# TT OWNERS don't agree with the new speed limit?



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

.
The TT is a sporty car. How will this affect your enjoyment of it?

Times: *"Road speed limit cut to 50mph"*
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/drivin ... 864847.ece

I've always said it's *inapropriate* speed that kills - speed in itself doesn't kill as we'd all be dead if that were the case!

Over the years cars have had massive improvements; better brakes, better handling, better tyres and levels of safety protection etc. and yet the speed limit is being reduced???  . The roads themselves have not suddenly become unsafe. The only thing you could argue is that they have become more congested - but that's where the word *inapropriate* comes in with regard to speed.

We all know that when roads are empty and the weather is good, it's safer to drive faster, and when roads are crowded, or the weather or lighting is bad, it isn't - which in itself makes a nonsense of a fixed speed limit, where it not for the impracticality of changing it dynamically (or would new technology here allow this?).

If people are behaving inappropriately then perhaps the government should invest money in education? Bring back public information films! How often do we see people on motorways hogging the middle and overtaking lanes or using their damn fog lights all the time? There's a serious point here - has the government investigated whether proper intelligent driving education campaigns would save more lives than a blanket reduction in speed limits? I doubt it, for herein, I suspect, lies the real reason: Revenue collection.

They've teamed up with a company to create a new generation of average speed camera equipment to catch people out. The coffers must be a little low following the banking crisis :wink:

Another question: 56mph was supposed to be an economic speed to travel. Is it going to cut carbon emmissions by forcing everyone to travel at under 50mph?

Perhaps we should start a Downing Street petition?

Comments anyone?


----------



## Dash (Oct 5, 2008)

FFS [smiley=bomb.gif]

Arsing politicians, always having to be seen to be doing something. And here I was hoping that they'd up the speed limit!

I can't see them investing heavily in average speed cameras in de-restricted areas of road. It just makes getting caught out by a lurking copper.

People need to be taught how to drive. The road to my village is 60. I do 50. Why? Because 50 is the safe speed for it. Some people do 40 along there. Why? Because that's what they feel safe doing. People won't go faster than they feel safe doing unless they are cocks. Which is where the education needs to be targeted, kids who think they're invincible, and there is no such thing as oncoming traffic.

At the end of the day accidents will happen. Roads are very dangerous. Knocking around in a ton of metal at high speeds, it's just a matter of time until somebody isn't paying attention, or somebody makes a mistake. The only way to make it safe is to ban transport.


----------



## EnfieldTT (Jun 7, 2008)

There's a road up near mine, it's National Speed Limit, but you'd have to be off your fucking rocker to do it: four blind bends and more hills and camber than the Rockies. Anyone doing 60 along there would be on a deathwish. At night, not a light to be seen, so it's main beams on until you meet oncoming. By law, you could belt around it doing 60 but I've never met anyone doing more than about 30ish. Explain THAT!!

For my money, there are far greater dangers on the road than speed right now: people with blinding headlights/people with one stupidly brighter than the other, people who drive up your arse, back off, then up again - they don't have a clue how to maintain a constant speed, people who undertake everyone and swerving all over the place, and then those who don't indicate/look in their mirrors - they just veer out whenever they so choose. In my opinion, it's these tossers who cause the accidents - every single one should be rounded up and shot.


----------



## rustyintegrale (Oct 1, 2006)

If they're genuinely worried about deaths on the roads then they should do something about the thousands of potholes that litter our roads. Even our main roads and motorways are affected and these are nothing short of deathtraps themselves.

If drivers aren't caught out by the damage caused by a direct impact with a pothole then they sure as hell are affected as drivers swerve across the road to avoid them.

Why are motorists persisitently penalised and taxed to the hilt whilst seeing little or no benefit in terms of quality and suitability of roads?

Cheers

rich 

Apologies to KMP for making yet another 'complaint'... :lol:


----------



## rustyintegrale (Oct 1, 2006)

...and I break the limits on a daily basis anyway, so another 10mph will make sod all difference.

The government can go f**k themselves - they've already f**ked us up every orifice... :?

cheers

Rich


----------



## EnfieldTT (Jun 7, 2008)

rustyintegrale said:


> If they're genuinely worried about deaths on the roads then they should do something about the thousands of potholes that litter our roads. Even our main roads and motorways are affected and these are nothing short of deathtraps themselves.
> 
> If drivers aren't caught out by the damage caused by a direct impact with a pothole then they sure as hell are affected as drivers swerve across the road to avoid them.
> 
> ...


Ahh yes, potholes! You're so right - no one wants to ride their pride and joy over them, then HOPE it hasn't bent the suspension to pieces. Why are they not spending the ridiculous amounts of money they receive on maintaining the roads?? Our roads are dogshit, go to the States, Ireland and most of mainland Europe and their main roads are superb.

Another thing is proper drainage. A couple of weeks ago I saw a car about 6 in front of me aquaplain on a stretch of road which is notorious for collecting surface water. The car skidded across inside lanes and ended up in the ditch. Lovely. I dunno what speed he was doing, but he wasn't gunning it. That stretch of road has been like that for yeeeears, yet the HA don't seem bothered about installing proper drainage?? Stretch of road is on the A406 near Ilford-ish


----------



## y3putt (Mar 29, 2008)

Please can you re-post this in the Flame Room ..so we can really say what we think !!! :lol:

What will they think of next..??


----------



## rustyintegrale (Oct 1, 2006)

y3putt said:


> Please can you re-post this in the Flame Room ..so we can really say what we think !!! :lol:
> 
> What will they think of next..??


Just hit that * key mate... :lol:


----------



## isambard (Mar 6, 2009)

EnfieldTT said:


> There's a road up near mine, it's National Speed Limit, but you'd have to be off your fucking rocker to do it: four blind bends and more hills and camber than the Rockies. Anyone doing 60 along there would be on a deathwish. At night, not a light to be seen, so it's main beams on until you meet oncoming. By law, you could belt around it doing 60 but I've never met anyone doing more than about 30ish. Explain THAT!!
> 
> For my money, there are far greater dangers on the road than speed right now: people with blinding headlights/people with one stupidly brighter than the other, people who drive up your arse, back off, then up again - they don't have a clue how to maintain a constant speed, people who undertake everyone and swerving all over the place, and then those who don't indicate/look in their mirrors - they just veer out whenever they so choose. In my opinion, it's these tossers who cause the accidents - every single one should be rounded up and shot.


As churchill would say.. 'absolutely.........CORRECT'. You've hit the nail right on the head mate. I've been driving for nearly 20 years now, and was getting the feeling that perhaps it was just me getting older and gaining a more miserable attitude towards other road users by noticing how BAD other drivers actually are at, er, DRIVING!! BUT you have confirmed my suspicions that it is in fact THEM and not ME. EVERYTHING you have said, the constant speed, no indication, and so much more REALLY is the issue. These idiots (I nearly said 'people' then-ha!) need to be monitored and brought to book by the police more. The police need to be doing what they're supposed to be doing and POLICE the roads. I wonder if they actually know what that means these days? Does their training just involve being taught how to point a radar gun and then write a ticket?

I can remember when I was caught doing 80 in a 30. 'GASP'!! BUT the 30 was a stupid limit as this was a long straight, clear road, no houses, no schools, not a dickie bird! Conversely as ridiculous as EnfieldTT's national speed limit scenario above. Anyway, blue lights in the rearview, pull over, why were you doing 80 in a 30? Cos I thought the road conditions were safe to drive at that speed (not bad for 19, eh?!! :lol: ). Copper walks round the car, spots the bald tyre, gives me £30 fine and 3 points. Its a fair cop guv! No speeding ticket. Why? because he was POLICING, using his common ***king sense!!! not collecting money!! He knew the road was safe to drive at that speed and could obviously see from my flawless display ( :lol: ) that I was in complete control of my chocolate brown (complete with vinyl sunroof) austin allegro!!

As said previously, and has been proven on countless occasions its not SPEED that kills it the way people drive.


----------



## skiwhiz (Feb 17, 2008)

saw this on the news this morning, yes to a petition, if some one can start it then post link


----------



## cbcosta (Nov 25, 2002)

"saw this on the news this morning, yes to a petition, if some one can start it then post link"

Like if "this" government listen to anything we say... :evil: over the last 8 years we have seen our rights and liberties reduced , slowly but steady...speed cameras , councils abusing powers, cctv, ID cards , DNA databases the list is endless. Do we have any say?


----------



## s_jon (Sep 6, 2006)

> cbcosta Do we have any say?


We do next year, and hopefully the current loads of to55ers in power will be history and the tories will have the balls to reverse some of this sh1t


----------



## CHADTT (Jun 20, 2007)

The technology for monitoring this is going to be difficult to implement.

Some roads do need slowing down, but some roads need speeding up also.

More overtaking points will need to be installed.

Overtaking lorries will be more difficult as the speed you can pass them is now reduced and therefore time exposed is vastly increased.

Overtaking by lorries will become a problem as they ride out there limiter to get from A to B most of the time anyway.

Boredom will creep in on many roads, people will assume that as they are travelling slower less attention will be required.
Thats when phones, texting, smoking, cd-changing and many other distractions come into play and the nasty head-on, or offroad accidents start to appear.

I could understand this reduction it went hand-in-hand with a sensible approach to increasing limits on the motorway / Fast A-roads. Some stretches can easily accomodate 90mph. There is enough technology already installed to vary the speed limit both up and down to suit the conditions. European roads have signage showing 110km/h for wet weather and 130km/h for dry. Thats a sensible approach.


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

I hate them. When is the next election?

[smiley=argue.gif]


----------



## Apaddler (Nov 19, 2008)

It's a f*cking joke. You know what's happened. Somewhere in Whitehall some data has been received and badly analysed, with the conclusion that more people are getting injured on the roads. So there's been a brainstorming session full of lefties and tofu-munching new labour hippies, with the usual brainstorming session rules that "no idea is a bad idea". Some young upstart on a fast-track scheme who probably lives in the City, buys Fairtrade products and doesn't drive has decided to "champion" - I hate that phrase - a new initiative. What is the world coming to?
In terms of practical action, there is bound to be a petition on the YouGov site before the week's out, and I would also urge everyone to write to their MP (or the local Conservative candidate, or both). THere was an article in the papers today about Jack Straw reversing a decision to give private companies access to our medical records, because of overwhelming objection to the plans, or something, and we all remember the reversal of the retrospective road tax changes last year - so it can happen.
But you're right, this government is properly rubbish.


----------



## Dash (Oct 5, 2008)

CHADTT said:


> There is enough technology already installed to vary the speed limit both up and down to suit the conditions. European roads have signage showing 110km/h for wet weather and 130km/h for dry. Thats a sensible approach.


I'd love to see variable speed limits. With the exception of out-side schools, we don't see it in this country. I would hazard a guess as it being too much trouble for the authorities.

"But it was a 30 zone ten minute ago officer".


----------



## slineTT (Feb 24, 2006)

Speed, and speed again and again and again....... 
The major reason for accidents...... blah blah blah....... :twisted: 
But if you see the stats number, speed is only 29% as a major factor but they will use 100% of tax payers money so that they can get more scamera revenue.


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

Wondermikie said:


> I hate them. When is the next election?
> 
> [smiley=argue.gif]


I agree, bunch of wankers :x

Sign up to this here http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/noNSLreduction/


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

Go by train its much less stressful :roll:


----------



## rustyintegrale (Oct 1, 2006)

wallsendmag said:


> Go by train its much less stressful :roll:


Getting from Tunbridge Wells to say Warrington by rail is way too stressful. At least you have your own space in the car, can stop when you want, and play music when you want... :wink:


----------



## Adam RRS (May 25, 2006)

rustyintegrale said:


> ...and I break the limits on a daily basis anyway, so another 10mph will make sod all difference.
> 
> The government can go f**k themselves - they've already f**ked us up every orifice... :?
> 
> ...


 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Brilliant!

My attitude entirely! Couldnt give a shit... they could say 20mph for all I care, makes f*ck all difference


----------



## CHADTT (Jun 20, 2007)

Signed up, keep it rolling guys (and galls)


----------



## jammyd (Oct 11, 2008)

rustyintegrale said:


> wallsendmag said:
> 
> 
> > Go by train its much less stressful :roll:
> ...


Off topic a little but why the hell would you want to go to warrington :lol: :lol:

I live there and I don't want to be there.

As for speed limits Driving along, I am sure there is not one person who would say they stick to every speed limit everywhere,

I think lowering speed limits on some roads (REF the latest NCAP road ratings) is ok, but the worst roads ( the ones which will be affected) already tend to be driven carefully by the safe and sensible drivers which we all are, are we not?!!!

I don't think a blanket lowering speed limits is the correct thing. the problem is that there is no answer, as driving habits are in grained into from an early age.

I drove the M6, Toll, M42 and M40 today to get to work and it was a consistent 70-75 mph all the way, nothing wrong with that at all I think.

Idiots cause crashes, lapses in concentration cause accidents, and people doing things which are dangerous ( dickhead in Toyota today undertaking/overtaking/undertaking, then so nearly putting it in the side of a lorry) are the real problem. Guess what the wanker was only 4 cars ahead of me after 20 miles!


----------



## Fab 4 TT (Sep 28, 2004)

Guy on BBC News 24 this morning......If I heard right, lost his daughter to a hit & run DRUG induced driver. I quote, "if he'd been doing 30mph my daughter would be still alive"? WTF?


----------



## Mark Davies (Apr 10, 2007)

I agree that the standards of driving on our roads are very poor. The requirements of the driving test, even improved as it has been in recent years, are not exacting and that's about as good at driving as most people get, their standrds just steadily declining afterwards. It is simple human nature to make an effort for a test and then to get lazy afterwards.

And sadly, that is in itself an argument for a blanket speed limit. Yes, we can all agree that it is only speed in the wrong places and at the wrong times that is a problem. However, I think we can all agree that far too many motorists can't be trusted to make the right decisions . Yes, we could make the test standard much higher and provide far more education, but aren't those same people just going to ignore all that once they've got their licence just like they do now?

Traffic police budgets have been cut drastically. There are hardly any out there any more so we simply cannot rely on them to be there to deal with inappropriate driving as it happens, and with budgets getting cut even further I'm afraid the concept of having police officers using their discretion and dealing with issues within a context of safety are long gone and gone for good.

So, if we can't trust a significant number of people to use common sense when it comes to safety and we haven't got enough officers to police it properly then do we have any other option but to impose a blanket speed restriction at what is generally the lowest acceptable speed?

Of course that just tars us all with the same brush as the irresponsible drivers. Yes, it is a highly inefficient and inequitable solution. The argument about it preventing drivers running their car at its optimum fuel efficiency is a compelling one. So surely there has to be another solution?

Well hopefully there is.

The good news is that from my personal experience about 90% of these announcements made by this Government never come to anything. They're just sound-bites designed to appease the media and maintain opinion poll ratings and I suspect as often as not they never have any intention of doing anything more than that. And in many cases - and this will certainly be one of them - they find what they announce is so completely out of touch with public opinion that they just quietly ditch it and pretend they never mentioned it.


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

It is interesting reading the comments from a Police Officer's point of view. However the big problem is government policy, the nanny state and a one size fits all attitude.

Watching TV programs like "Traffic Cops", it is very obvious that the traffic cop plays a major part in detecting crime. Not only are they out looking for us doing silly speeds, but they also have what can be called a sixth sense, pulling over vehicles involved in crimes drugs etc. In a large number of crimes a vehicle is used as transport and it is the observation of the traffic cop which can spot the criminals. What is concerning is more traffic cops now appear to work on hteir own, rather than pairs, which means the driver is now the chief observer as well.

Also when pulled over, a good traffic cop will educate drivers. Like all of us I have bad driving habits, which can be corrected when pointed out by a helpful officer.

If our stupid nanny state government were to introduce a reduced blanket limit then who will police it, speed cameras which catch the casual speeders but not the unsafe drivers, or traffic cops who should already be patrolling the roads and educating drivers?

Government policy will dictate.


----------



## rustyintegrale (Oct 1, 2006)

Mark Davies said:


> Traffic police budgets have been cut drastically.


So where do our tax pounds go?

NHS budgets reduced.
No money to repair the roads.
No money to improve public transport.

Someone, somewhere has got a big pocket full of our money... :?

Cheers

Rich


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

rustyintegrale said:


> Mark Davies said:
> 
> 
> > Traffic police budgets have been cut drastically.
> ...


Newcastle United FC (aka Northern Rock), HBOS, RBS, Natwest, Lloyds to name but a few of the beneficiaries of the ex-chancellors fuck ups.


----------



## Adam RRS (May 25, 2006)




----------



## rustyintegrale (Oct 1, 2006)

Adam RRS said:


>


 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

That just about sums it up nicely!


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

mighTy Tee said:


> rustyintegrale said:
> 
> 
> > Mark Davies said:
> ...


OK I'll bite  The Northern Rock money was paid up front in one lump sum by all accounts. Before they went tits up (Northern Rock that is.)


----------



## jammyd (Oct 11, 2008)

Fab 4 TT said:


> Guy on BBC News 24 this morning......If I heard right, lost his daughter to a hit & run DRUG induced driver. I quote, "if he'd been doing 30mph my daughter would be still alive"? WTF?


Yeah I saw that and nearly spat my coffee out! She was killed by a driver who was on drugs and drink. Yes he was speeding, but how the hell did he know he was, he was too high on drugs!

And, AND... when questioned was it the drugs which killed his daughter, he said, after a long pause, "YES, but speed kills others".

He used statistic, but made no quote of where the speed actually was a problem in it... random statistic... 98% of what he said was crap, I do feel sorry his daughter died, but surely he should be campaigning against drugs or drink not speeding...


----------



## Fab 4 TT (Sep 28, 2004)

I should have shown some remorse regards the loss of his daughter. I daren't even begin to contemplate losing my son.

Point still stands thou, why is the BBC broadcasting a discussion regards speeding, with a confused, bewildered and obviously un-objective speed campaigner?


----------



## Apaddler (Nov 19, 2008)

There was another one of these on the BBC breakfast a while ago, a mother starting up some campaign or other because her daughter was knocked off her bike and killed by a lorry turning left. What was the daughter doing at the time? trying to overtake the lorry on the left.
Pity about the girl getting killed for her error but really, some people need to stop looking for a scapegoat.
Probably happen to me now I've said that.

Here's an idea. What about removing speed limits in rural areas and putting sharp spikes on all the corners? Sort of a modern-day motoring Darwinian selection. :twisted:


----------



## jammyd (Oct 11, 2008)

Apaddler said:


> There was another one of these on the BBC breakfast a while ago, a mother starting up some campaign or other because her daughter was knocked off her bike and killed by a lorry turning left. What was the daughter doing at the time? trying to overtake the lorry on the left.


Next we will be having a law about turning left :roll:


----------



## Apaddler (Nov 19, 2008)

jammyd said:


> Apaddler said:
> 
> 
> > There was another one of these on the BBC breakfast a while ago, a mother starting up some campaign or other because her daughter was knocked off her bike and killed by a lorry turning left. What was the daughter doing at the time? trying to overtake the lorry on the left.
> ...


Well the latest is some Scottish quack wants to ban chocolate! Who are these bastards?!


----------



## Wallsendmag (Feb 12, 2004)

Apaddler said:


> jammyd said:
> 
> 
> > Apaddler said:
> ...


Wasn't he from East Kilbride ? bit strange around there.


----------



## A3DFU (May 7, 2002)

Mark Davies said:


> The good news is that from my personal experience about 90% of these announcements made by this Government never come to anything.


Well, Mark, I am afraid it has!!!!

Not only bears the A537, the Cat&Fiddle Road, a 50mph speed limit all the way now.
But the Whaley Bridge-Macclesfield Road, A5047, and the Whaley Bridge-Buxton Road, A5004 = Long Hill, now have the same speed restriction 

All of those roads are perfectly safe at a higher speed. I use them regularly.
It is credit to a few reckless drivers no doubt, like the ralley clubs who use those roads on Friday nights, that we now have to crawl along those nice roads :?


----------

