Young Drivers are idiots.

[MadduckUK]

let's say you're traveling at 85. you don't have the full 2 second gap suggested by the highway code, but you've got places to be, damnit! person in front brakes. how fast are you going to be going, compared to them, when you hit? how much force on you and your passengers?

well if you put it like that cars should drive as close to each other as physically possible to give them the lowest closing speed.

[Salazaar]

let's say you're traveling at 85. you don't have the full 2 second gap suggested by the highway code, but you've got places to be, damnit! person in front brakes. how fast are you going to be going, compared to them, when you hit? how much force on you and your passengers?

now do the sums at 70

I'm not sure that argument holds up, the two second rule is to allow you thinking time to hit the brakes rather than mitigate a difference in speed. If you're that close behind someone who suddenly brakes you're not going to have time to react and you'll plough straight into the back of them. It doesn't really matter whether they're breaking from 70 or 85, they won't have slowed down very much in that short space of time. If there's a decent space between you, you'll be able to react and all things being equal (assuming you're both driving relatively modern cars) you'll be able to match their braking and avoid hitting them.

The actual speed you're both doing is fairly irrelevent (at those sorts of speeds), especially since the two second rule takes into account your speed anyway (by its nature of being a time based measurement rather than distance).

[Dorza]

These can range from speed humps/islands to removing road markings (this has been proven to slow traffic in town centres) and setting up zones where pedestrians are actually given right of way over cars.

In relation to the islands sticking RIGHT OUT INTO THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD, they are about the most dangerous things on our roads today in my opinion. There is an island on the main road into town where I live and the amount of people who take chances when they come up to that thing is UNREAL. If they weren't there the situation of people taking chances simply wouldn't exist. I've even seen a couple of coppers playing roulette with them over the years too.

If your behind a large car or van there is no way you can see if it is clear to move forward and follow them through. Whats worse is that there are a number in my area that are placed very near blind bends and near the brow of a hill (the people in my local council have the brain capacity of an early hominid). This makes it very hard to judge if you can drive on the opposite side of the road and pull back in. Danger aside they don't slow traffic as intended they stop it, causing huge tail backs during peak hours and adding to congestion which further fuels peoples want to take a risk when they come up to them. They simply are not safe.

[kalniel]

and setting up zones where pedestrians are actually given right of way over cars.

Pedestrians always have right of way on the actual road itself I thought.

[Salazaar]

In relation to the islands sticking RIGHT OUT INTO THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD, they are about the most dangerous things on our roads today in my opinion. There is an island on the main road into town where I live and the amount of people who take chances when they come up to that thing is UNREAL. If they weren't there the situation of people taking chances simply wouldn't exist. I've even seen a couple of coppers playing roulette with them over the years too.

If your behind a large car or van there is no way you can see if it is clear to move forward and follow them through. Whats worse is that there are a number in my area that are placed very near blind bends and near the brow of a hill (the people in my local council have the brain capacity of an early hominid). This makes it very hard to judge if you can drive on the opposite side of the road and pull back in. Danger aside they don't slow traffic as intended they stop it, causing huge tail backs during peak hours and adding to congestion which further fuels peoples want to take a risk when they come up to them. They simply are not safe.

That would depend on A) driver's using the correctly i.e. realising they don't have right of way and that they don't have an automatic right to go on through just because the geezer in front did. And B) local road planning departments actually siting them in sensible places!

Obviously there's are situations where these work and others where they don't.

[Salazaar]

Pedestrians always have right of way on the actual road itself I thought.

Not true (except on crossings, obvoiusly). You can get arrested for just walking out into traffic! On the other hand you can also get arrested for hitting pedestrians, so I'd still give them some leaway

[kalniel]

Not true. You can get arrested for just walking out into traffic! On the other hand you can also get arrested for hitting pedestrians, so I'd still give them some leaway

Hehe true - well I know you can't just walk out into traffic.

(let's face it, those with "places to be" 2ft off someone's bumper are just gonna feverishly whack on the anchors when they see the camera, then gun it after passing it aren't they)

That's why I love average speed cameras

[Dorza]

That would depend on A) driver's using the correctly i.e. realising they don't have right of way and that they don't have an automatic right to go on through just because the geezer in front did. And B) local road planning departments actually siting them in sensible places!

Obviously there's are situations where these work and others where they don't.

They're a a dangerous obstruction and nothing more. One way or another, people will always take a risk on these things. Correct placement and use aside, it can on occasions be very hard to judge the speed and distance of a vehicle that is approaching you head or very nearly head on so people will inevitably rightly or wrongly "go for it". This matter is amplified much more if the vehicles who don't have right of way, have the sun shining directly in their eyes, as is the case with the one near where I live. It becomes extremely difficult to see if there is a car coming towards you.

It also seems convenient that the government can bend the rules of the road. Normally it is highly illegal to drive on the wrong side of the road, yet these islands make you do that 'for safety'....modern roads are like an assault course.

[directhex]

I'm not sure that argument holds up, the two second rule is to allow you thinking time to hit the brakes rather than mitigate a difference in speed. If you're that close behind someone who suddenly brakes you're not going to have time to react and you'll plough straight into the back of them. It doesn't really matter whether they're breaking from 70 or 85, they won't have slowed down very much in that short space of time. If there's a decent space between you, you'll be able to react and all things being equal (assuming you're both driving relatively modern cars) you'll be able to match their braking and avoid hitting them.

The actual speed you're both doing is fairly irrelevent (at those sorts of speeds), especially since the two second rule takes into account your speed anyway (by its nature of being a time based measurement rather than distance).

you can't start your reaction time until they finish theirs. you can't slam on the brakes until you've seen them do it then gone through your reaction time.

at 70, you've gone 21m, before you can start slowing down. any guesses how far the gap between you and them is when they've slammed on the brakes, and you've spent 2/3 of a second at 70?

[dangel]

The actual speed you're both doing is fairly irrelevent (at those sorts of speeds), especially since the two second rule takes into account your speed anyway (by its nature of being a time based measurement rather than distance).

Indeed - and neither will the car in front stop in a radically faster time than you - if this wasn't the case then there would be far more accidents. All this obsessing about speed ignores the simple fact that regulating speed alone isn't helping. Bad driving is about so much more than that - statistically 85-95% of accidents are occuring because of factors other than velocity. And yet all we do is worry about speed because (as i've said) it's far easier to stick up a camera which generates revenue rather than put a plod on the road who uses it.
We all know which would make the difference, surely?


Briefly back on topic - if we had plod pulling over gary Mcchavvykins and scaring the bejesus out of him i'd say it's a bit more effective than simply sending him and invoice two weeks later when he's already dropped enough canabis to wash away the memory.


Incidentally, my leon with carbon metallic 4 pot brembos, braided lines, 4.1 and big tyres stops horrendously quickly but I don't drive any closer to cars in front than my audio 80 which has banana skins for brakes

[Howard]

Incidentally, my leon with carbon metallic 4 pot brembos, braided lines, 4.1 and big tyres stops horrendously quickly but I don't drive any closer to cars in front than my audio 80 which has banana skins for brakes

Hehe, sounds like the comparison between my current 1.4ton barge with it's 282mm front brakes/4 wheel disks & abs and nearly new tyres that stops pretty sharpish if I want it to vs my old Cinquecento, which I think had brakes but I can't be *too* sure! But you win having 4 pot brembos

[dangel]

Hehe, sounds like the comparison between my current 1.4ton barge with it's 282mm front brakes and nearly new tyres vs my old Cinquecento, which I think had brakes but I can't be *too* sure!

There's an element of danger to driving an older car - tbh the brakes aren't all that bad but by comparison to my other car they're terrible. I've only got 75bhp but it's immense fun and has to be one of the nicest chassis i've ever driven (it's lowered which might help).

The cinquecento is a bread bin of a car though - my wife wanted one and i flatly refused to let her have one. After my bruises faded I still don't regret the decision

Running pads on a car which require bedding in on your 'out lap' is.. interesting.

[Howard]

I liked my Cinq, it was fun to drive, didn't let me down and it certainly teaches you respect and skill for driving, and I reckon more people could do with something like that over relying on a car full of babysitting features and total lack of control/feedback. Fortunately I didn't have an accident in it, let alone one at speed, or I might have had slightly differing opinions of it..!

39bhp is more than enough, too, honest

[dangel]

I can see it being a hoot to drive - small car wheel in each corner etc.

I guess it's the old arguement - if everyone had big steel spike facing them from the steering wheel they'd all be much more careful when driving.

Bit messy tho in reality.

[Howard]

It'd work! It'd certainly slow everyone down

[dangel]

It'd work! It'd certainly slow everyone down

Which would save biilllions of lives!!!