Speeding on the M180 in to Grimsby

[The General]

Completely off topic of last Saturday but there seems to be a new ploy down in Shoebury. If anyone is around Church Road/Maplin Way beware. A policeman parks his car round the corner down Church Road (the less busier of the 2) and he nips round the corner with his hand-held speed gun and tries to zap people both up and down Maplin Way. Coming up from the seafront and the t'other way. I just smiled at him and did about 25.

He has just a normal police car and there are no signs around saying that "camera's could be in operation" like there is down Ness Road and Thorpe Hall Avenue.

This has got to be highly illegally and must catch people out?!

15 months and counting for me. Not bad at all.

7000 posts and thats one of the first to make a serious point!

 

[Interpol Shrimper]

Quote[/b] (Shrimp in a Kilt @ May 13 2005,12:12)]We are all Kevin Maher fans.

Are we

Not so much a fan, I'm more someone that tolerates his presence & is happy when he does well despite getting frustrated with him from time to time!

 

[Shrimp in a Kilt]

Quote[/b] (glasgowsufc @ May 13 2005,12:17)]

Quote[/b] (Shrimp in a Kilt @ May 13 2005,12:12)]We are all Kevin Maher fans.

Are we  

Not so much a fan, I'm more someone that tolerates his presence & is happy when he does well despite getting frustrated with him from time to time!

Did I ask you to spoil my brilliant theory with your boring facts? I didn't think so!

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] (Shrimp in a Kilt @ May 13 2005,12:15)]

Quote[/b] (Matt the Shrimp @ May 13 2005,11:01)]

Quote[/b] (Clarky_Blues @ May 13 2005,10:49)]When we travelled to Cardiff there were a few mobile camera units, I suppose they put them out as they know loads of fans will be travelling by car who don't know the roads.

I'm amazed there isn't more of an outcry about this.  The very fact that these units are mobile must surely show the police's protestations about these cameras being used for safety as being utterly untruthful.

Rather than using their resources to catch the truly dangerous - like the lunatic who sped past us at c. 140 mph (and that's not an exaggeration), as Axe was driving me, HK Blue, Naps & Barry Harris back to Upminster - they instead position a camera in a place to catch lots of unsuspecting people doing 85mph on a motorway so that they can boost police funds... truly the stealthiest of all stealth taxes, and utterly axiomatic of the way in which this government is all about the illusion of improving society, when in fact it is doing anything but that...

Sorry, I'll get off my soapbox now...

Matt

Sorry Matt, don't often disagree with you but if you don't want the fine don't do the crime.

Mine is a more philosophical question though... why is it a crime? Should it be a crime?

A crime should surely be a form of behaviour which is so injurious to society at large that it cannot go unpunished.

How does driving at 85 mph in a big modern car on a motorway fall into that definition?

Matt

 

[Upminster Blue]

Quote[/b] (Matt the Shrimp @ May 13 2005,11:01)]

Quote[/b] (Clarky_Blues @ May 13 2005,10:49)]When we travelled to Cardiff there were a few mobile camera units, I suppose they put them out as they know loads of fans will be travelling by car who don't know the roads.

I'm amazed there isn't more of an outcry about this.  The very fact that these units are mobile must surely show the police's protestations about these cameras being used for safety as being utterly untruthful.

Rather than using their resources to catch the truly dangerous - like the lunatic who sped past us at c. 140 mph (and that's not an exaggeration), as Axe was driving me, HK Blue, Naps & Barry Harris back to Upminster - they instead position a camera in a place to catch lots of unsuspecting people doing 85mph on a motorway so that they can boost police funds... truly the stealthiest of all stealth taxes, and utterly axiomatic of the way in which this government is all about the illusion of improving society, when in fact it is doing anything but that...

Sorry, I'll get off my soapbox now...

Matt

Here, here.

 

[Technician]

Since when has the speed limit been 85mph on the motorways? anyone doing that speed deserves everything they get... not only because it's bloody dangerous, but also because it increases the levels of pollution in the atmosphere, by using more fuel... meaning you lot obviously have more money than sense

Where's the fire anyway? I'll bet that if you set off at the same time as everyone else doing 70mph, you'd only arrive a few minutes before the sensible drivers (if you're very lucky!!!

).

 

[Firestorm]

Maplin way has speed camera signs at both ends

Interesting bit about speed limits though.
IMHO 30's and 40's are their for other road users (Push bikes pedestrians etc) safety however the 70 limit for motorways was thought of in a time of Narrow wheels , drum brakes crap road surfaces, no abs, poorer suspension  etc.
In MCN this week there is this comparison. The Highway code has the stopping distance from 70 miles an hour as 96 metres.
The New Triumph Speedtriple stops in 43.7 metres

 

[blues_r_best]

Quote[/b] (Technician @ May 13 2005,13:58)]not only because it's bloody dangerous, but also because it increases the levels of pollution in the atmosphere, by using more fuel...

Is it actually true that by going faster that you use more fuel, because as you travel quicker you need less force to keep the momentum going and so should use less fuel, but on the other side, air resistance will increase meaning more fuel would be used.

I don't know

 

[Firestorm]

Quote[/b] (Technician @ May 13 2005,13:58)]Since when has the speed limit been 85mph on the motorways? anyone doing that speed deserves everything they get... not only because it's bloody dangerous, but also because it increases the levels of pollution in the atmosphere, by using more fuel... meaning you lot obviously have more money than sense

Where's the fire anyway? I'll bet that if you set off at the same time as everyone else doing 70mph, you'd only arrive a few minutes before the sensible drivers (if you're very lucky!!!

).

a 170 mile motorway journey at 85mph 2hours
at 70 mph 2 hours 45 minutes

Now as they recommend that you stop for every two hours driving 20 minute break takes the total journey time up to 3 hours 5 minutes at total of 50% longer....

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Spot on, Mr. C in your post about speed limits.

Techy - the speed limit isn't 85 mph.  But, frankly, when it comes to motorways - and speed limits in general - there needs to be some clearer thinking on all this.

After all, which is less safe:

1. Driving at 90 mph on an empty motoway
2. Driving at 70 mph during rush hour motorway traffic
3. Driving at 30 mph outside a school at 8.15 a.m. during term time.

2 and 3 are legal, 1 is illegal.  And yet 2 and 3 are probably far, far more dangerous.  But then - and I say this as a lawyer - the law is often an *** about this.  I certainly think current national laws leave a lot to be desired on this front, that's for sure...

Matt

 

[Firestorm]

Quote[/b] (blues_r_best @ May 13 2005,14:18)]

Quote[/b] (Technician @ May 13 2005,13:58)]not only because it's bloody dangerous, but also because it increases the levels of pollution in the atmosphere, by using more fuel...

Is it actually true that by going faster that you use more fuel, because as you travel quicker you need less force to keep the momentum going and so should use less fuel, but on the other side, air resistance will increase meaning more fuel would be used.

I don't know  

Does depend on the vehicle but I believe that the optimum a few years ago was 57mph above or below that and Fuel consumption increases

That said it the fuel does get mixed with a greater percentage of air at higher speeds so the concentration is less.

 

[Shrimp in a Kilt]

Quote[/b] (blues_r_best @ May 13 2005,14:18)]

Quote[/b] (Technician @ May 13 2005,13:58)]not only because it's bloody dangerous, but also because it increases the levels of pollution in the atmosphere, by using more fuel...

Is it actually true that by going faster that you use more fuel, because as you travel quicker you need less force to keep the momentum going and so should use less fuel, but on the other side, air resistance will increase meaning more fuel would be used.

I don't know  

The faster you go the more fuel you use. Trying to push a mass of metal through the air at high speed is very ineficient and fuel consumption increases dramatically with speed. EG if I am doing a steady 70 in my Liteace, fuel consumption averages 28mpg. Bring that down to average 55, and my fuel consumption improves to 34mpg, or around 20% better economy.

 

[Shrimp in a Kilt]

Quote[/b] (Firestorm @ May 13 2005,14:19)]a 170 mile motorway journey at 85mph   2hours
at 70 mph  2 hours 45 minutes

Now as they recommend that you stop for every two hours driving  20 minute break takes the total journey time up to 3 hours 5 minutes at total of 50% longer....

Firstly, you are getting confused between average and maximum speeds. To average 85 mph you have to travel, usually a fair bit faster than that. To average 70, you again have to travel at a higher speed for some part of the journey, but not by as much.

Secondly in your example, I'm afraid your maths doesn't add up. 170 mile journey at 85mph average takes two hours. But the same journey at 70mph takes two hours and 25 minutes. Also, you cannot apply the rest break  to only the one journey. Driving at high speed is more tiring so you should stop more often, so the rest break is irrelevant here.

It is 79 miles to Inverness on a mix of roads. Driving my wife's Astra 16v, and tanking it, I can make the journey in 1 hour 17 minutes. I am taking risks, albiet minor ones (I hope!) for quite a lot of that time, eg assumptions about how another road user is going to behave while I overtake him, whether a vehicle is likely to come around a corner ahead at a relatively high speed, etc. In the Liteace, I drive sedately and though I reach the national limit I don't exceed it. It takes me 1 hour and 26 minutes. By driving hard, breaking the speed limit  and taking risks that involve me and other road users I can save 9 minutes on my journey. Hardly seems worth it.

 

[bas blue]

didnt get a speeding ticket on the coach. but two coachloads nearly got charged for loitering !

 

[Firestorm]

Quote[/b] (Shrimp in a Kilt @ May 13 2005,14:45)]Secondly in your example, I'm afraid your maths doesn't add up. 170  mile journey at 85mph average takes two hours. But the same journey at 70mph takes two hours and 25 minutes. Also, you cannot apply the rest break  to only the one journey. Driving at high speed is more tiring so you should stop more often, so the rest break is irrelevant here.

Oops 2.45 hours not 2 hours 45 minutes damn calculator.

I applied the stop to the only journey which took longer that 2 hours as the recomendations are a stop every 2 hours and it was tongue in cheek............

Peronally, I dislike the emphasis on speed being the killer.
It is poor driving which kills.
What is to blame for someone going round a corner too fast? The speed or the incompetance of the driver who chooses to take the cornewr too fast for his or his cars ability.
Speed doesn't kill ...ar****les who can't drive fast sensibly do.

 

[Technician]

Why is everyone trying to justify their illegal actions? The national speed limit on a motorway is 70mph! the fact that the law doesn't bat an eye-lid if you are doing 75-80mph (however briefly), is irrespective. The speed limit is there for everyone's safety and it annoys me that those who ignore the law, are the one's that also think they own the road.

Would there be more wear and tear on the road surfaces at greater speeds? Probably!!!

Would the risk of an accident be increased at greater speeds? Definately!!!

At 75mph, my car is 20% less fuel efficient than at 55mph, so at 85mph it is likely to be something like 30-40% less fuel efficient and greater speeds can reduce an engines life-time through increased wear and tear.

As for the theory that you could get to Grimsby in 2 hours...

dream on...

I would be very surprised if I arrived at the same destination more than 15 minutes behind you maximum, so is it really worth it

 

[Guest]

Shouldn't this be moved across to The Pub forum? as it has strayed off topic?

 

[Technician]

Quote[/b] (Rayleigh_Blue @ May 13 2005,14:58)]Shouldn't this be moved across to The Pub forum? as it has strayed off topic?

I agree it's in the wrong forum, but the topic is speeding!!!

 

[Shrimp in a Kilt]

Quote[/b] (Firestorm @ May 13 2005,14:55)]

Quote[/b] ]Oops 2.45 hours not 2 hours 45 minutes damn calculator.

I applied the stop to the only journey which took longer that 2 hours as the recomendations are a stop every 2 hours and it was tongue in cheek............

From my bike riding days, over 80 mph was tongue half way down my windpipe, not in my cheek...

Quote[/b] ]Peronally, I dislike the emphasis on speed being the killer.
It is poor driving which kills.
What is to blame for someone going round a corner too fast? The speed or the incompetance of the driver who chooses to take the cornewr too fast for his or his cars ability.
Speed doesn't kill ...ar****les who can't drive fast sensibly do.

Yes and no. The problem is that everyone who drives fast thinks that they are a safe driver, and therefore it is acceptable to speed because of their superior skill. The trouble is that they routinely overestimate the extent of that skill, and get into a habit of driving fast. And it is when they involve other people in the results of this misjudgement that it becomes unacceptable. 85% of drivers feel that they are in the top 10% of drivers on the road. Almost all of them are wrong.*










Except me, of course!

 

[The General]

I always stick to 70mph ... !!!