Rigid enforcement of 70mph limit on motorways.

Posted by: Steve Toy on 14 November 2005

The government is proposing the above in another of their leaked secret reports. Having virtually lost the debate from the safety angle they are trying a different pretext - exhaust emissions. Apparently engines become much less efficient beyond the magical figure of 70 that just happens to coincide with the current speed limit. Officials agree that the move could be highly sensitive (and a poll I took part in confirmed that 75% of respondents were opposed to such authoritarian control.)

Given the governments much weaker majority and the bloody nose it received in Parliament on the Terrorism Bill, I very much doubt they will go through with it. The proposals are likely to create a stir in the media before being flatly denied, as we've seen a few times before in recent years.

I'm convinced the proposals would simply be in keeping with the totalitarian bent that exists solely to make people in power feel powerful under suitable pretexts that the public are expected to swallow i.e: safety, the environment or national security.

We've already discussed ad nauseum what the government would need to do if they really wanted to make the roads safer. Now we need to consider measures that would reduce emissions of greenhouse gases without necessarily imposing more restrictions on drivers.

If the government wants to reduce emissions I suggest the following:

1) Removal of all speed humps and chicanes. The process of stopping/starting, slowing down/speeding up, or even maintaining a constant speeed of 15 to 20 mph does not make for an engine running efficiently. The emergency services would be delighted at this and more lives could be saved as a result!

2) Reverse all those speed limit reductions that didn't actually reduce the accident rate. Engines are more efficient at 40mph plus than at 30mph. The 30 mph limit should be reserved exclusively for roads in densely built up areas and not on arterial suburban roads that used to (and were designed to) carry limits of 40, 50 mph or even national speed limit.

3) Stop removing parking spaces from our cities forcing drivers to go round in circles adding to traffic while they look for somewhere to stop.

4) Tax punitively the use and ownership of fanny cages.

5) Address the issue of emissions from factories and fossil-fuelled power stations.

6) Build more nuclear power stations and wind generators, promoting renewable energy sources in general.

Alternatively they can use every pretext available to limit our freedom as they usually do. It is only a question of the gullibility of the electorate.
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by Steve G
If the government want to crack down on speeding anywhere it should start with 30mph limits first.
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by Steve Toy
I think they've already done that. Certainly around here there aren't many unenforced 30mph limits. The issue here is not one of safety but one of emissions. Thus the 30mph limit doesn't really apply in this particular instance.
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by Steve G
Safety shouldn't be more important than emmissions.

Everywhere I drive I'd say most people break the 30mph speed limits, often substantially, with virtually no chance of being caught if they know the speed camera locations.
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by Steve Toy
I agree. However, as I'm sure you are aware, a car engine is more efficient and emits less at 40 plus mph in fifth gear than at 30mph in third or fourth gear.

Obviously in densely built-up areas, safety is paramount where such a conflict between safety and emissions may exist.

quote:
if they know the speed camera locations.


Even the mobile ones?
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by Sir Crispin Cupcake
Steve,

I wouldn't argue with any of your proposals but that doesn't mean that enforcing a 70mph limit isn't a good idea. I can vouch for the fact that travelling at 70mph uses a hell of lot less fuel than going at 90, for example. I once got 48mpg out of a 2 litre (petrol) Passat by sticking to 60. I'm not out to spoil anyone's fun, but oil isn't an infinite resource unfortunately and the day will come when it runs out. Do you want that day to come sooner or later?
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by Steve Toy
There's more oil down there than you think. The problem we have now is that investment in getting the stuff out of the ground hasn't kept pace with demand. We have so far 5% of total reserves in our grasp as currently available resources.
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by Steve G
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Toy:
Even the mobile ones?


I've only seen mobile cameras used in urban areas on a handful of occasions.
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by J.N.
Can someone tell me what a fanny cage is please?

John.
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by Matt F
quote:
Originally posted by J.N.:
Can someone tell me what a fanny cage is please?

John.


I was thinking the same thing - is it a modern name for a chastity belt or something?

Matt.
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by Steve Toy
SUVs
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by Matt F
Maybe your maximum speed on the motorway should therefore be based on the emissions, mpg and engine rpm.

As my motor has a C02 rating of 174g/kg, 42mpg combined and a sixth gear that gives about 36mph per 1000rpm then presumably this would give me the right to go very fast indeed.

In fact why not go the whole hog and fit rev limiters – I’d be happy with 4000rpm – that would give me 144mph but would keep the smaller petrol cars to around 80mph.

Matt.
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by Matt F
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Toy:
SUVs


Eh? I was thinking a 2 seater sports car or something a.k.a. fanny magnet.

Matt.
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by Steve Toy
Fanny cages and fanny magnets are two different things.
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by Not For Me
This might encourage folks to go on A roads and other trunk roads at higher speeds.

I enjoyed my trip on the A43 and A423 today!

Didn't enjoy the M1 and M40 so much - lots of MLCs and reps in the outside lane.

DS
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by Steve Toy
The M40 is one of my favourite motorways because it's one of the fastest and free-flowing.
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by MichaelC
The M6 Toll was pretty good too the other day.
Posted on: 14 November 2005 by Steve Toy
These pleasant experiences on the M6 Toll and M40 (from where I live the two are often combined) where you keep your distance, maximise space and go with the flow, arrive relaxed, and refreshed at the M25 in well under 2 hours from Birmingham, will be a distant memory if the Labour autocrats get their way. Instead it will be bumper-to-bumper at 67 mph, keeping your distance and being cut in by those who see your distance-space as being a slot reserved for them, giving up on safe distances in order not to keep braking, and arriving stressed out 2 and a half hours later.

I.e: it will be like driving is now on the M6 North of J4, the M1, and the M62. Naturally the drop-in-in the ocean/counterproductive measure to tackle emissions will also provide an excellent revenue-raising opportunity....
Posted on: 15 November 2005 by Nime
Steve,

I have decided you need to get a real life. You are under-stimulated in your present occupation. So you go out of your way to seek stimulation. Continuing to live by driving with your pre-occupation with road conditions is not conducive to a long and happy life. Do you have ulcers? You'll end up all bitter and twisted if you don't change your ways.
Choosing to struggle against an unchangeable system is like banging your head against a wall. It is pointless, damaging and deliberately obtuse! You simply cannot win. Acceptance of the impossibilty of change, in something that bothers you, is to remove the control it has over your life. Let it go. Just imagine if you didn't like clouds? Would it be any less logical to rail against clouds spoiling your day? Rather than your present obsession with road transport? Remember Betsy Trotwood and be very afraid. Winker
Posted on: 15 November 2005 by andy c
So, we could ask for the linit on the motorway to change to 80mph? Big Grin

Or, we could have police outriders to escort young steve wherever he pleases Cool
Posted on: 15 November 2005 by Nime
If he moved to Denmark he could legally drive at 130kph on certain stretches of the near-empty motorways. No speed cameras and you don't see a police patrol car more than once every three months. Many drivers add 20+kph for luck so he cold be travelling at 150kph almost witout risk most of the time. The police even advertise in the papers when they are going to have a manual radar speed control! Downside is he has to drive a late model Merc and learn three more vowels. Oh, and the beer is crap. But you can buy english bottled premium ales in the co-op at a couple of quid for 50cl. Hope this helps?
Posted on: 15 November 2005 by Rich Conroy
I can see this from both sides. I break the speed limit several times a day but it's on clear back roads. On the other hand the street I live on is a rat run and cars regulary do 50 in a 30 zone. I've lost a few wing mirrors at £220 a go and had my car crashed into. All while parked. I presume with sat nav and a limiter on the engine then you just couldn't do over the stated limit. If the sat nav says it's 30 in a zone then your car just won't do over that. This is one of those situations where people believe eveyone should obey the law rather than them. Also, can anyone recommend a good reasonably priced radar detector for the UK? I've just got 3 points for 38 in a 30 zone (bugger got me as I was about to enter a 40 zone and put my foot down a bit early).
Rich.
Posted on: 15 November 2005 by Stephen Bennett
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Toy:
I think they've already done that. Certainly around here there aren't many unenforced 30mph limits. The issue here is not one of safety but one of emissions. Thus the 30mph limit doesn't really apply in this particular instance.


No speed cameras on my residential cul-de-sac. Bastards come down the almost empty street by mistake at @ 50mph do a 'pissed off' 10 point turn at the end and come back up at 70. It's worse at night. Several cats killed but no action by police or council untill someone gets run over.

If the police really wanted to make some cash, a few hours at the top of my street would make a mint.

Regards

Stephen
Posted on: 15 November 2005 by BigH47
My Mk II Golf GTI does about 3-4 MPG better @ 80 than it does @ 70 MPH.
Go figue.

Howard
Posted on: 15 November 2005 by Steve Toy
quote:
So, we could ask for the linit on the motorway to change to 80mph?


As I stated in the opening post, I doubt very much the government will actually go through with the proposals. However, I think we can conclude from this that the 70 mph limit will definitely not be raised to 80.

quote:
Or, we could have police outriders to escort young steve wherever he pleases


I regularly follow coppers at the speed I want to be doing, no blue lights either! Big Grin
Posted on: 15 November 2005 by Steve Toy
"If he moved to Denmark he could legally drive at 130kph on certain stretches of the near-empty motorways. No speed cameras and you don't see a police patrol car more than once every three months. Many drivers add 20+kph for luck so he cold be travelling at 150kph almost witout risk most of the time."

I could live with that, although the same could be said of every EU nation except maybe Belgium.


"The police even advertise in the papers when they are going to have a manual radar speed control!"

I'd better learn Danish then and read the local papers.

"Downside is he has to drive a late model Merc and learn three more vowels." Why?

"Oh, and the beer is crap. But you can buy english bottled premium ales in the co-op at a couple of quid for 50cl. Hope this helps?"

I'd rather live in France, Germany or even Belgium then. In fact, I'd rather live in a country with a rigidly-enforced 50mph limit than one with shit/expensive beer. Big Grin

quote:
10 point turn


All point turns are odd-numbered.