80 Mph Limit on the motorways

Rommi

Just a quick word of advice....dont try 40 in a 30 zone... you will get a ticket. The police can stop you for anything over 30 but will not prosecute unless you are doing more than 10% + 1mph over the limit, that is how they take speedo error into account... the limit for a 30 is 34!

As for the limit sin general in this country... it needs a total review... it was all set back in the dark ages!

Sorry, but don't even expect to get away with 34mph. Although the speedo isn;t tested in the MoT, the 10% error is urban myth. If his Chief Constable is with him, they can nick you at anything over 30mph.

****e ain't it - no easy way to test your speedo, but no allowance from the law.


I think the thing they should really concentrate on is lane discipline. Get the muppets out of the middle lane and we'd have nearly 30% more road space to use instead of cramming into the outside lane at anything from 60mph upwards. Simple argument here - if it costs (wild guess) £1m per mile of m/way, then a **** in the middle lane has wasted £333,333 of road by not moving over - FINE THE BAST@RD £1/3m - that'll learn 'em !!!!!!! (Well, maybe £500 would do for now!!!!)

Sorry but I rarely do 80 on the motorway...
Its only a ploy for the Tories to get back into power... you know what its like they'll use it in their campaigns and after gaining power through tickling testosterone, will say - cant do it because of blah blah blah....

The 70 limit was brought in, in the 60's mainly due to the likes of Jaguar "road testing" and delivering their new cars on public highways. The final straw was the introduction of the Shelby Cobra which could do ridiculous speeds considering it's lack of handling and braking. Too many people were dying due to manufacturers raising the top speed of their cars without improving braking, chassis or suspension. The government were forced to do something, hence a 70mph limit. In this way the public were penalised instead of educated or trained, when, in actual fact it should have been the car manufacturers who should not have been allowed their vehicles on the roads without sufficient testing to a higher standartd.

The speed limits are outdated theses days and an overhaul of the entire systemis long overdue due to advancements in motoring technology.

[Luckypants]

The speed limits in this country are politcal footballs. If road planners had thier way, the speed limit on any road would 90% of it's design speed. Numerous studies have shown that when left to travel un-restricted, the traffic speeds average out at 85% of the design speed of the road.

This is why everyone goes at around 80-85 on motorways, they are designed for 100mph. A-roads are designed for 70 (trunk) and 60 (non-trunk?) and so on. It would be easy to desing the roads in town / around schools etc down to a safe speed (it's called traffic calming )

But most speed limits are are set artificially by local councillors / county councils 'cos the authority for setting them was taken from the police a number of years ago.

It's all bolloxed and if the tories advocate setting them for the road rather than some fat councillor's whim, I'm for that

100 mph would be more like it...

I remeber Labour promising to relax pub licensing laws too. I wouldn't bank an extra 10mph from the Tories.

[Red ones]

The art of digging out old threads takes time to perfect, however, is worth it in the long run!

Looks unlikely that motorways will be on the Governments review list this year and that only A and B roads will be considered.
What gets me is what this fart said though...

Sean Spiers, chief executive of the Campaign to Protect Rural England, said there is a strong demand for the review.

"Fifty seven per cent of fatalities on the road last year were in rural areas, so there is a crying need for this and we know that lots of villages are lobbying their local authorities to introduce thirty mile speed limits."

I wonder what percentage of roads are in rural areas, and what percentage of miles travelled are on those roads?

Raising the speed limit to 80 is a bad idea because we all do 90 anyway and it's pretty much tolerated. If they raise the limit to 80 and enforce it better we'll all be going slower. I do have 3 pts collected from a mobile camera on the M6 but in general there isn't much enforcement on motorways and you can cruise along at 85 without too many worries. Besides I don't think any Govt will raise speed limits whilst petrol is so expensive as the environmentalists will be in uproar.

[northwind]

There is the emissions issue... There's been a lot of claims bandied about that cars (on average) are more efficient at 60mph and that limits should actually be dropped. But frankly, sod that If we're going to limit vehicles based on emissions, then it'd make more sense to limit inefficient cars to 60 and fit a tacho, and let efficient vehicles off the leash.

While cars have got better- chassis, brakes, tyres- and that decreases stopping distances and increases safe speeds, I'm not at all convinced that driving standards haven't fallen to compensate... But on the other hand, most of the drivers that are a real hazard aren't massively more dangerous at 80 than 70, and those that are, are probably doing 80 anyway.

Then again, an artificially low limit never gets taken seriously, and eventually just gets ignored.

Loads of alternatives mooted... faster "overtaking lane" with strict rules as posted earlier- but does that make things too complicated? You know people would sit in it regardless of enforcement. One slow lane and everything else faster? So trucks, caravans and 125 owners can sit happily in the 60 lane without having faster traffic crawl all over them.

Either way, I'll probably be exceeding it on long motorway legs anyway, so it's probably not that big a deal for me But, if they were to increase the limit to 80 and enforce it strictly, that'd pretty much suck.