News1 min ago
Speeding
A few weeks ago I was on the M26 at 1am riding home after a weekend in France - it was a bright, dry night and the motorway was almost deserted.
My bike was running beautifully and I was alert. At one point I reached almost double the speed limit.
The only person I may have been endangering was myself.
So, is there an argument to 'relax' our out of date 70 limit overnight?
I would hasten to add I wouldn't dream of doing this sort of speed unless the conditions were right.
My bike was running beautifully and I was alert. At one point I reached almost double the speed limit.
The only person I may have been endangering was myself.
So, is there an argument to 'relax' our out of date 70 limit overnight?
I would hasten to add I wouldn't dream of doing this sort of speed unless the conditions were right.
Answers
1 to 11 of 11
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by flip_flop. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
An old f**rt answer. There are many laws which you may not agree with but you are required to abide by for the general good of society as a whole. You are not allowed to pee in the street although it does nobody any harm. In the case of an accident you do not only affect yourself. What about your family, wife children if you have any, hospitals, emergncy services? (and other parents/children/loved ones if you do hit anyone else). As for speed limits, I have heard the excuse many times that 'I thought I was safe'. Some people are not safe doing 30. That is not the point. It is annoying that some people think the rules are not for them, whether it is speeding, car insurance or peeing in the street.
ps I think there is a case for having all heavy goods transported at night. It would solve a lot of probs during the day.
ps I think there is a case for having all heavy goods transported at night. It would solve a lot of probs during the day.
Flip flop - why do you think it is acceptable to expect our emergency services to scrape your body bits off the road because your tyre has blown, or any one of the possibilities that can happen either through your faul, someone elses fault or pure chance?
And spend many thousands of pounds putting you back together again, if you are lucky enough to survive?
Overnight motorway traffic is often horrendous, with all the lorries trunking across country, many of whom are foreign drivers.
So no, I don't think the speed limits should be relaxed.
Having been on the wrong end of a now dead speeding motorcyclist (it was not a pretty sight) I am not impressed at all by your driving at these stupid speeds.
And spend many thousands of pounds putting you back together again, if you are lucky enough to survive?
Overnight motorway traffic is often horrendous, with all the lorries trunking across country, many of whom are foreign drivers.
So no, I don't think the speed limits should be relaxed.
Having been on the wrong end of a now dead speeding motorcyclist (it was not a pretty sight) I am not impressed at all by your driving at these stupid speeds.
I'm sorry, but i have to disagree with the other comments.
A blow-out on a motorcycle is going to be messy, unfortunatley, regardless of whether the rider's travelling at 70mph or double that. The real point here is that these speed limits were set over 30 years ago, at a time when the majority of vehicles were fitted with drum brakes and poor quality tyres. Modern vehicles, ESPECIALLY MOTORCYCLES, can safely come to a standstill within half the Highway Code's suggested braking distances. The machines themselves are ultra-reliable, the compounds used in modern tyres are superior to those used in Grand Prix cars of the time the speed limits were set, and modern disc brakes and pads can bring a machine to a halt with incredible efficiency, even in adverse weather conditions.
Understand, I by no means condone reckless driving. In fact, as a motorcyclist myself I'm constantly irritated by other riders giving us all a bad name. I ride for enjoyment, not as my primary mode of transport, and I admit to exceeding the speed limits on a regular basis, but I only ever do so in appropriate places. As with the majority of other bikers, I would never exceed the speed limit within a built-up area, near a school, where the traffic is heavy, or when the general road conditions are poor. This is why i truly believe that the time, place, and conditions in which a motorist is caught speeding should be taken into account when judgement is passed.
Surely nobody out there can honestly tell me that a motorist, in control of a vehicle that is purpose-built for performance and properly maintained, travelling at 100mph on an empty stretch of motorway, in fine weather conditions, at an off-peak time, is comparable to somebody driving at 50-60mph in a built-up area with traffic and pedestrians at close quarter?
One is speeding, i grant you....but the other is speeding, driving recklessly, and without due care and attention in a populated area. Surely the punishment
A blow-out on a motorcycle is going to be messy, unfortunatley, regardless of whether the rider's travelling at 70mph or double that. The real point here is that these speed limits were set over 30 years ago, at a time when the majority of vehicles were fitted with drum brakes and poor quality tyres. Modern vehicles, ESPECIALLY MOTORCYCLES, can safely come to a standstill within half the Highway Code's suggested braking distances. The machines themselves are ultra-reliable, the compounds used in modern tyres are superior to those used in Grand Prix cars of the time the speed limits were set, and modern disc brakes and pads can bring a machine to a halt with incredible efficiency, even in adverse weather conditions.
Understand, I by no means condone reckless driving. In fact, as a motorcyclist myself I'm constantly irritated by other riders giving us all a bad name. I ride for enjoyment, not as my primary mode of transport, and I admit to exceeding the speed limits on a regular basis, but I only ever do so in appropriate places. As with the majority of other bikers, I would never exceed the speed limit within a built-up area, near a school, where the traffic is heavy, or when the general road conditions are poor. This is why i truly believe that the time, place, and conditions in which a motorist is caught speeding should be taken into account when judgement is passed.
Surely nobody out there can honestly tell me that a motorist, in control of a vehicle that is purpose-built for performance and properly maintained, travelling at 100mph on an empty stretch of motorway, in fine weather conditions, at an off-peak time, is comparable to somebody driving at 50-60mph in a built-up area with traffic and pedestrians at close quarter?
One is speeding, i grant you....but the other is speeding, driving recklessly, and without due care and attention in a populated area. Surely the punishment
A line has to be drawn somewhere on speed limits and other "road rules"
I appreciate vehicles today are far safer than they ever have been, but what about the drivers?
Many drivers can spot and assess and deal with hazards far earlier than others. Consequently they are probably far safer driving/riding at 100mph that the latter who are less capable of dealing with a situation at 20-15mph. And we have all come across the latter. (Possibly with their trolley in Tesco.)
When the one capable of driving/riding at 100mph meets with others, thats where the accidents occurr.
Who is to blame? The slow one or the fast one?
Do we need to have driving tests to assess not just the basic competence to pass the test but to display the ability to pass at a higher standard than perhaps the person who passed before you?
Possibly a grading system from A (excellent) to
D (only just made the basic requirements)
Ideal!!
What happens when A at 100mph meets D at 25mph, possibly turning right across A's path.
They are my feelings, not am answer.
Where do we go from here?
I appreciate vehicles today are far safer than they ever have been, but what about the drivers?
Many drivers can spot and assess and deal with hazards far earlier than others. Consequently they are probably far safer driving/riding at 100mph that the latter who are less capable of dealing with a situation at 20-15mph. And we have all come across the latter. (Possibly with their trolley in Tesco.)
When the one capable of driving/riding at 100mph meets with others, thats where the accidents occurr.
Who is to blame? The slow one or the fast one?
Do we need to have driving tests to assess not just the basic competence to pass the test but to display the ability to pass at a higher standard than perhaps the person who passed before you?
Possibly a grading system from A (excellent) to
D (only just made the basic requirements)
Ideal!!
What happens when A at 100mph meets D at 25mph, possibly turning right across A's path.
They are my feelings, not am answer.
Where do we go from here?
-- answer removed --
I'm sure most most motor cyclists are very skilful but the place to display that skill is on the race track, not a publiic road. The fact that modern tyres and brakes are better and theoretically less dangerous is no reason for scapping speed limits. I also stand by my reply that you cannot pick and choose which laws you want to obey. If you not only took into account the speed but also weather conditions, oil on the rod. competency of the driver and whatever else a good lawyer could argue the system would be chaotic. Enough reckless drivers (some resulting in death) are getting away with a slap on the wirst as it is.
-- answer removed --
1 to 11 of 11
Latest Posts
ChatterBank5 mins ago
News5 mins ago
ChatterBank10 mins ago
Lord Botham Falls Into An Australian...
News15 mins ago
Staying Safe In Manchester.....
ChatterBank15 mins ago
