90 MPH on a motorway - likely outcome?
GB
my sons.)
A.Lee
> 90 MPH on a motorway - likely outcome? (Not me, as it happens, but one of
> my sons.)
Presumably stopped, then given a Notice of Prosection, not a Fixed
Penalty?
6 points, £250 fine would be a reasonable guess.
Alan.
--
To reply by e-mail, change the ' + ' to 'plus'.
neverwas
> 6 points, £250 fine would be a reasonable guess.
>
Could well be but I think it depends on earnings.
I looked at this sort of thing recently for someone who is facing a
penalty. The guidelines for magistrates are freely available.
http://www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk/docs/magistrates_court_sentencing_guidelines_update.pdf
page 133 indicates the starting point for 71-90 in a 70 limit with a not
guilty plea is a Band A fine and 3 points; for 91-100 is a Band B fine
and 4-6 points OR 7-28 days disqualification. And also lists factors
which may mitigate (eg guilty plea) or aggravate (eg it was in driving
rain on the M25 by Heathrow with a double bed on the roofbars).
Fines then depend on income. The rules for those are also available but
there are also various ready reckoners - eg
http://www.monticello.org.uk/.
--
Robin
Dr Zoidberg
news:48a77183$0$2930$fa0f...@news.zen.co.uk...
> 90 MPH on a motorway - likely outcome?
Higher fuel consumption and shorter journey times.
> (Not me, as it happens, but one of my sons.)
>
If you mean what happens if you get caught , if it's in decent conditions
and there are no other aggravating factors then more often then not the
police will issue an FPN.
If they didn't it probably means he wa driving like a tit as well in which
case it will be a trip to court and probably 4 points and a couple of
hundred quid fine
--
Alex
"I laugh in the face of danger , then I hide until it goes away"
steve robinson
> 90 MPH on a motorway - likely outcome? (Not me, as it happens, but
> one of my sons.)
If he pleads guilty , then its likely to be between 3 and 6 points ,
and £60 to £300 much depends on the magistrate .
Generally he can plead by post if he has a bad driving record anyway
they may insist he attends court
If he has been driving less than two years then he will face an
automatic ban if he recieves 6 points , possibly may have to resit his
test in that case
Bystander
will probably be three JPs (at least two, unless you get a DJ). Speeding has clear
guidelines based on how fast you were going, and fines are based on that plus your
residual weekly income. Of all offences, speeding and drink driving are the most
mechanistically sentenced, because the court has a number to go on.
As my old Clerk used to say "the last thing you should do is rummage in the box until you
can take out the ball that has his name on it".
GB
"Dr Zoidberg" <AlexNOOO!!!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote in message
news:g88m7a$e96$1...@registered.motzarella.org...
> "GB" <NOTso...@microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:48a77183$0$2930$fa0f...@news.zen.co.uk...
>> 90 MPH on a motorway - likely outcome?
>
>>
> and there are no other aggravating factors then more often then not the
> police will issue an FPN.
> If they didn't it probably means he wa driving like a tit as well in which
> case it will be a trip to court and probably 4 points and a couple of
> hundred quid fine
>
Thanks for the help so far, folks. I can see that I should have been more
explicit about what has happened.
On 14 July, Police issued a Notice of Intended Prosecution stating that my
son was spotted on 6 July by a 'Camera Device' doing exactly 90 on the M4.
The printed form says that the allegation is supported by photographic/video
evidence.
That's as far as it has got, because my son flew out to Trinidad around the
beginning of July (I am not sure about the date), the NIP was sent to his
old address, and I have only just received it. He is away for some months,
so I have opened it for him, scanned it, and emailed it to him. He is
therefore already outside the 28 days for replying, but I assume that is not
a problem in the circumstances if I write to the Police now and explain the
position?
GB
news:_iQpk.43816$E41....@text.news.virginmedia.com...
Thanks for that. I looked at the guidelines, and he does indeed seem to be
right at the top end of the band for Band A fine and 3 points on the
licence.
Can the weather conditions be inferred from the speed camera photo, or does
there have to be other evidence?
GB
Traffic Regulation Act 1984, s.89(10). In fact, the NIP refers to s. 89(1).
Looking up the statute, I can't find a s89(10)
http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?activeTextDocId=2223862
In fact, s 89(1) seems just the right section to cover this, but why do the
sentencing guidelines refer to s.89(10)?
Adrian
were saying:
> On 14 July, Police issued a Notice of Intended Prosecution stating that
> my son was spotted on 6 July by a 'Camera Device' doing exactly 90 on
> the M4.
Silly question - whereabouts on the M4...? Was it a 70 limit or lower?
GB
"Adrian" <tooma...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6gqj08F...@mid.individual.net...
South Wales - 70 limit.
Alex Heney
wrote:
They will probably accept a late return in the circumstances.
And at that speed (assuming he wasn't in the 50 limit around Port
Talbot), they will often just issue a fixed penalty, although if they
are giving that option, it usually says so on the NIP form.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
It really bothers me when people cut me o...
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
steve robinson
Where in south wales , the only camera i know of is situated just
before the swansea junction and its 50 thier
--
Howard Neil
That part of the motorway often have mobile vans sitting on bridges.
--
Howard Neil
Alex Heney
It's not unknown for them to post camera vans on bridges over the
motorway.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Never eat yellow snow!
Les.
"Anthony R. Gold" <not-fo...@ahjg.co.uk> wrote in message
news:gj5ha41mai0q2ni1v...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 20:15:12 +0100, "GB" <NOTso...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Adrian" <tooma...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> surprised to find 70MPH speed signs on the A55. I don't recall seeing
> those signs anywhere in the UK before.
>
> Tony
>
Welcome to the home of the traffic talivan!
Les. (Anglesey).
PM
> 90 MPH on a motorway - likely outcome? (Not me, as it happens, but
> one of my sons.)
Get overtaken a lot? :-)
Ian Jackson
<pm@m_.com.invalid> writes
motorways. The 'norm' is around 80 'on the clock' (well, rumour has it -
I can't, of course, speak from personal experience ;0) ). 'A friend'
tells me that, in his experience, cars travelling at 80 are passed as
much as they pass. Almost nobody travels at 70. You would be very
unlucky to get booked for driving at 80, but 90 may be pushing your
luck.
--
Ian
Simon Finnigan
news:p8wI0iFZ...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk...
It`d be interesting to see where you drive, as my experience recently has
been that while driving at about 60mph, I am passed by 1 or 2 cars a minute,
and those aren`t going much quicker than me. Certainly in a 40 mile
motorway run I might see 4 or 5 cars doing upwards of 80 mph, but as for it
being the norm - absolutely not where I drive.
I`ve noticed that this has only really happened recently, with the increase
in fuel costs. It seems that a lot of people have realised that going at
90mph on the motorway doesn`t actually save much time compared to 60mph, but
does add a lot onto the fuel bill.
Ian Jackson
<SimonF...@HotMail.Com> writes
>"Ian Jackson" <ianREMOVET...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:p8wI0iFZ...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <0LOdnSEy44nlHzTV...@pipex.net>, PM
>><pm@m_.com.invalid> writes
>>>GB wrote:
>>>> 90 MPH on a motorway - likely outcome? (Not me, as it happens, but
>>>> one of my sons.)
>>>
>>>Get overtaken a lot? :-)
>>>
>> While obviously illegal, I reckon that 90mph is not uncommon on
>>motorways. The 'norm' is around 80 'on the clock' (well, rumour has
>>it - I can't, of course, speak from personal experience ;0) ). 'A
>>friend' tells me that, in his experience, cars travelling at 80 are
>>passed as much as they pass. Almost nobody travels at 70. You would
>>be very unlucky to get booked for driving at 80, but 90 may be
>>pushing your luck.
>
>It`d be interesting to see where you drive, as my experience recently
>has been that while driving at about 60mph, I am passed by 1 or 2 cars
>a minute, and those aren`t going much quicker than me. Certainly in a
>40 mile motorway run I might see 4 or 5 cars doing upwards of 80 mph,
>but as for it being the norm - absolutely not where I drive.
My friend used to drive in many places, but he would often make return
journeys between London and Birmingham, on the M40, leaving at 7am and
7pm. He certainly didn't waste his time dawdling in his company car at
60mph (or even 70). However, he definitely got the impression that an
awful lot of cars passed him at speeds which must have been around 90.
Also, a considerable number of their drivers were young ladies!
>
>I`ve noticed that this has only really happened recently, with the
>increase in fuel costs. It seems that a lot of people have realised
>that going at 90mph on the motorway doesn`t actually save much time
>compared to 60mph, but does add a lot onto the fuel bill.
>
I can't disagree with what you say about fuel consumption. There's also
the increased wear and tear to be considered. My friend now drives his
own car, and his need to get to his destinations is much less urgent
than it used to be. As a result, he now drives about 12% slower than he
used to. However, he hasn't really noticed any significant reduction of
traffic speeds on motorways. There are still a lot of cars travelling at
around 90mph.
--
Ian
a...@b.invalid
> much as they pass. Almost nobody travels at 70. You would be very
> unlucky to get booked for driving at 80, but 90 may be pushing your luck.
Road speed statistics:
Average speed on motorways for cars and motorbikes is 70mph exactly, 20%
in the 70-74mph band. 46% of cars surveyed below 70mph, only 3% of cars
90mph or over.
Dr Zoidberg
news:p8wI0iFZ...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk...
Personally I reckon that the average speed has dropped quite a bit in the
last year because of the rising cost of fuel.
While an indicated 80 was far more common , the typical cruising speed is
now more like an indicated 72
Simon Finnigan
> On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 20:40:07 +0100, "Simon Finnigan"
> <SimonF...@HotMail.Com> wrote:
>
>> "Ian Jackson" <ianREMOVET...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:p8wI0iFZ...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk...
>>
>>> motorways.
>>> The 'norm' is around 80 'on the clock' (well, rumour has it - I can't,
>>> of
>>> course, speak from personal experience ;0) ). 'A friend' tells me that,
>>> in
>>> his experience, cars travelling at 80 are passed as much as they pass.
>>> Almost nobody travels at 70. You would be very unlucky to get booked for
>>> driving at 80, but 90 may be pushing your luck.
>>
>> It`d be interesting to see where you drive, as my experience recently has
>> been that while driving at about 60mph, I am passed by 1 or 2 cars a
>> minute,
>> and those aren`t going much quicker than me. Certainly in a 40 mile
>> motorway run I might see 4 or 5 cars doing upwards of 80 mph, but as for
>> it
>> being the norm - absolutely not where I drive.
>
> to speeding that I too have noticed and that I assumed was caused by
> higher
> fuel prices.
I do know a few people who used to drive everywhere at 90 who now enjoy
driving again - lifes a lot less tressful at 60 :-) When things start to go
wrong, you`ve got much more time to try and sort the problem than you do at
90. Although you still see the occasional idiot who thinks that just
because they`re driving an M3 that they can take a corner at 80mph in the
wet - until they learn that the laws of physics still apply to them, and
that friction doesn`t really care how good you think your car is, there`s
only so much it can do to keep you on the road :-)
Simon Finnigan
The vast majority of my motorway driving is in the northwest - junctions 16
to 36 on the M6, and all the motorways that come off it. The big
disadvantage to everyone driving more slowly is the idiot who things that
lane 1 is only for HGV`s and buses, so they drive in lane 2, but do it even
more slowly than they used to. At 40 mph in one particulaly stupid example
I saw the other day! They ended up stranded with HGV`s under taking them
and cars overtaking them!
PM
>>
> I can't disagree with what you say about fuel consumption. There's
> also the increased wear and tear to be considered. My friend now
> drives his own car, and his need to get to his destinations is much
> less urgent than it used to be. As a result, he now drives about 12%
> slower than he used to. However, he hasn't really noticed any
> significant reduction of traffic speeds on motorways. There are still
> a lot of cars travelling at around 90mph.
Company cars will be driven as usual I guess.
In my old car I would get a 25% reduction in fuel consumption by lightening
my right foot.
My current car, the difference is only about 10%.
(On a sub-10-mile journey to work)
Big Les Wade
>However, he definitely got the impression that an awful lot of cars
>passed him at speeds which must have been around 90. Also, a
>considerable number of their drivers were young ladies!
Though no longer young, my wife is terrible for this. She often goes up
to 95-100, not deliberately but just because she forgets to check. I
have learned from experience not to verbally criticise her driving, so
when she goes past 90 I try to drop a hint by rolling myself into a ball
and covering my face with my hands.
--
Les
"God will save her, fear you not, be you the men you've been.
Get you the sons your fathers got and God will save the Queen."
Rob S
wrote:
-I do know a few people who used to drive everywhere at 90 who now enjoy
-driving again - lifes a lot less tressful at 60 :-)
Interesting discussion, especially regarding stress levels relating to speed.
From some experimenting I did on a willing guinea pig (me), I find the least
stress driving method is around 55-60 where I rarely needed to stray from the
inside lane.
Next less stressful was driving as fast as traffic allowed, which was therefore
generally in the outside lane.
By far the most stressful was trying to drive at 70, which involved the most
lane hopping, overtaking manuoveurs, the most idiots tailgating while overtaking
someone on the inside lane, like I could make myself or the car inside me
disappear if they got really close....
There has without a doubt been a general reduction in average speeds - due to
fuel costs - in the last 6 months.
-Rob
robatwork at mail dot com
Adrian
much like they were saying:
> Interesting discussion, especially regarding stress levels relating to
> speed. From some experimenting I did on a willing guinea pig (me), I
> find the least stress driving method is around 55-60 where I rarely
> needed to stray from the inside lane.
>
> Next less stressful was driving as fast as traffic allowed, which was
> therefore generally in the outside lane.
>
> By far the most stressful was trying to drive at 70, which involved the
> most lane hopping, overtaking manuoveurs, the most idiots tailgating
> while overtaking someone on the inside lane, like I could make myself or
> the car inside me disappear if they got really close....
I agree entirely - with one small addendum.
Doing 55-60 is only "non-stressful" if you ignore the effect on goods
vehicles behind you.
I'm assuming an indicated 55-60, real 50-55, as otherwise you'd be
popping out of L1 to overtake wagons frequently.
Tom
wrote:
>Though no longer young, my wife is terrible for this. She often goes up
>to 95-100, not deliberately but just because she forgets to check. I
>have learned from experience not to verbally criticise her driving, so
>when she goes past 90 I try to drop a hint by rolling myself into a ball
>and covering my face with my hands.
Have you not thought about *up*grading her car to a 750cc Panda or
similar :-)
Regards
Tom
BobC
> Rob S <robatworkDeleteTheseFourWo...@mail.com> gurgled happily, sounding
In my company car I'm generally in L2 or 3, but in my campervan, where
I buy the fuel, I've found the best thing is to drive at 56mph (real).
At that speed you are going the same as the HGVs so can just sit in
L1. If I see an HGV gaining in my mirror I speed up slightly. If an
HGV tries to overtake I consider I've failed.
This works very well. I spend most of my time in L1, don't interfere
with the HGVs, have a reasonable fuel consumption, and as there's very
little lane changing is pretty stress free.
BobC
Simon Finnigan
I tend to pick a speed between 50 and 60 that gives me the minimum changing
lanes. And if a HGV starts to overtake, I`ll back off a bit to let them go
past before bringing my speed back up again. I`ve seen far too many
injuries and knackered cars to want a HGV on either side of me, it`s far too
easy for something to go horribly and fatally wrong.
On a side note, I`ve found that driving quickly doesn`t necessarily make a
big difference to journey time. For exmaple, my home-work route is 15 miles
each way, about 6-7 miles of which is on a motorway. If I where to try and
drive flat out on the normal roads i`d still be restricted by the other
vehicles, so an increase in speed would invlove lots of overtaking. On the
motorway, if I nortmally do 60 I could, in my current car, easily double my
speed to 120mph. Which would reduce the journey time by roughly half. On a
7 mile run that would save me 3 and a half minutes. Certainly not worth
saving 3.5 minutes when my car does about 20mpg at that kind of speed, and
55-65mpg at 60mph :-)
I have also found that by driving normally at 50-60mph depending on the
conditions I time my journeys for this speed - if I`m running late I can
increase my speed by 15% without any risk of being caught speeding, and
depending if I wanted to push my luck could take it up to 80 or so with a
minmal risk of being caught and done. On a long run if I set off lte I can
easily make up the time, whereas if you normally drive at 80-90 and need to
make up time, you end up having to go at a stupid speed, with the risks
associated with it.
Rod
> On 19 Aug,
>
>> Doing 55-60 is only "non-stressful" if you ignore the effect on goods
>> vehicles behind you.
>>
>> I'm assuming an indicated 55-60, real 50-55, as otherwise you'd be
>> popping out of L1 to overtake wagons frequently.
>
> around a genuine 56mph the least stressful. I say around, as you have to
> adjust for the difference in governer settings to reduce stress levels, and
> avoid the ten minute governer race to overtake.
And if such a vehicle is displaying a notice claiming to be so limited,
but is actually doing around 80mph (real), is any offence being
committed (over and above speeding)?
--
Rod
Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
<www.thyromind.info> <www.thyroiduk.org> <www.altsupportthyroid.org>
Roland Perry
Aug 2008, Rod <poly...@ntlworld.com> remarked:
>And if such a vehicle is displaying a notice claiming to be so limited,
>but is actually doing around 80mph (real), is any offence being
>committed (over and above speeding)?
Maybe something in the Construction and Use Regs, or maybe something
more specialised.
--
Roland Perry
Rob S
<robatworkDelet...@mail.com> wrote:
-By far the most stressful was trying to drive at 70, which involved the most
-lane hopping, overtaking manuoveurs, the most idiots tailgating while
overtaking
-someone on the inside lane, like I could make myself or the car inside me
-disappear if they got really close..
Just to clarify - I don't have a car inside me, but on my inside. No, that's no
better. I think you know what I mean. Those average speed limit cameras on the
M1 raodworks are 1000x more effective than spot gatsos. Maybe they should be on
motorways permanently, but set at a more realistic 85mph.
tim.....
"Rod" <poly...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:6h5sueF...@mid.individual.net...
> m...@privacy.net wrote:
>> On 19 Aug, Adrian <tooma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Doing 55-60 is only "non-stressful" if you ignore the effect on goods
>>> vehicles behind you.
>>>
>>> I'm assuming an indicated 55-60, real 50-55, as otherwise you'd be
>>> popping out of L1 to overtake wagons frequently.
>>
>> Most goods vehicles are governed to (a real) 56mph. I find travelling at
>> around a genuine 56mph the least stressful. I say around, as you have to
>> adjust for the difference in governer settings to reduce stress levels,
>> and
>> avoid the ten minute governer race to overtake.
>
> And if such a vehicle is displaying a notice claiming to be so limited,
Are you sure that the signs actually represent that the vehicle has a
limiter fitted. Surely all the sign is is an indication of the maximum
speed that the vehicle can legally travel. It is not uncommon to see
vehicles carrying more than one sign representing the limits it different
countries, it can't be physically limited to more than one of them.
> but is actually doing around 80mph (real), is any offence being committed
> (over and above speeding)?
The speeding offence will be that of exceeding the maximum allowed speed,
i.e. 56mph, so 80 mph is 50% over, not a trivial offence
tim
Rod
a specific company which I have seen many times on a stretch of the M40.
It has a notice which says that it is limited to 56mph - which I
certainly read, rightly or wrongly, as meaning that it has a limiter set
at that speed.
Many, many years ago I was aware of someone who regularly replaced a rev
limiting rotor arm (at least I think that was what they did) to allow
speeding. I am assuming that the appropriate modern equivalent is being
done in this case.
Tom
news:6h8b2mF...@mid.individual.net...
http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/Speeding-pig-farmer-is-spared.4417009.jp
Tom
tim.....
<m...@privacy.net> wrote in message news:4FD2FDACDC%brian...@lycos.co.uk...
> On 22 Aug,
> "tim....." <tims_n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Are you sure that the signs actually represent that the vehicle has a
>> limiter fitted. Surely all the sign is is an indication of the maximum
>> speed that the vehicle can legally travel. It is not uncommon to see
>> vehicles carrying more than one sign representing the limits it different
>> countries, it can't be physically limited to more than one of them.
>
> after a
> certain date.
>
I don't doubt that, but there are thousands of vehicles still on the roads
who's limiters will be set to a nationally defined limit at time of
registration and (certainly as at 2000) different countries had different
limits.
tim
Alex Heney
wrote:
>m...@privacy.net wrote:
>> On 19 Aug,
>> Adrian <tooma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Doing 55-60 is only "non-stressful" if you ignore the effect on goods
>>> vehicles behind you.
>>>
>>> I'm assuming an indicated 55-60, real 50-55, as otherwise you'd be
>>> popping out of L1 to overtake wagons frequently.
>>
>> Most goods vehicles are governed to (a real) 56mph. I find travelling at
>> around a genuine 56mph the least stressful. I say around, as you have to
>> adjust for the difference in governer settings to reduce stress levels, and
>> avoid the ten minute governer race to overtake.
>
>And if such a vehicle is displaying a notice claiming to be so limited,
>but is actually doing around 80mph (real), is any offence being
>committed (over and above speeding)?
Yes.
Not because of any notice displayed, but because it would have a
faulty governor, which would be in breach of the Construction & Use
regulations.
Unless of course, it was doing that speed while "freewheeling" down
hill :-)
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
All things are green unless they are not.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
Simon Finnigan
news:6qata49ebcokgb741...@4ax.com...
I think you mean a slow moving car in lane 1, you in lane 2 overtaking, and
an idiot trying to force you out the way, yes? :-)
Rod
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:15:12 +0100, Rod <poly...@ntlworld.com>
> wrote:
>
>> m...@privacy.net wrote:
>>> On 19 Aug,
>>> Adrian <tooma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Doing 55-60 is only "non-stressful" if you ignore the effect on goods
>>>> vehicles behind you.
>>>>
>>>> I'm assuming an indicated 55-60, real 50-55, as otherwise you'd be
>>>> popping out of L1 to overtake wagons frequently.
>>> Most goods vehicles are governed to (a real) 56mph. I find travelling at
>>> around a genuine 56mph the least stressful. I say around, as you have to
>>> adjust for the difference in governer settings to reduce stress levels, and
>>> avoid the ten minute governer race to overtake.
>> And if such a vehicle is displaying a notice claiming to be so limited,
>> but is actually doing around 80mph (real), is any offence being
>> committed (over and above speeding)?
>
> Yes.
>
> Not because of any notice displayed, but because it would have a
> faulty governor, which would be in breach of the Construction & Use
> regulations.
>
> Unless of course, it was doing that speed while "freewheeling" down
> hill :-)
Thanks all. I feel unsafe when I see the lorry as I cannot believe it
has the necessary stopping capability - at least when loaded - to do
80mph as safely as a decent car. And the driving tends to be rather
gung-ho as well.
Alex Heney
wrote:
Most lorries have historically had better brakes than most cars.
But both trucks and cars have now reached the point where the brake
are effective enough to lock the wheels (or cause the ABS to kick in)
pretty well at will.
So the overall effectiveness of the braking system now is dependent on
the relationship between how much rubber is in contact with the road,
and the overall mass of the vehicle.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Discoveries are made by not following instructions.
Steve Firth
>
> Most lorries have historically had better brakes than most cars.
That's not so. Lorries rely almost exclusively on pneumatic brakes which
have a longer delay between pedal activation and application of the
brakes than the hydraulic systems fitted to cars. Lorries have drums
which are much less effective than disks under heavy braking and are
particularly ineffective under repeat braking. Brake balance on lorries
is almost always inferior to cars because it can be adjusted manually
and truckers tend to mess about with the balance and in the process mess
it up.
In general if a car and a lorry brake at the same moment travelling at
30mph by the time the car has stopped the truck will still be travelling
at 20mph.
Alex Heney
wrote:
*Now* that is probably true, although mainly because of the difference
in the ratio of mass to area of rubber on the road.
When trucks first started to be fitted with air brakes, those were
*far* more effective than the car brakes in use at the time. That is
why they all had to have warnings on the back that they were fitted
with air brakes - it meant they could slow down much more quickly than
the car tailgating them could.
But then cars had the drum brakes too in those days. And more and more
trucks are now using disc brakes as well.
But as I said, once you reach the point where you can lock the wheels
at will, which is generally true of almost ALL modern vehicles, then
the overall braking effectiveness is down to how much braking force
can be applied before the wheels lock, which is dependent on the ratio
between the mass of a vehicle, and the total area of rubber in contact
with the road.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
It's not hard to meet expenses, they're everywhere!
Dr Dan Holdsworth
> In message <0LOdnSEy44nlHzTV...@pipex.net>, PM
><pm@m_.com.invalid> writes
>>GB wrote:
>>> 90 MPH on a motorway - likely outcome? (Not me, as it happens, but
>>> one of my sons.)
>>
>>Get overtaken a lot? :-)
>>
> While obviously illegal, I reckon that 90mph is not uncommon on
> motorways. The 'norm' is around 80 'on the clock' (well, rumour has it -
> I can't, of course, speak from personal experience ;0) ). 'A friend'
> tells me that, in his experience, cars travelling at 80 are passed as
> much as they pass. Almost nobody travels at 70. You would be very
> unlucky to get booked for driving at 80, but 90 may be pushing your
> luck.
According to a GPS-based speedcamera warning unit I have recently
purchased [1] indicated 60 on my car [2] is 56 MPH, indicated 70 is
around 65 and indicated 80 is 75 to 76 MPH.
So, extrapolating upwards and assuming your car to have a similar
inbuilt inaccuracy that mine has, I'd say the speedo would need to be
on around 100 for the actual figure of 90 to be reached. This should
be easily enough for your son to have realised he was well inside
"naughty boy" territory so I honestly expect him to get somewhat more
than a slap on the wrist.
[1] A Novus Rider, which spends much time telling me (in a female,
BBC-standard voice) that I am approaching a possible mobile camera
zone. What it cannot do is physically detect cameras [3] but it ain't
half good for possible warnings; keeps you at the limit very nicely
too.
[2] Avensis 2.0 diesel, 2001 spec, half-worn tyres.
[3] This is apparently illegal now, and was never much use as it
relies on microwave backscatter or laser scatter to work, which are
both very hit and miss.
Simon Finnigan
news:xBUtk.353957$JM.1...@newsfe16.ams2...
> On 2008-08-18, Ian Jackson <ianREMOVET...@g3ohx.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <0LOdnSEy44nlHzTV...@pipex.net>, PM
>><pm@m_.com.invalid> writes
>>>GB wrote:
>>>> 90 MPH on a motorway - likely outcome? (Not me, as it happens, but
>>>> one of my sons.)
>>>
>>>Get overtaken a lot? :-)
>>>
>> While obviously illegal, I reckon that 90mph is not uncommon on
>> motorways. The 'norm' is around 80 'on the clock' (well, rumour has it -
>> I can't, of course, speak from personal experience ;0) ). 'A friend'
>> tells me that, in his experience, cars travelling at 80 are passed as
>> much as they pass. Almost nobody travels at 70. You would be very
>> unlucky to get booked for driving at 80, but 90 may be pushing your
>> luck.
>
> According to a GPS-based speedcamera warning unit I have recently
> purchased [1] indicated 60 on my car [2] is 56 MPH, indicated 70 is
> around 65 and indicated 80 is 75 to 76 MPH.
Interesting - I was playing with mine the other day (TomTom and a Passat)
and an indicated 60 was about 58mph, indicated 70 was 68mph and other speeds
where fairly similar, showing the speedo to be fairly accurate over the
range from 40mph upwards. Before 40 it was a bit hit and miss, as it`s
difficult to find nice straight roads where you can maintain that low a
speed for long enough to get a result without annoying other people :-)
Roland Perry
30 Aug 2008, Simon Finnigan <SimonF...@HotMail.Com> remarked:
>> According to a GPS-based speedcamera warning unit I have recently
>> purchased [1] indicated 60 on my car [2] is 56 MPH, indicated 70 is
>> around 65 and indicated 80 is 75 to 76 MPH.
>
>Interesting - I was playing with mine the other day (TomTom and a
>Passat) and an indicated 60 was about 58mph, indicated 70 was 68mph and
>other speeds where fairly similar, showing the speedo to be fairly
>accurate over the range from 40mph upwards.
It varies enormously from one make of car to another.
--
Roland Perry
Tom
written by an insurance company? This would provide much more protection.
Tom
Simon Finnigan
news:XTgERPXw...@perry.co.uk...
makes, and found that one was almost exactly right throughout the speed
range we could check, and none where more than 3mph out at 70. That was
over about 6 cars, or 3 different makes.
Roland Perry
Sat, 30 Aug 2008, Tom <usenet...@ntlworld.com> remarked:
>For future trading have you thought of getting your credit limits under
>written by an insurance company? This would provide much more protection.
Last time I looked that sort of insurer would have refused to cover most
of my commercial debtors, but I suppose it gives you a polite way of
refusing the business.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
31 Aug 2008, Simon Finnigan <SimonF...@HotMail.Com> remarked:
>>>> According to a GPS-based speedcamera warning unit I have recently
>>>> purchased [1] indicated 60 on my car [2] is 56 MPH, indicated 70 is
>>>> around 65 and indicated 80 is 75 to 76 MPH.
>>>
>>>Interesting - I was playing with mine the other day (TomTom and a
>>>Passat) and an indicated 60 was about 58mph, indicated 70 was 68mph
>>>and other speeds where fairly similar, showing the speedo to be
>>>fairly accurate over the range from 40mph upwards.
>>
>> It varies enormously from one make of car to another.
>I did a similar experiment in some works cars, all 4x4`s but different
>makes, and found that one was almost exactly right throughout the speed
>range we could check, and none where more than 3mph out at 70. That
>was over about 6 cars, or 3 different makes.
Congratulations for finding a cluster of "quite accurate" speedos. I'm
sure others could find a similar cluster of "really quite wonky ones".
(Unless you were checking some Fiat Pandas, last time I looked most 4x4
makers were clustered at the higher end of the market. What was the
cheapest one you tested?)
--
Roland Perry
Simon Finnigan
Had a couple of Landrover disco 3`s, Toyota Landcruisers and Mitsi Shoguns,
all of which had some serious mileage on them (like 150k plus, on year old
vehicles :-) )