View Full Version : Guess how many...
...points I picked up on my way down to Swansea yesterday.
Managed to pass about 4 or 5 camera vans on the way down. Some I spotted, some I didn't. Some were on the other side of the motorway but not sure if they were shooting both ways or not.
My guess is 6 ::/:
Depends whether they were west or east of the border. If they were west, you're 'screwed'. :(
leowyatt
22-02-2009, 13:03
What speed were you doing?
Child killer tbh.
And he strangles kittens too.
Justsomebloke
22-02-2009, 13:25
Probably/Hopefully none.
I have this when I go & return to my daughter/grandsons, There are 6 there & 6 back, On a bad day I could get banned going down & drive on a ban coming home :'(
Good job I know where they are then a Wooooooohooooooooo :p
My guess is 6 ::/:
Three if you're unlucky.
Good job I know where they are then a Wooooooohooooooooo :p
The specs on the A14? Nasty, nasty cameras.
I know a lot of people done by gatsos etc. but noone by specs. I'm sure they work, but at least they give you a chance to slow right down to get out of it :)
Justsomebloke
22-02-2009, 14:36
Having done the route a bezillion times over the last fifteen years i even know where the ruts are in the road let alone some static cameras. to be fair though they are situated in some very dangerous locations along a very busy 2 lane road, Should really be a triple along there as a lorry pass can take eons when thy are playing the lorry side by side game for 10 KIN miles :angry:
Should really be a triple along there as a lorry pass can take eons when thy are playing the lorry side by side game for 10 KIN miles :angry:
Lorries restricted to 59mph or whatever it is, really boil my p*ss when they overtake another restricted vehicle on a dual carriageway :angry:
A Place of Light
23-02-2009, 00:50
Should really be a triple along there as a lorry pass can take eons when thy are playing the lorry side by side game for 10 KIN miles :angry:
It might feel like aeons, but in reality it tends to take a couple of minutes.
Where do you need to get to so quickly that a couple of minutes makes such a big difference?
Psymonkee
23-02-2009, 03:18
I think I'm getting 3 for my efforts on Friday heading to Walsall - 2 weeks of nervous waiting :(
Got just a little fed up wit the cameras tonight though - dual carriageway, arrow straight, wide and well separated from the other lanes and nothing but sodding cameras!
Hopefuly it's a nil point experience for all involved though ;)
It might feel like aeons, but in reality it tends to take a couple of minutes.
Where do you need to get to so quickly that a couple of minutes makes such a big difference?
I'm guessing it's not about the getting somewhere in a hurry but the interruption to your smooth journey/momentum.
Ooo err! Hopefully none!
I was flashed the other day, but it was because of an ambulance speeding through in the opposite direction. I was stuck in traffic on the other side so made sure when the camera did flash I was pulling a funny face :)
lol pheebs ;D
It might feel like aeons, but in reality it tends to take a couple of minutes.
Where do you need to get to so quickly that a couple of minutes makes such a big difference?
Don't know the road in question, but I'm regulalry held up many minutes, and all it would take is the overtaken lorry to back off 1 or 2 mph for a few seconds, but no :angry:
Record is 12 miles on the M11. At 56mph that's about 13 minutes...
What speed were you doing?
I normally hover between 80-90. The only camera in Wales was the one approaching the toll booths and I'd already mainly slowed down for that, although was probably still doing 60 in the 50 zone for a bit.
Reigate Hill on the M25 is always an example of stupidity by drivers. It's four lanes of motorway due to the weight of traffic, and it is such a regular occurrence to see 3 lorries side-by-side, struggling up the hill, dropping below 40-50mph, and all the cars being forced into the outside lane. Only good thing to come from it is when you get the other side of the lorries very, very few cars start going back to their normal lane, they stick in the right at around 60. Drop left a couple of lanes to give you a safety margin (and of course because you're following strict lane discipline), foot down to bring you up to 70(ish;)) and it's plain sailing past loads of cars.
It might feel like aeons, but in reality it tends to take a couple of minutes.
Where do you need to get to so quickly that a couple of minutes makes such a big difference?
Didn't you know, there's children to be run over and kittens to be strangled!
Prepare to the ****ed by the long dick of the law. ;)
I reckon 3 at least. Maybe 6.
Reigate Hill on the M25 is always an example of stupidity by drivers. It's four lanes of motorway due to the weight of traffic, and it is such a regular occurrence to see 3 lorries side-by-side, struggling up the hill, dropping below 40-50mph, and all the cars being forced into the outside lane. Only good thing to come from it is when you get the other side of the lorries very, very few cars start going back to their normal lane, they stick in the right at around 60. Drop left a couple of lanes to give you a safety margin (and of course because you're following strict lane discipline), foot down to bring you up to 70(ish;)) and it's plain sailing past loads of cars.
Either that or slow down in front of those lorries so they have to change up about 8 gears.
I'm going to go abstract and say you got a point from each camera. :D
LeperousDust
23-02-2009, 16:37
Ouchies :(
A Place of Light
23-02-2009, 19:22
I'm guessing it's not about the getting somewhere in a hurry but the interruption to your smooth journey/momentum.
It's been shown time and time again that the optimum speed for a relaxed and smooth journey is around 60mph. The faster you go, the more concentration (read effort) is required and the typical stop/start scenario affects you to a lesser degree.
A Place of Light
23-02-2009, 19:29
Didn't you know, there's children to be run over and kittens to be strangled!
;)
I just think that whenever I see a forum post from someone pointing out how angry they are about this, I think "oh good, someone who's angry behind the wheel.....what a recipe for safe motoring that is".
If you're going to be flying around at 90 only to complain about being held up, then here's a crazy idea.....start your journey a fraction earlier?
At 90 you'll use more fuel, give your tyres a harder time, put more strain on your engine and risk an endorsement or two and for what? To get home a little earlier?
Unless the journey is a long one then you'll save very little in the way of time no matter how much extra progress you think you're making, and even on a long journey the time saving will be minimal.
A Place of Light
23-02-2009, 19:31
Either that or slow down in front of those lorries so they have to change up about 8 gears.
Good advice, why not take it up a notch and slam your brakes on.....that's bound to be good for a laugh.
Being a driver isn't about getting one over on someone who "did you wrong" on the road.
That kind of attitude causes accidents.
Right off topic but APoL you do know you can multi-quote don't you?
No need for lots of individually quoted posts :)
And on topic - I hate those cameras and I'm gonna take a guess at 3points unless you're really lucky Desmo
Del Lardo
23-02-2009, 22:02
It's been shown time and time again that the optimum speed for a relaxed and smooth journey is around 60mph. The faster you go, the more concentration (read effort) is required and the typical stop/start scenario affects you to a lesser degree.
Can you point me towards an article? I'd be interested in having a read.
For me I tend to cruise at 80mph because I can comfortably process what's going on around me. At 60mph the lack of effort required is actually an issue for me as my mind starts to wonder and I loose concentration.
It's been so long since I've driven more than 5 miles in one stretch that I just don't care anymore. And the last long drive I made was 1,530 miles in a 26 foot U-haul, speed limited to 75mph.
So, yeah. I struggle to get my Jeep warmed up all the way anymore...
Zero, I still have zero points and thats from 9 years of driving.
Zero, I still have zero points and thats from 9 years of driving.
Had 3 in 2005, now off my licence, in :shocked: nearly 20 years of driving.
A Place of Light
24-02-2009, 00:37
Can you point me towards an article? I'd be interested in having a read..
Several have been referenced over at the blue place on many occasions.
Search ye olde motors forum for ye shall find what ye seek.
For me I tend to cruise at 80mph because I can comfortably process what's going on around me. At 60mph the lack of effort required is actually an issue for me as my mind starts to wander and I lose concentration.
So you're incapable of paying sufficient attention at speeds around the 60mph mark?
Do you think this is acceptable and also do you also think it would stand as a plausible defence in a court of law?
Del Lardo
24-02-2009, 01:14
Several have been referenced over at the blue place on many occasions.
Search ye olde motors forum for ye shall find what ye seek.
Having vowed never to return to the blue place I may struggle to find them ;)
So you're incapable of paying sufficient attention at speeds around the 60mph mark?
Do you think this is acceptable and also do you also think it would stand as a plausible defence in a court of law?
Not incapable but certainly not comfortable. I'm not talking about a built up motorway here with loads of traffic around where there is more than enough going on to keep me interested but a free flowing motorway where you can comfortably drive at 70 mph until your progress is impeded by someone who is driving below the speed limit. It's also something that I'm aware of so I can do something about it unlike a hell of a lot of drivers who seem to live in their own little world.
As for a plausible defence in court, I very much doubt it but if my inattention was the cause of an accident and it went to court I'd do what I've always done when I have gone to court, tell the truth and if necessary take the punishment. I hasten to add that both times I have been to court I told the truth and was found Not Guilty, the 2nd time it cost a CSO his job.
A Place of Light
24-02-2009, 01:25
Having vowed never to return to the blue place I may struggle to find them ;).
That is a shame, as once you learn to filter away the dross you are left with a wide base of knowledge.
Not incapable but certainly not comfortable. I'm not talking about a built up motorway here with loads of traffic around where there is more than enough going on to keep me interested but a free flowing motorway where you can comfortably drive at 70 mph until your progress is impeded by someone who is driving below the speed limit. It's also something that I'm aware of so I can do something about it unlike a hell of a lot of drivers who seem to live in their own little world.
This is an interesting turn of phrase that you use.
It's limit, not a target.....yet you seem to imply that anyone who is not travelling at the very least at the posted limit is a hindrance or they're doing something irresponsible as they're "getting in your way".
If you do a couple of timed runs you will soon learn that the average motorist is fooling himself that he is gaining anything more than a matter of minutes by travelling above the posted limit, unless his journey is free of traffic jams and it covers 100+miles.
Del Lardo
24-02-2009, 02:08
This is an interesting turn of phrase that you use.
It's limit, not a target.....yet you seem to imply that anyone who is not travelling at the very least at the posted limit is a hindrance or they're doing something irresponsible as they're "getting in your way".
If you do a couple of timed runs you will soon learn that the average motorist is fooling himself that he is gaining anything more than a matter of minutes by travelling above the posted limit, unless his journey is free of traffic jams and it covers 100+miles.
I was taught that unless there are adverse conditions like bad weather, obstructions etc you should always aim to drive at the speed limit. You do 25 in a 30 on your test and you will pick up a fault unless there is a damn good reason for you to be doing that speed. I have taken that lesson on and use it on the motorway and drive at 70mph when it is safe to do so. If people want to tootle along at 60mph then go for it but when they are doing it in the outside lane of a motorway then they are hindering the progress of other vehicles where the driver chooses to drive at the legal speed limit in the same way that someone driving at 25mph in a 30mph zone is hindering the progress of the drivers behind them.
My experience of 100k+ miles of motorway driving is that most inattentive driving comes from those pootling along at 60mph in the middle lane in their own little world*. At the same time the most aggressive driving comes from those who are barrelling along at way over the speed limit. Neither style of driving is safe IMO.
As for the time saving argument... I drive from Cambridge to the Heathrow area most weeks which is ~70 miles on the motorway. If I drove at 70mph it would take me 1 hour. If I drove at 60 mph it would take me 1 hour & 10 minutes. So over the course of a year at 60 mph I would spend another 17 hours in the car for no good reason. That's 17 hours a year where I can be discussing interesting things with you on BD! :)
*I have a cracking anecdote about a Rover, a Lotus, a Policeman and a camera if anyone is interested.
LeperousDust
24-02-2009, 02:46
*I have a cracking anecdote about a Rover, a Lotus, a Policeman and a camera if anyone is interested.
Go for it.
APoL do you actually drive ;D :p?
I generally don't speed per se, apart from driving to and from uni/home because i can literally save 2 hours a journey, it costs me a bit more in fuel granted, but i'm willing to pay that to not have to spend the extra 2 hours in my car. Likewise i'd pay the train to go faster if i could! I'm personally not a fan of the random arbitrary speed limit.
I was taught that unless there are adverse conditions like bad weather, obstructions etc you should always aim to drive at the speed limit. You do 25 in a 30 on your test and you will pick up a fault unless there is a damn good reason for you to be doing that speed.
Taught the same thing here. As far as I recall the Institute of Advanced Motorists teaches the same too. My driving instructor routinely hammered in the phrase "promote the flow" along with his other classics like "drive to what you see to be clear" (i.e. blind corner, go carefully; straight & clear road, go to speed limit.)
Off the top of my head, a car engine is most efficient at 55mph. It's the main reason why speed limits in the US are set at 60, and have been ever since fuel shortage a few decades ago.
According to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_automobiles#Speed_and_fuel_economy _studies on modern engines the most efficient speed is now around 65mph.
Had 3 in 2005, now off my licence, in :shocked: nearly 20 years of driving.
I didnt want to boast but i will :D
But I do little driving.
But I have had the odd venture into untold territory
I was taught that unless there are adverse conditions like bad weather, obstructions etc you should always aim to drive at the speed limit. You do 25 in a 30 on your test and you will pick up a fault unless there is a damn good reason for you to be doing that speed. I have taken that lesson on and use it on the motorway and drive at 70mph when it is safe to do so. If people want to tootle along at 60mph then go for it but when they are doing it in the outside lane of a motorway then they are hindering the progress of other vehicles where the driver chooses to drive at the legal speed limit in the same way that someone driving at 25mph in a 30mph zone is hindering the progress of the drivers behind them.
My experience of 100k+ miles of motorway driving is that most inattentive driving comes from those pootling along at 60mph in the middle lane in their own little world*. At the same time the most aggressive driving comes from those who are barrelling along at way over the speed limit. Neither style of driving is safe IMO.
As for the time saving argument... I drive from Cambridge to the Heathrow area most weeks which is ~70 miles on the motorway. If I drove at 70mph it would take me 1 hour. If I drove at 60 mph it would take me 1 hour & 10 minutes. So over the course of a year at 60 mph I would spend another 17 hours in the car for no good reason. That's 17 hours a year where I can be discussing interesting things with you on BD! :)
*I have a cracking anecdote about a Rover, a Lotus, a Policeman and a camera if anyone is interested.
I was taught very briefly that if you are not gaining on the car in front stay in the "slow lane" if you are catching up on someone you need the middle lane to over take, the 3rd land is just a misconception, we should have a land for lorries and 2 lanes for cars, and a button in cars that if a car is in the 2nd cars lane can be blown up if they are not over taking the car fast enough.
If everybody could overtake and pull it would be a great world but it aint, I hae being in the "slow lane" but its the closest lane to the hard shoulder if god forbid anything happened.
Del Lardo
24-02-2009, 11:00
Go for it.
Seeing as you ask so nicely.....
Driving up to my parents a few years ago when I still had my Lotus I was going along a dual carrageway at bang on 70mph and came up behind a Rover 800 doing 60mph in the inside lane. I pulled into the outside lane to overtake and as I closed to 2 second gap behind him I noticed two things, that there was a roundabout ~800m ahead and that the Rover was drifting from the left to the right hand side of his lane (no indicator). I decide that he is going to change lanes so lift off the throttle (due to low inertia in Elise it's like tapping the brakes in a normal car) so my speed reduces and I can maintain a safe 2 second gap.
As predicted he starts to change lane and as he is half way across the right hand indicator finally comes on and 10ths of a second later the car jerks violently to the left (he'd finally checked his mirrors and **** himself finding a car there). The change in direction was so violent that I thought he was going to loose control of the car and was already covering the brakes by the time he was back in the inside lane.
He remains in the inside lane so I pass him to a barrage of shaken fists and flashing lights and I continue on my journey thinking nothing more of it.
10 days later I'm working from home and I get a knock on the door. I answer it to find a Policeman there who tells me that I have been reported for trying to ram other driver off the road and that he would like to speak to me about it. After I'd had a little chuckle to myself (which he didn't seem to like) I inviting him in for a coffee and a chat.
He told me that a very respectable member of the community (never found out what though I suspect ex-Police, Magistrate, Mason as it's nigh on impossible to get the Police to act with evidence let alone with no evidence) had reported me for trying to ram him off the road on the [road] on Saturday [date]. I pointed out that any contact with another car in a Lotus would result in several thousand pounds worth of body work damage due to the fiber glass construction but alas logic wasn't working and he spent 10 minutes trying to convince me to admit to something that I hadn't done.
After 10 minutes I was bored so I told him to piss or get off the pot (obviously I phrased it slightly better) and he agreed that the conversation should act as a warning. I told him that as I had done nothing wrong I did not accept his warning and that I would be contacting his Sergeant if any further insinuation was made. He agreed to leave it at that and that's when I had my fun.
I asked him if he wanted to know what would have happened if it had ever made it to court and he looked a bit confused so I opened my laptop and showed him a video of the entire incident. I'd bought a new bullet cam a few days before the incident and had been using the trip up to my parents to soak test it. You could clearly see my speedo reading 70mph leading up to the incident and the whole dangerous manouver.
I told him that he was more than welcome to a copy if he wanted to pursue the respectable member of the comunity for wasting Police time or dangerous driving but he didn't seem particulary interested, thanked me for my time and left.
Alas I lost the video in the great laptop theft of 2008 :( I used to enjoy watching it to cheer myself up.
There's no such thing as the "slow" lane.
I seldom do 70 on the motorway. I drive within the conditions of the road, and the traffic density, and the area where I'm driving. Around schools I slow down, in built up areas I slow down (usually because the roads are full of bumps and are **** anyway). On big open roads I seldom stick to the limit, on motorways I seldom stick to the limits, on fun twisty country roads I drive in a spirited fashion to enjoy the roads. I don't worry about my speed, I concentrate on what's going on around me - my observation skills are really very good, my driving skill is above average but in the UK that's not hard to achieve, however I will say that I do have very good anticipation and observational skills - that comes with riding a motorbike.
I make my choices when I ride/drive and if I get caught then as long as it's by a policeman in a car able to offer some discretion if any is required then that's fine, what I abhor is all the automated systems which do nothing to make people safer.
I'm sure people here are safe drivers when it comes to it.
Motorway wise, most of the time (weather and traffic permitting) I will tend to nip above 70mph but not by much. On roads none national speed limit I will 99% of the time stick to the limit (although they've just changed all of the roads around here to 20mph which has thrown me a bit)... just because I'm a bit of a law abiding swot when it comes to things like that :) I also find it makes little difference going any faster.
I know some people have expressed they have elite driving skills (not meaning to pick but your kind self Mister Willhelm)... but I think this doesn't matter in the slightest. I consider myself quite an observant person and seem to have always been told I am very "aware and observant" especially when driving... and yet I've been driving down a 30mph road and from behind a car this kid has just ran out. I missed him (God knows how) and when continuing down the road I saw some of, I presume his mates, hidden round the corner of a building with pretend guns.
It was normally a "non kid zone" road... I've driven it hundreds of times... there were no schools near by or other people at the time.
I genuinely couldn't have second guessed that kid was there.
Had I hit him, at 30 he may of stood a chance. Any more than that he would have been dead.
It's things like that which makes me think that no matter how "good" I am and perhaps, how above average my perception is, accidents can still happen.
You also have to consider you're not alone on the road (and if I'm sounding patronising I don't mean to be!) YOU may be a bloody amazing driver, but that doesn't mean the dude coming towards you on the opposite side of the road is. What's to say he won't just suddenly swerve at you? Or on the motorway, someone playing with the radio swerve out suddenly and thwack you? Also, what if you're vehicle mucks up? My Pa's car went doolally on him on the motorway, ended up locking and spinning him round and down the motorway backwards at speeds over 60mph into a lamp post. He survived... but had he been going any faster God knows what would of happened.
Unless you're spidey man you canny see these things coming and so to me... anyone who thinks they feel they can speed because they have better perception is a bit rubbish really :p
Basically, to all those people who speed and think they're okay doing so, if you hit a child and killed them when speeding... and were told if you weren't they would have survived... how would you cope?
I'm not trying to be holier than thou as I do speed at times in my life (I think everyone does) but yeh. I would say I'm a changed person and do stick to speed limits more often than not after witnessing car crashes up close and also spending a few days filing away cases with photos attached of incidents on the road.
It's a fair comment. But if a child crossed the motorway, if I hit them at 70 or 80 it's still going to damage my car a lot :(
In heavily built up areas/neighbourhoods/schools I always am more cautious - I dare say that people who play their loud music and chatting on their phones doing 20mph are more dangerous than me doing 35. But that's just my take on it - there are always ways of preventing accidents and being careful, you don't have to drive at 20mph to stop yourself from killing someone.
Basically, to all those people who speed and think they're okay doing so
Speed doesn't kill. Inappropriate speed kills.
I freely admit that I exceed the speed limits but only when it's not inappropriate to do so. That means in 20, 30 and 40 mph zones I stick to the speed limit but when I'm presented with a nice twisty road I'm not going to pootle along at 60mph.
That's the thing, if speed killed then motorways would be the most dangerous roads. We go the fastest there, so the most killing would go on?
But it doesn't, in fact, they're the safest roads aren't they IIRC? Ironic, and probably why government "campaigns" never touch on the fact, that technically, the people going the fastest, are less likely to be in an accident. It's all about the road itself and in context. Something that can't be squeezed into a 20 second advert unfortunately, so the lowest common denominator sort of message is used, that if you drive fast you'll kill children.
35mph isn't dangerous in itself. 35mph outside of a busy school is very stupid and risky.
35mph on the same road, when empty at 4.05am, isn't very risky or stupid at all. Yet they both have the same legality, and if you did 35mph, which is was totally safe, you'll be penalised.
Same with driving conditions. If it's snowing heavily, you can barely see, grip is limited, and you're on a 60mph. It's insane to do 60, yet, if you do, as you hurtle past like a maniac, the "safety" camera set to catch "dangerous" drivers won't bat an eyelid as long as you're doing 60. When, in fact, you should be doing half that at least.
I think that, in a nutshell is why drivers get frustrated at the cameras, and the campaigns shoved down our throat. :)
Sorry I was kind of more emphasising the 30mph roads and such, not motorways :) Your standard built up area!
Speed doesn't kill. Inappropriate speed kills.
I freely admit that I exceed the speed limits but only when it's not inappropriate to do so. That means in 20, 30 and 40 mph zones I stick to the speed limit but when I'm presented with a nice twisty road I'm not going to pootle along at 60mph.
I'm like you then. It's people who speed and think they're safe in doing so in the lower limit, built up areas.
Even if it's 4pm and no kids are about - exactly like my encounter with the kid running out from behind a car - you can't ever guarantee that will not happen, so why risk going an extra 5 - 10mph (which won't really get you anywhere much faster) when knowing there will always be a very slim chance you could infact hit and kill someone (or something! Lets not forget those pesky cats and dogs that get loose and do a runner across the road!)
I don't have qualms with people who push the pace on open roads/motorways with few people about... it's the city areas that bug me!
I dunno. I think a lot of my influence is from my experiences through the bobby. I guess when you see the accidents happening and their outcomes all the time you kind of change your tune a bit.
A Place of Light
24-02-2009, 18:53
I was taught that unless there are adverse conditions like bad weather, obstructions etc you should always aim to drive at the speed limit. You do 25 in a 30 on your test and you will pick up a fault unless there is a damn good reason for you to be doing that speed.
True, but that's to show you can make good progress when the conditions allow. That and the fact that if we all drove the way we are expected to on our test then we would all talk a lot longer to get to our destination.
I have taken that lesson on and use it on the motorway and drive at 70mph when it is safe to do so.
Absolutely, but that's not what you said previously and that's what we're talking about here. You said you tend to cruise at around 80mph, and my point was (and still is) that there is nothing to gain by cruising at 80 instead of 70 other than increasing your fuel consumption and your risk of picking up a few points. The time saved, unless you're journey is something like 200+ miles is miniscule and you'll arrive slightly less relaxed than if you'd been driving at a lower speed.
If people want to tootle along at 60mph then go for it but when they are doing it in the outside lane of a motorway then they are hindering the progress of other vehicles where the driver chooses to drive at the legal speed limit in the same way that someone driving at 25mph in a 30mph zone is hindering the progress of the drivers behind them.
100% agree.
If you want to plod along at 60mph on the motorway then that's fine.....just have enough common sense to stick to lane 1.
My experience of 100k+ miles of motorway driving is that most inattentive driving comes from those pootling along at 60mph in the middle lane in their own little world*. At the same time the most aggressive driving comes from those who are barrelling along at way over the speed limit. Neither style of driving is safe IMO..
Agreed.
As for the time saving argument... I drive from Cambridge to the Heathrow area most weeks which is ~70 miles on the motorway. If I drove at 70mph it would take me 1 hour. If I drove at 60 mph it would take me 1 hour & 10 minutes. So over the course of a year at 60 mph I would spend another 17 hours in the car for no good reason. That's 17 hours a year where I can be discussing interesting things with you on BD! :)
Yes, but that would involve you averaging60mph or 70mph in each case, not treating either of those as a maximum. If you and I tool the same journey, with me aiming to cruise at 70 and you at 80, then I could keep to my cruising speed for pretty much all of the journey (traffic permitting) which would give me an average speed not much less than my permitted maximum. You, on the other hand, would be forced to slow from your maximum to 70mph whenever you saw plod or a camera before accelerating back upto 80mph when "the coast was clear"......putting your average not only noticeably less than your vmax but also not a great deal more than mine. Add that you'd have the extra stress of constantly looking for marked/unmarked police cars and cameras and the net result would be you arriving a matter of minutes more than I did with you using more fuel and feeling slightly more mentally taxed than I.
100% agree.
If you want to plod along at 60mph on the motorway then that's fine.....just have enough common sense to stick to lane 1.
Technically speaking (not sure if it's legally speaking or not) if you aren't overtaking anything then you should always be driving in Lane 1 no matter what your speed.
A Place of Light
24-02-2009, 19:21
Go for it.
APoL do you actually drive ;D :p?
It's unlikely that anyone on this forum has spent more time behind the wheel than I.
Possible, but unlikely.
I generally don't speed per se, apart from driving to and from uni/home because i can literally save 2 hours a journey, it costs me a bit more in fuel granted, but i'm willing to pay that to not have to spend the extra 2 hours in my car. Likewise i'd pay the train to go faster if i could! I'm personally not a fan of the random arbitrary speed limit.
Two questions spring to mind.
If you can save TWO HOURS on your journey by speeding (assuming we're talking about compared to sticking to the limit doing the same journey on the same day at the same time). then:-
A) How long a journey are we talking about?
and
B) What kind of maximum/cruising speeds do you acheive on this journey?
300 miles at an average of 100mph =3 hours.
300 miles at an average of 70mph= 4 hours and 20 mins approx.
You can see where I'm going with this?
Off the top of my head, a car engine is most efficient at 55mph. It's the main reason why speed limits in the US are set at 60, and have been ever since fuel shortage a few decades ago.Aren't the speed limits in the US either 55mph or 65mph?
According to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_automobiles#Speed_and_fuel_economy _studies on modern engines the most efficient speed is now around 65mph.
I suggest you read your article more thoroughly.
My engine has no idea how fast the car is travelling at. All it knows is the load it's required to pull and the revs it's running at. 5000RPM in 5th gear and 5000rpm in third gear only differ in one respect. the load on the engine is increased as the wind resistance at 5000RPM in 5th is greater than at 5000RPM in 3rd.....therefore the fuel consumption will be greater in the higher gear in this example. From 30mph wind resistance becomes a factor, therefore the faster you go above 30mph the harder the engine has to work to pull the vehicle. This means that the optimum economy will be acheived by driving at a point somewhere just above tickover RPM in whatever gear turns this into a speed of 30mph or under.
This is also one of the reasons why, when teams attempt to break the world record for miles per gallon they tend to stick to 30mph and not 55/66mph.
A few quoted from your article:-
"Driving at 45 rather than 65 mph (72 rather than 105 km/h), results in about one-third the power to overcome wind resistance, or about one half the energy per unit distance, and much greater fuel economy can be achieved"
"The 1997 Toyota Celica, got 1 mpg better fuel-efficiency at 65 than it did at 55 (43.5 vs 42.5), although almost 5 mpg better at 60 than at 65 (48.4 vs 43.5), and its best economy (52.6 mpg) at only 25 mph (40 km/h). "
Note: automatics don't always fall under this for the simple reason that many have fewer gears than a manual AND the fact the driver doesn't typically have complete control over shift times.
The reason 55/65mph is cited so often is for a few good reasons.
It's a realistic (or used to be years ago but now we're stuck with it) cruising speed for a long journey, whereas there are no long roads with a 30 limit. It's also a good compromise between fuel economy, journey time and safety.
A Place of Light
24-02-2009, 19:24
That's the thing, if speed killed then motorways would be the most dangerous roads. We go the fastest there, so the most killing would go on?
But it doesn't, in fact, they're the safest roads aren't they IIRC? Ironic, and probably why government "campaigns" never touch on the fact, that technically, the people going the fastest, are less likely to be in an accident
Your principle is correct but your example is not.
Motorways are the safest roads because there are fewer hazards to negotiate on them than on any other road. You don't have junctions/traffic lights/cyclists/pedestrians and a whole host of other hazards/distractions to deal with.
A Place of Light
24-02-2009, 19:29
Speed doesn't kill. Inappropriate speed kills.
Which is a great strap line.....until you bear in mind that every single driver who crashed because he/she was going to fast thought, five seconds before the accident, that his/her speed was appropriate.
You're right that it's inappropriate speed that's the real problem here, where you miss the point is that most drivers are not qualified to determine what is/isn't an appropriate speed at the given time with any real accuracy.
I agree with the last statement. People in this country have no idea how to drive in general. Better education and mandatory advanced driving should be in place.
As for engine efficiency and all that garbage, that has nothing to do with imposed speed limits.
I agree with the last statement. People in this country (as with a lot of others) have no idea how to drive in general. Better education and mandatory advanced driving should be in place.
As for engine efficiency and all that garbage, that has nothing to do with imposed speed limits.
A Place of Light
24-02-2009, 19:42
I agree with the last statement. People in this country (as with a lot of others) have no idea how to drive in general. Better education and mandatory advanced driving should be in place.
As for engine efficiency and all that garbage, that has nothing to do with imposed speed limits.
New York New York, so good you said it twice ;)
You're also correct in that the US 55mph limit (and the typical european 90kph limit) have nothing to do with fuel economy.
I've been lucky that in almost 10 years of having a full licence I've not had a speeding ticket yet.
If I know a route, and I'm not travelling on minor roads, I will push the speed limit.
New York New York, so good you said it twice ;)
You're also correct in that the US 55mph limit (and the typical european 90kph limit) have nothing to do with fuel economy.
I know I'm right, most of hte interstates now are up to 65-70mph. :)
It's unlikely that anyone on this forum has spent more time behind the wheel than I.
Possible, but unlikely.
I'm intrigued so let's see. I've done an average of around 30k/year for the last 23 years.
A Place of Light
25-02-2009, 00:24
I know I'm right, most of the interstates now are up to 65-70mph. :)
And they have nothing to do with economy either.....so we agree.
A Place of Light
25-02-2009, 00:27
I'm intrigued so let's see. I've done an average of around 30k/year for the last 23 years.
Not close, although a consistant 30k/year is still quite a lot of road time under your belt.
Del Lardo
25-02-2009, 00:38
Not close, although a consistant 30k/year is still quite a lot of road time under your belt.
So you going to tell us or carry on being elusive? :'(
A Place of Light
25-02-2009, 00:48
So you going to tell us or carry on being elusive? :'(
No because the actual figure is neither important nor demonstrative of any kind of ranking system. If I've done twice the mileage Feek has does that mean I'm twice as able or twice as good a judge of what's right or wrong? No, of course not.
I was asked if I actually do drive, and I replied with an off the cuff remark (which I believed then and now to be true) to point out that not only do I drive, but that I've got a fair amount of experience under my belt.
If I put an actual figure up then I would feel like people were reading it as if it had a giant "NER NER, I told you so" after it.....and that's not something I want.
Not close, although a consistant 30k/year is still quite a lot of road time under your belt.
I've heard that you might be doing extra mileage soon!!
LeperousDust
25-02-2009, 00:51
Well as you say yeah i do the 300 mile drive, and i was using your 60mph pootle as a 5 hour reference point, and i'll freely admit i can average 90mph on the way home easy which works out to around 3 hours something, thats a big difference to me. Since i step right onto the motorway within about 10 mins of leaving edinburgh, and i live literally 2 mins off a motorway junction, with only motorway all the way inbetween i think its different. I don't speed ever at all anywhere else there is seldom any point it saves minutes at best as you say, and i freely agree its generally pointless.
Del Lardo
25-02-2009, 00:52
No because the actual figure is neither important nor demonstrative of any kind of ranking system. If I've done twice the mileage Feek has does that mean I'm twice as able or twice as good a judge of what's right or wrong? No, of course not.
I was asked if I actually do drive, and I replied with an off the cuff remark (which I believed then and now to be true) to point out that not only do I drive, but that I've got a fair amount of experience under my belt.
If I put an actual figure up then I would feel like people were reading it as if it had a giant "NER NER, I told you so" after it.....and that's not something I want.
I was just curious and showing an interest in my fellow forum member. Next time I won't bother :(
Justsomebloke
25-02-2009, 00:53
It's unlikely that anyone on this forum has spent more time behind the wheel than I.
Possible, but unlikely.
.
;D
A Place of Light
25-02-2009, 00:57
Well as you say yeah i do the 300 mile drive, and i was using your 60mph pootle as a 5 hour reference point, and i'll freely admit i can average 90mph on the way home easy which works out to around 3 hours something, thats a big difference to me. Since i step right onto the motorway within about 10 mins of leaving edinburgh, and i live literally 2 mins off a motorway junction, with only motorway all the way inbetween i think its different. I don't speed ever at all anywhere else there is seldom any point it saves minutes at best as you say, and i freely agree its generally pointless.
If you can average 90mph then you must really be tanking it for long periods of time.
What peak speeds are you hitting? Surely you must be cranking it up in the region 110mph or so?
Obvioulsy, if you're going to break the posted limit by 30 or 40 mph then it will make a difference, but to go back to my previous point you'll be using more fuel, putting more strain on both your car and yourself and risking an instant ban if you're caught.
A Place of Light
25-02-2009, 01:01
I was just curious and showing an interest in my fellow forum member. Next time I won't bother :(
Easy tiger, I was explaining my reasoning.
While I stand by my comment, it was only intended to be throwaway, and not some way to flex my e-penis (like I have one).
Don't take it as a slap in the face as it was most certainly not intended as one :)
A Place of Light
25-02-2009, 01:03
;D
;D back atcha.
LeperousDust
25-02-2009, 01:07
Well since its essentially just the a74(m) to M6 to M58 which are all flowing, its not really very hard to realise an average of 90 is just 90 for that whole period :p
I know it costs more fuel, but as i said earlier i'm willing to "pay" to get home quicker, likewise i'd pay more on the train to get it places quicker...
A Place of Light
25-02-2009, 01:18
Well since its essentially just the a74(m) to M6 to M58 which are all flowing, its not really very hard to realise an average of 90 is just 90 for that whole period :p
I know it costs more fuel, but as i said earlier i'm willing to "pay" to get home quicker, likewise i'd pay more on the train to get it places quicker...
Surely though, even just to compensate to slowing down when you come up behind slower cars, you'll need to touch 100mph in places?
And that would be an actual 100mph and not an indicated 100mph.
APoL, it is of course your right to divulge (or not) whatever you want, but your e-penis argument simply doesn't hold. Your reply to Feek's post implies more than 690,000 miles (do the maths if you care) which to me just counts as 'starship mileage' (somewhat apt in Feek's case).
By comparison, I've done a sum total of zero (nil, nada, or however you want to put it) miles of driving. Now while that does mean that I shouldn't (and wouldn't) try to comment on driving style, that doesn't invalidate my thoughts regarding the OP, or regarding speeding in general.
I don't object to speed where the conditions are appropriate - and your comment about judgement in that respect is certainly valid for a lot of drivers, but not all (and certainly not people like Will who are also experienced bike riders). Given those thoughts, you might be surprised to learn that I've personally been on the receiving end of two crashes - once as pillion on a bike, and once as a pedestrian. Both low speed in traffic, thankfully, otherwise at least in the last case I probably wouldn't be here.
A Place of Light
25-02-2009, 01:44
APoL, it is of course your right to divulge (or not) whatever you want, but your e-penis argument simply doesn't hold. Your reply to Feek's post implies more than 690,000 miles (do the maths if you care) which to me just counts as 'starship mileage' (somewhat apt in Feek's case).
By comparison, I've done a sum total of zero (nil, nada, or however you want to put it) miles of driving. Now while that does mean that I shouldn't (and wouldn't) try to comment on driving style, that doesn't invalidate my thoughts regarding the OP, or regarding speeding in general..
Which is exactly the opposite of what I said.
The fact that I've spent more time on the road than Feek does not make my opinion more valid than his by default.
You didn't get that from my post?
Actually, I think I probably did, but either confused myself, or confused you, or both en-route for reasons which are, and doubtless shall remain, entirely mysterious.
Point is - your mileage, starship or otherwise, shouldn't have any bearing whatsoever on a general discussion about speed (other than in cases where experience is clearly an important factor). Ergo, on this forum at least, thoughts of gilding your e-penis are probably more grounded in paranoia than substance, but it's your choice and if called upon I would defend your right to make it.
Your principle is correct but your example is not.
Motorways are the safest roads because there are fewer hazards to negotiate on them than on any other road. You don't have junctions/traffic lights/cyclists/pedestrians and a whole host of other hazards/distractions to deal with.
This is true, and it echos the point rather, that speed in itself, removed from everything else isn't dangerous. It's just a single element (one of many in driving) that *can* cause danger if abused. 31mph in a 30mph doesn't immediately change safe driving into dangerous driving.
At the end of the day legal != safe all of the time.
A Place of Light
25-02-2009, 02:18
Point is - your mileage, starship or otherwise, shouldn't have any bearing whatsoever on a general discussion about speed (other than in cases where experience is clearly an important factor). Ergo, on this forum at least, thoughts of gilding your e-penis are probably more grounded in paranoia than substance, but it's your choice and if called upon I would defend your right to make it.
I agree, but my comment was in response to someone asking If I actually do drive.....nothing more.
I have no e-penis and I care little for what opinion others have of me. This is why I didn't post what I estimate my mileage to be as it would serve no purpose other than to add some more validity to my opinion.....which is something I wouldn't even try to do.
A Place of Light
25-02-2009, 02:21
This is true, and it echos the point rather, that speed in itself, removed from everything else isn't dangerous. It's just a single element (one of many in driving) that *can* cause danger if abused. 31mph in a 30mph doesn't immediately change safe driving into dangerous driving.
At the end of the day legal != safe all of the time.
Definitely.
What I would say is that even in accidents where excessive speed wasn't the primary cause, it does increase the severity of the accident.
You assume so much about everyone else and get so very defensive when people do the same back. Very odd.
Will your sweeping statements about this country do make me chuckle.
I agree, but my comment was in response to someone asking If I actually do drive.....nothing more.
I have no e-penis and I care little for what opinion others have of me. This is why I didn't post what I estimate my mileage to be as it would serve no purpose other than to add some more validity to my opinion.....which is something I wouldn't even try to do.
Surely if you weren't waving the e-peen then a response of "yes I do drive" would of been more appropriate?
There's no such thing as the "slow" lane.
I seldom do 70 on the motorway. I drive within the conditions of the road, and the traffic density, and the area where I'm driving. Around schools I slow down, in built up areas I slow down (usually because the roads are full of bumps and are **** anyway). On big open roads I seldom stick to the limit, on motorways I seldom stick to the limits, on fun twisty country roads I drive in a spirited fashion to enjoy the roads. I don't worry about my speed, I concentrate on what's going on around me - my observation skills are really very good, my driving skill is above average but in the UK that's not hard to achieve, however I will say that I do have very good anticipation and observational skills - that comes with riding a motorbike.
I make my choices when I ride/drive and if I get caught then as long as it's by a policeman in a car able to offer some discretion if any is required then that's fine, what I abhor is all the automated systems which do nothing to make people safer.
QFT for me too :D
A Place of Light
25-02-2009, 19:05
You assume so much about everyone else and get so very defensive when people do the same back. Very odd.
I'm not getting defensive. Several people misunderstood my post and I'm attempting to clarify. If I were being defensive I'd be defending a point I had made, not pointing out that some have made an incorrect interpretation of a comment of mine.
There's a difference ;)
Plus you of all people already know that I assume nothing about anyone.
Surely if you weren't waving the e-peen then a response of "yes I do drive" would of been more appropriate?
Because I could've passed my test last week and replied "yes I do drive". The reason I made my original comment was to not only point out that I do indeed drive.....but that I'm a fairly experienced driver at that.
As for the e-penis argument (which I actually brought up so I'd hardly mention it if I were doing just that, would I?) I'd have needed to trot out a long list of examples proving me to be teh king. I didn't, because it's a throwaway comment albeit an accurate one. There may well be members in here that have covered more mileage than I, but that's why I said "possible, but unlikely". A comment that I stand by.
LeperousDust
25-02-2009, 19:16
Surely though, even just to compensate to slowing down when you come up behind slower cars, you'll need to touch 100mph in places?
And that would be an actual 100mph and not an indicated 100mph.
I overtake them, pretty much everytime i drive back and fourth i'm very rarely held up, and i actually have a motion capture from my camera of most (battery died) of the way home. I'll see if i can dig it out somewhere, it's just me overtaking people and tucking out the way all the way.
And yeah that would be me doing around 100 in my car, which is actually 90 because my speedo is a nice easy 10% out. If i see a speed camera (that i should have already been warned about) ahead its quite easy to just blip off 20 back to 80 on my speedo and be within what the camera wants :)
A Place of Light
25-02-2009, 19:23
I overtake them, pretty much everytime i drive back and fourth i'm very rarely held up, and i actually have a motion capture from my camera of most (battery died) of the way home. I'll see if i can dig it out somewhere, it's just me overtaking people and tucking out the way all the way.
And yeah that would be me doing around 100 in my car, which is actually 90 because my speedo is a nice easy 10% out. If i see a speed camera (that i should have already been warned about) ahead its quite easy to just blip off 20 back to 80 on my speedo and be within what the camera wants :)
For gods sake don't youtube it ;)
LeperousDust
25-02-2009, 19:39
Haha, you'd love it by the sound of things ;)
Right working out from the last trip i averaged ~80 (actual) over the whooole trip, so yeah not actually as much as i expected. Thats sounds alright to me :p Happy now? :D
A Place of Light
25-02-2009, 20:02
Haha, you'd love it by the sound of things ;)
Right working out from the last trip i averaged ~80 (actual) over the whooole trip, so yeah not actually as much as i expected. Thats sounds alright to me :p Happy now? :D
Either way, you're still making good progress to do that journey in this sort of time frame. :)
Del Lardo
26-02-2009, 02:59
Easy tiger, I was explaining my reasoning.
While I stand by my comment, it was only intended to be throwaway, and not some way to flex my e-penis (like I have one).
Don't take it as a slap in the face as it was most certainly not intended as one :)
Apologies for not responding last night but my hotel internet connection died. My comment was slightly tougue in cheek, imagine I had a obviously fake sad face on as I said it ;)
Because this is a small community compared to most other forums and a lot of people are friends in RL I actually like to learn stuff about other members and to me as a car geek I'd find it quite interesting to find out how you did all those miles.
Maybe you drove one of those mega mileage Golfs all over Europe delivering diamonds, maybe you were a truck driver or maybe you had a fuel card and far too much free time?
Most people on BD are happy to share parts of their life on here, if you're not then fair play and tell me to bugger off but don't be suprised if some of us express an interest in what you do when you're not posting on here :)
A Place of Light
26-02-2009, 13:59
Most people on BD are happy to share parts of their life on here, if you're not then fair play and tell me to bugger off but don't be suprised if some of us express an interest in what you do when you're not posting on here :)
I'm a fairly private person, that's why I tend not to go into too much detail as it might look like I'm typing the written equivalent of putting my thumbs in my ears and shouting "ner ner". I don't do the whole point scoring thing on internet forums, but when people don't know you they don't always realise this and the arguments start from there.
So, sorry if you thought I was being a little short with you (5'9", so don't start ;) ) and if you ever think one of my posts directed to you is a little acidic then ask me to clarify it before assuming the worst.
:)
Del Lardo
26-02-2009, 14:16
I'm a fairly private person, that's why I tend not to go into too much detail as it might look like I'm typing the written equivalent of putting my thumbs in my ears and shouting "ner ner". I don't do the whole point scoring thing on internet forums, but when people don't know you they don't always realise this and the arguments start from there.
So, sorry if you thought I was being a little short with you (5'9", so don't start ;) ) and if you ever think one of my posts directed to you is a little acidic then ask me to clarify it before assuming the worst.
:)
Diamond delivery man it is then ;);D
Diamond delivery man it is then ;);D
No doubt delivering to where I work (the building used to be owned by a diamond merchant). ;) ;D
On a similar note are there guidelines as to where the roving speed cameras can set up?
I only ask as I saw one yesterday that was parked slightly dangerously and very illegally.
I was under the impression that Police can only park illegally, ie double yellow lines, central reservations between 2 same direction lanes etc, if it's an emergency.
If this is correct then would you be able to argue the fact that they were illegally parked when the ticket was issued if you were caught speeding by one of these badly set up cameras.
LeperousDust
26-02-2009, 19:13
As far as i knew the mobile units can only be set up on pre determined mobile sites.
Well, it's two weeks gone now.....looks like I should be clear :D
*awaits post when I get home*
A Place of Light
09-03-2009, 19:59
Well, it's two weeks gone now.....looks like I should be clear :D
*awaits post when I get home*
IIRC, "they" have 14 days to send out the ticket.
Some people take this to mean that they must receive the ticket within 14 days and if they do not then they're in the clear.
You're not back in Kansas just yet, Dorothy.
;)
I know, which is why I was allowing for some postage today ;D
Still nothing, so I reckon I'm safe :p
A Place of Light
09-03-2009, 21:25
I know, which is why I was allowing for some postage today ;D
Still nothing, so I reckon I'm safe :p
Me too, TBH.
They say 14 days but pretty much everyone gets notified much sooner.
Can I stick my neck out and advise you to start celebrating?
... unless of course they mean 14 working days, in which case Friday 13th
Uh oh! :eek:
A Place of Light
09-03-2009, 22:26
... unless of course they mean 14 working days, in which case Friday 13th
Uh oh! :eek:
Every silver lining has a cloud.....and all that jazz, right? :D
Psymonkee
10-03-2009, 01:57
Think that means I'm nearly in the clear too....forgot all about this after getting home :D
... unless of course they mean 14 working days, in which case Friday 13th
Uh oh! :eek:
Don't the police work weekends? ;D
Don't the police work weekends? ;D
I don't think the office do ;)
I hate those vans, went past one on the A27 and did much the same as you for the next few weeks, at least when you get pulled over for it you know your going to get done :lipsrsealed:
Don't the police work weekends? ;D
No weekends are for kebabs and perving at scantily clad women patrolling the night time streets.
As for the most miles driven, can I pipe in here? :D
I have no idea as to an actual number. All I know is I drove semi for two years (what you folks call an arctic). I drove taxi for 5 years. So there's 3/4 of a million miles right there. Throw in my personal driving over the last (gulp) 24 years and I'm probably up over a million miles.
And in all that time I've gotten 2 speeding tickets (both 8 hours apart on the same interstate, opposite directions. ;D) and 4 accidents (two not my fault, one equipment failure and one I tried to fight as not my fault but lost). And only the equipment failure one left any of the vehicles involved disabled (mine).
Where can you get to that's within a million mile radius though? :D
A Place of Light
11-03-2009, 18:41
As for the most miles driven, can I pipe in here? :D
I have no idea as to an actual number. All I know is I drove semi for two years (what you folks call an arctic). I drove taxi for 5 years. So there's 3/4 of a million miles right there. Throw in my personal driving over the last (gulp) 24 years and I'm probably up over a million miles.
And in all that time I've gotten 2 speeding tickets (both 8 hours apart on the same interstate, opposite directions. ;D) and 4 accidents (two not my fault, one equipment failure and one I tried to fight as not my fault but lost). And only the equipment failure one left any of the vehicles involved disabled (mine).
We're in similar ballparks.
A Place of Light
11-03-2009, 18:42
Where can you get to that's within a million mile radius though? :D
The bottom of Bill Gates' wallet?
Where can you get to that's within a million mile radius though? :D
1/93 of the way to the Sun?
I think it's safe to say....I'm clear :cool:
A Place of Light
12-03-2009, 02:17
I think it's safe to say....I'm clear :cool:
If this turns out not to be the case, try some live yoghurt.
My turn to worry :( Although the camera definitely flashed so I'm stuffed :angry: My own damned fault, red light camera, about 0.25secs after it went red. 13 years blemish free driving comes to an end.
Going to have to wait ages as it's a lease vehicle.
A Place of Light
20-03-2009, 19:51
My turn to worry :( Although the camera definitely flashed so I'm stuffed :angry: My own damned fault, red light camera, about 0.25secs after it went red. 13 years blemish free driving comes to an end.
Going to have to wait ages as it's a lease vehicle.
Did it flash twice, as I'm fairly sure you're safe unless it did.
/disclaimer, could be wrong though.
We're in similar ballparks.
Well I've been to Andromeda.
Then back again.
A Place of Light
20-03-2009, 19:57
Well I've been to Andromeda.
Then back again.
How was the in-flight meal?
Mine sucked hard.
Did it flash twice, as I'm fairly sure you're safe unless it did.
/disclaimer, could be wrong though.
Pretty sure traffic light cameras only go once.
If you were doing over 170mph you'll be fine.
Or is that GATSOs? :confused:
A Place of Light
22-03-2009, 16:09
Pretty sure traffic light cameras only go once.
My bad, misread the original post.
Red light cameras flash once, the speed cams twice.....I think.
A Place of Light
22-03-2009, 16:12
If you were doing over 170mph you'll be fine.
Or is that GATSOs? :confused:
If you're referring to the TG episode where they used a TVR, then IIRC mythbusters showed that to share common ground with most of the TG activities and be complete bullworks.
If you're referring to the TG episode where they used a TVR, then IIRC mythbusters showed that to share common ground with most of the TG activities and be complete bullworks.
Adam and Jamie pwn Velcro-Head/Hamster/Capt. Slow non shocker.
Never saw the TG ep. just heard about it. I'll check my sources better next time ;)
A Place of Light
23-03-2009, 01:12
Adam and Jamie pwn Velcro-Head/Hamster/Capt. Slow non shocker.
Never saw the TG ep. just heard about it. I'll check my sources better next time ;)
Funnily enough I prefer Hamster/May to Clarkson by a long chalk.
Just a shame VBH isn't on Top Gear anymore IMHO.
As for the cam thing, I dunno. Mythbusters beat the cam but it took some rocket powered thing at around 245 mph to do so. I prefer to take the easier option and just stick to the limit :D
All the cameras round here flash twice. See them go off all the time because the lights in London areas are set so far back from junctions. It's almost like it's deliberate.
If you were doing over 170mph you'll be fine.
Or is that GATSOs? :confused:
If you're referring to the TG episode where they used a TVR, then IIRC mythbusters showed that to share common ground with most of the TG activities and be complete bullworks.
Adam and Jamie pwn Velcro-Head/Hamster/Capt. Slow non shocker.
Never saw the TG ep. just heard about it. I'll check my sources better next time ;)
Funnily enough I prefer Hamster/May to Clarkson by a long chalk.
Just a shame VBH isn't on Top Gear anymore IMHO.
As for the cam thing, I dunno. Mythbusters beat the cam but it took some rocket powered thing at around 245 mph to do so. I prefer to take the easier option and just stick to the limit :D
By a remarkably slow co-inky-dink, I was reading about this yesterday.
The reason Mythbusters needed to go so fast to beat the camera is that US speed cameras only take one pic whereas GATSOs take 2.
On a related note, I only saw the TRUVELO on the way home from the parentals at the last minute. :(
*awaits postman*
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.