomes-provis...ety-standards/
So you can turn the speed limiter off, or override it, but the fact that you did so will be stored for subsequent use in the event of an accident or prosecution.
At the moment the legislation is only aimed at new cars, buses and trucks built post 2022, but they expect it to be applied to motorcycles too in the future.
Last edited by willie_gunn; 27th March 2019 at 12:36.
That system already exists, it is called the A14.
Then travel at a speed where if someone pulls out you can accelerate but still keep within the limit.
Slowly, slowly, slowly the influence of state snooping, Big Brother and do-gooders pervades our society...
An article in The Sunday Times states:
“Interpol, which co-ordinates police intelligence across 190 countries confirmed that
some of its members are using the eCall system for surveillance operations, though it
refused to say whether British police were using the technology in this way.”
34
The Sunday Times submitted a Freedom of Information request to ten police forces asking
whether they were using eCall to track the movements of drivers. Five forces refused to
disclose the information on national security grounds, two forces did not respond, one
stated it would be too time-consuming to provide the information and two forces confirmed
that they did not track drivers.
no doubt there will be an aftermarket in de-limiting the vehicle.
I bet doing that will either immobilise the vehicle or void your insurance.
You can be pretty sure that, whilst they say it’s possible to switch off the limiter, having an accident having done so will no void the drivers insurance.
Once the coding boys/re-mappers get their hands on them it will be easy enough to remove the software or alter it so that the black box believes it's always switched on.
I was never a fast driver and suspect I stick absolutely to the limits pretty much all the time. I'm not against speed enforcement - having just this morning been overtaken by someone while trying to stick to the 20mph limit in a residential area and nearly being taken out minutes later (20mph area again) by some t@sser in an ageing noisy Subaru wreck coming round a tight corner at excess speed half way into my side of the road.
BUT that doesn't change the facts - as in UK Government statistics - that show exceeding the speed limit is a factor (of possibly more than one) in only a small minority of accidents - even serious ones.
By far the biggest cause of accidents is the range of actions/inactions which result from carelessness and inattention. Most modern cars - including the EU manufactured BMWs and Mercedes - have large colourful "infotainment" screens that are an invitation to take your attention away from the road. How does that contribute to road safety?
If the EU or UK governments were interested in saving hundreds of thousands of lives each year, they could ban tobacco and alcohol and make it illegal to have a BMI over 25.
Bottom line is, this isn't about saving lives.
EDIT: There was a good interview on BBC news with a woman who is editor of (from memory) Autotrader. She gave a very coherent and credible account of the downside of speed limiters.
Last edited by David_D; 27th March 2019 at 16:56.
I have the same engine in a Golf R & agree, the ability to hoof it away from or past the hard of thinking is great. Regardless of what tech the manufacturers come up with in the name of road safety, someone will very quickly come up with a way of overcoming it.
I wonder what the powers will do to replace the lost income from Safety Cameras if everyone is forced to be safe?
Once it's mandatory for all increase the speed limit to something more befitting the 21st century.
120mph maybe?
I find the EU/UK Government's faith in this kind of tech rather alarming given the recent tragic crashes of two Boeing 737 Max aircraft, which reports suggest may result from software "issues".
I thought motorways were the safest of all roads? If this tech is to be deployed, surely better to limit cars to 30mph, 40 mph via gps?
- - - Updated - - -
I thought motorways were the safest of all roads? If this tech is to be deployed, surely better to limit cars to 30mph, 40 mph via gps?
That’s exactly what’s being proposed. GPS and road sign recognition cameras to stop you speeding through any speed limit!
While it’s hard to argue against the ‘safety first’ lobby, I’m in the ‘pay more attention’ camp. Continually we are dumbing everything down to the level of people with little to no awareness of their surroundings, instead of encouraging them to open their eyes and develop their skills. We are gradually creating a society of zombies. Perhaps it would be safest of all if everyone were drugged and strapped to their chairs, then road deaths would definitely be zero.
Without doubt this will suck some more of the joy from life, though there has been a feeling of inevitably about it for some time. Driving fast cars and riding fast bikes has been too much fun over the years to be allowed in a big brother world, even if you’re doing is with skill and consideration for others.
At the very least, in return for this I’d like to see the speed limit on motorways increased to 80mph. This legislation is coming from countries where they have those limits, so it would be particularly irritating to be forced to drive at speeds that were designed for 60s cars with no safety features and brakes that don’t work.
I think it's an excellent idea, and while we're at it here is even better one for the EU - why don't you chop the dicks off all the men at birth so they won't be able to rape someone when they grow up.
Fas est ab hoste doceri
We'll still need an override to get past dangerous twats dawdling at the new limit.Once it's mandatory for all increase the speed limit to something more befitting the 21st century.
120mph maybe?
I see two sides of this...
Current company car, Pug 308GT, will max out at 140mph. Totally ott for uk roads and the “sports” suspension means I’m as likely to finance an osteopath as a “safety partnership”.
I also ride a 150cc Vespa and have been frightened to death by lunatics desperate to overtake me just so that they can arrive at their destination two seconds quicker.
I can see insurance companies doing everything they can to void policies if the limiter has been overridden. The consequences of that if you wipe someone and leave them injured or worse are not insignificant.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Bit early in the evening, isn’t it?I think it's an excellent idea, and while we're at it here is even better one for the EU - why don't you chop the dicks off all the men at birth so they won't be able to rape someone when they grow up.
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
Seriously? So everywhere at 10+mph below the speed limit?
I started to type a more involved reply but saw this was in G&D so I'll throttle back (see the pun?). Let's just say I won't be doing that.
At last a reply I can agree with. Speed limits are largely set to cope with the most inept driver. So 90+% of road users are penalised because of the small percent that shouldn't be allowed on the road in the first place. I'm a big fan or repeat tests... maybe every 10 years and then dropping to every 5 years when you get to 60, and part of that test should be the ability to keep up safely with the traffic flow.
On a busy road, why not.
Another poster suggested raising the limit to 120mph along with these changes. Suppose you’d set cruise control to that (or a bit higher).
Or that other cash cow for local authorities the 'speed awareness course' which must rank up there with the most inaccurate title for a seminar! A room of 25 people paying £100 a head for a morning session. I reckon a nice 2+ grand profit each time; coming up to 5 grand for a day... gravy train!!
I heard something the other morning that something like 25% of people taking such a course don't re-offend so the commentator was saying that shows how great these courses are... cobblers! The reason why those 25% don't re-offend is not because of the course as such, it's because they know next time it's points. What they should do is say first offence £100 fine and no points and no time wasting course! That way they can save the money hiring the room at the local centre and still get 25% not re-offending ;-)
I wasn’t going to respond but, as I’m bored before a conference morning session starts...
1) “Speed kills” remember the advertising campaign - well, it’s backed up by pretty solid research:
https://www.rospa.com/rospaweb/docs/...iate-speed.pdf
TLDR: Higher speed causes more accidents, Higher speeds cause more serious injuries.
2) Whether or not you like it - speed limits are just that a LIMIT (not a target!). It is against the law to speed - punishable by points, fines and/or disqualification.
3) As someone who used to speed - but got caught and now never speeds I see a lot of inappropriate and downright illegal behaviour on the roads (anyone who thinks it is only 10% of people is living in dreamland - the report I linked to earlier indicates that the research shows that only just over half of drivers (52%) generally obey speed limits.
4) As a cyclist (as well as a motorist) I would personally welcome enforcement of speed limits on all roads - it would make my commute to work a heck of a lot less dangerous.
In summary - why would anyone be against something that makes it harder (or impossible if used correctly) to break the law and therefore remove the chance of legal penalties whilst simultaneously making the roads safer for everyone?
A selfish desire to break the law and endanger other road users is not a valid reason to oppose this.
As to the revenue issue - the government raises less than £1billion each year from road traffic related penalties and approximately half of that (maybe less) is from speeding - the loss to the economy caused by accidents and deaths is likely much higher than this. Also the cost of enforcing speed limits through policing is not cheap - let the police catch other criminals by preventing one type of crime throgh simple technological enforcement.
Rant over - conference about to start. I’ll put on my flameproof pants now but I’ll still not be speeding so I’ll look out for you all in my mirrors as you sit 2 inches from my rear bumper.
Cheers,
Mark C
Out of interest, what do you drive?
Used to have a Lexus GS 430 - got done for 104 on a motorway (ouch), prior to that 3 litre Jag. Have had quite a few relatively quick cars. Nothing exotic though.
Now I drive a hybrid Auris (which I’ve set to shout at me if I go over the speed limit), just about to swap for the new Corolla.
Cheers,
Mark C
People who speed are equally as criminal as those who buy watches tax free and don't declare them when they come back through customs.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote