If you got caught drifting a roundabout....
Discussion
vonhosen said:
Furberger said:
vonhosen said:
Kawasicki said:
Is there a oversteer angle limit then? Shouldn't we have an understeer limit too? How about a tyre slip in braking or acceleration limit?
All apply.There will be some lateral movement of the tyre perpendicular to its direction of rotation during cornering at any speed.
As all apply, does that mean that the BIB have the right to throw the book at anyone who is cornering in a car?
This thread reminds me of an article I read years ago from when Clarkson had visited Iceland.
Place was covered in snow as you might expect, and he had happened to observe an elderley woman approaching a junction in her similarly elderley Corolla or similar. Instead of going straight on as he had anticipated the old dear pulls the most incredible handbrake turn and drifts inch perfect round the corner and on her merry way, leaving a gobsmacked Clarkson breathless in admiration.
Speaking with some locals in the bar later it transpires that this was indeed nothing exceptional and if you were to travel around you would see similar behaviour all over the island.
Really puts the skill of Joe Public UK into perspective. Imagine explaining such a manouvere to the Police here and coming away without some sort of endorsement!
Place was covered in snow as you might expect, and he had happened to observe an elderley woman approaching a junction in her similarly elderley Corolla or similar. Instead of going straight on as he had anticipated the old dear pulls the most incredible handbrake turn and drifts inch perfect round the corner and on her merry way, leaving a gobsmacked Clarkson breathless in admiration.
Speaking with some locals in the bar later it transpires that this was indeed nothing exceptional and if you were to travel around you would see similar behaviour all over the island.
Really puts the skill of Joe Public UK into perspective. Imagine explaining such a manouvere to the Police here and coming away without some sort of endorsement!
Furberger said:
vonhosen said:
Furberger said:
vonhosen said:
Kawasicki said:
Is there a oversteer angle limit then? Shouldn't we have an understeer limit too? How about a tyre slip in braking or acceleration limit?
All apply.There will be some lateral movement of the tyre perpendicular to its direction of rotation during cornering at any speed.
As all apply, does that mean that the BIB have the right to throw the book at anyone who is cornering in a car?
vonhosen said:
Furberger said:
vonhosen said:
Furberger said:
vonhosen said:
Kawasicki said:
Is there a oversteer angle limit then? Shouldn't we have an understeer limit too? How about a tyre slip in braking or acceleration limit?
All apply.There will be some lateral movement of the tyre perpendicular to its direction of rotation during cornering at any speed.
As all apply, does that mean that the BIB have the right to throw the book at anyone who is cornering in a car?
It might be nice to think that you can rate what amount of slip is inappropriate, but how can you do that?
Is it just a case of "If, in my subjective opinion, I don't like the look of your driving then it's illegal?"
Kawasicki said:
vonhosen said:
Furberger said:
vonhosen said:
Furberger said:
vonhosen said:
Kawasicki said:
Is there a oversteer angle limit then? Shouldn't we have an understeer limit too? How about a tyre slip in braking or acceleration limit?
All apply.There will be some lateral movement of the tyre perpendicular to its direction of rotation during cornering at any speed.
As all apply, does that mean that the BIB have the right to throw the book at anyone who is cornering in a car?
It might be nice to think that you can rate what amount of slip is inappropriate, but how can you do that?
Is it just a case of "If, in my subjective opinion, I don't like the look of your driving then it's illegal?"
Edited by vonhosen on Friday 18th January 16:42
vonhosen said:
Kawasicki said:
vonhosen said:
Furberger said:
vonhosen said:
Furberger said:
vonhosen said:
Kawasicki said:
Is there a oversteer angle limit then? Shouldn't we have an understeer limit too? How about a tyre slip in braking or acceleration limit?
All apply.There will be some lateral movement of the tyre perpendicular to its direction of rotation during cornering at any speed.
As all apply, does that mean that the BIB have the right to throw the book at anyone who is cornering in a car?
It might be nice to think that you can rate what amount of slip is inappropriate, but how can you do that?
Is it just a case of "If, in my subjective opinion, I don't like the look of your driving then it's illegal?"
And whether either is an offence has nothing to do with the outcome, or indeed with potential risk, because whether the driver is in complete control cannot be taken into account.
I wonder why people think that traffic law is a bit inconsistent and badly conceived...
TomJS said:
flemke said:
vonhosen said:
Kawasicki said:
Is there a oversteer angle limit then? Shouldn't we have an understeer limit too? How about a tyre slip in braking or acceleration limit?
All apply.And before the inevitable "think of the children" responses: no, practice at a glass smooth skidpan or racetrack doesn't necessarily substitute for experience in the real world IMHO (though obviously off road practice to develop the basic skills would be recommended).
VictorMeldrew said:
TomJS said:
flemke said:
vonhosen said:
Kawasicki said:
Is there a oversteer angle limit then? Shouldn't we have an understeer limit too? How about a tyre slip in braking or acceleration limit?
All apply.And before the inevitable "think of the children" responses: no, practice at a glass smooth skidpan or racetrack doesn't necessarily substitute for experience in the real world IMHO (though obviously off road practice to develop the basic skills would be recommended).
Yes, but the point is they are very unlikely to be able to tell if it was self induced, which was the point of the post. I've read what you have said on not getting near the limit etc, but that simply tells me you haven't driven a 500 TVR. Or a Cerbera. Or a 928. Or a Scimitar GTE. Or any number of lively, powerful, light rear drivers.
Still, anyone driving such a vehicle must be aware of the risks when they buy them eh, so if they (the cars) misbehave on the public roads then the driver can expect no mercy from jobsworths.
Still, anyone driving such a vehicle must be aware of the risks when they buy them eh, so if they (the cars) misbehave on the public roads then the driver can expect no mercy from jobsworths.
10 pence short said:
Explaining that it's controlled and safe on the road, to a magistrate, is another thing entirely
But should one be prosecuted for something the magistrate is incapable of understanding? Paul
VictorMeldrew said:
Yes, but the point is they are very unlikely to be able to tell if it was self induced, which was the point of the post. I've read what you have said on not getting near the limit etc, but that simply tells me you haven't driven a 500 TVR. Or a Cerbera. Or a 928. Or a Scimitar GTE. Or any number of lively, powerful, light rear drivers.
Still, anyone driving such a vehicle must be aware of the risks when they buy them eh, so if they (the cars) misbehave on the public roads then the driver can expect no mercy from jobsworths.
In reality, all those cars will slide a bit, but you do have to be careless - when I'm in town I try and be pretty careful, as I'm in a 400bhp supercar that is a bit of a handful. Occasionally it will let go totally unexpectedly, and I hope that the cop behind me would use his experience and objectivity to say 'he wasn't giving it a big bootful. perhaps there's some diesel there, and he's certainly not taking the piss.'Still, anyone driving such a vehicle must be aware of the risks when they buy them eh, so if they (the cars) misbehave on the public roads then the driver can expect no mercy from jobsworths.
But with your honesty condoms slipped on lads, usually when it breaks free, you're wearing a little smile, and you know damn well that you've pressed a bit heavier on the loud pedal than necessary.
Seems to me that as with most forms of 'enthusiastic' driving, the trick is to only do it where the probability of getting caught by the Bib is acceptably low. For some people 'acceptably low' might mean zero i.e. never knowingly do it - I expect that most people have more relaxed attitude to risk though.
GreenV8S said:
Seems to me that as with most forms of 'enthusiastic' driving, the trick is to only do it where the probability of getting caught by the Bib is acceptably low. For some people 'acceptably low' might mean zero i.e. never knowingly do it - I expect that most people have more relaxed attitude to risk though.
Donutting outside the copshop probs a bad idea then? 
rtdRacer said:
But with your honesty condoms slipped on lads, usually when it breaks free, you're wearing a little smile, and you know damn well that you've pressed a bit heavier on the loud pedal than necessary.
No, can't agree. Mine did a 180 once when I lifted off the throttle in a straight line, and yes it was a gentle lift. No ice involved, or at least not enough to bother the vehicles behind who were now wondering why the sports car was travelling backwards. I've had the back end step out on several occasions when I've been driving like a saint; conversely the back end very rarely steps out if I am giving it beans, unless I want it to.And BHP has very little to do with it.
Edited by VictorMeldrew on Friday 18th January 18:09
MrFlibbles said:
GreenV8S said:
Seems to me that as with most forms of 'enthusiastic' driving, the trick is to only do it where the probability of getting caught by the Bib is acceptably low. For some people 'acceptably low' might mean zero i.e. never knowingly do it - I expect that most people have more relaxed attitude to risk though.
Donutting outside the copshop probs a bad idea then? Some people are never happy
vonhosen said:
Quite simply you should be aiming to avoid getting to the point where normal grip is lost. If you do get to that point then you may find yourself prosecuted. That's likely to happen where the officer believes you intentionally got to that point for pleasure, or you were negligent in doing so.
Prosecuted for pleasure.How totalitarian.
We can debate this as much as we like, however the law of this land is, in this day and age, attributable to the lowest common denominator. Those who have zero talent behind the wheel of a dangerous implement.
Whilst one would think that laws would be designed to protect the talented from the talentless, however, while we have a driving test system that permits inept people to command a deadly weapon, the laws have to be designed to protect the rest of society from THEM.
Which means, that no matter how sure you are that you are in control of your motor vehicle, regardless of the forward speed, the law will be based on what Kevin from Neesden is capable of in his bodykitted 1.2 Clio driving like he's just watched Fast & The Furious Tokyo Drift, and is attempting to emulate it in the high street.
However, we do have, somewhere, officers of the constabulary that are capable of viewing, and evaluation the "display" before either "ignoring it" (the road was greasy, well done that man!), "giving you a 'calm-down' speech" and a quick producer whilst looking your MT900 over. or reading you the riot act for driving without due care and attention, if not reckless driving, or even dangerous, if the RAB is populated with Bert & Hilda in their Honda Civic.
Just thing yourselves thankful that they haven't designed an LTI20/20 that measure slip angle!!
The wonders of dumbed down society, where they no longer teach common sense in school (do that again and you get a whack which will hurt! Lots).
Rob.
Whilst one would think that laws would be designed to protect the talented from the talentless, however, while we have a driving test system that permits inept people to command a deadly weapon, the laws have to be designed to protect the rest of society from THEM.
Which means, that no matter how sure you are that you are in control of your motor vehicle, regardless of the forward speed, the law will be based on what Kevin from Neesden is capable of in his bodykitted 1.2 Clio driving like he's just watched Fast & The Furious Tokyo Drift, and is attempting to emulate it in the high street.
However, we do have, somewhere, officers of the constabulary that are capable of viewing, and evaluation the "display" before either "ignoring it" (the road was greasy, well done that man!), "giving you a 'calm-down' speech" and a quick producer whilst looking your MT900 over. or reading you the riot act for driving without due care and attention, if not reckless driving, or even dangerous, if the RAB is populated with Bert & Hilda in their Honda Civic.
Just thing yourselves thankful that they haven't designed an LTI20/20 that measure slip angle!!
The wonders of dumbed down society, where they no longer teach common sense in school (do that again and you get a whack which will hurt! Lots).
Rob.
flemke said:
Pork_n_Beem said:
Have you all gone mad !!
What do you think? 
Pork_n_Beem said:
If you were entering a RAB and loeb is coming around sideways would you consider filtering in or consider selecting reverse !
I think we have pushed the boundaries enough lets just settle for 90mph on a straight road.
Drifting on a public road....implications for the emergency stop, very messy when your crossed up, what about visibility, massively increases the blind spots when you are looking through the side windows across the passengers side, what lights, they will be facing the wrong direction, especially indicators.....
Guys, i think this one needs more thought
I did not think that anyone was suggesting, or even imagining, that all "drifting" (power oversteer) should be allowed.I think we have pushed the boundaries enough lets just settle for 90mph on a straight road.
Drifting on a public road....implications for the emergency stop, very messy when your crossed up, what about visibility, massively increases the blind spots when you are looking through the side windows across the passengers side, what lights, they will be facing the wrong direction, especially indicators.....
Guys, i think this one needs more thought
Rather, I think the question was whether any drifting might be allowed. It seemed that those who know the law and how the authorities think about such things viewed all intentional and perhaps also all unintentional drifting as an absolute offence.
At some point I raised the question of whether, if the person doing the drifting were Sebastien Loeb, and there were no living or dead things within the vicinity so that it was not physically possible for the drifting car to cause any harm whatsoever, a bit of drifting would ever be allowed.
The answer seemed to be "No - it's all proscribed."
The only time i can think off where its probably OK is on a snowy road, where you are powering up a hill and the road is straight and the car is tracking the camber of the road.
sleep envy said:
flemke said:
Soren2 said:
I understand that some might be able to perform this manoeuvre more safely than others. But I'd agree with von that to approach a hazard with the intention of losing traction and grip to achieve nothing more than a car park trick is an action that will always render itself punishable.
Does anyone actually disagree with that? If so why?
We have tried above to articulate why we disagree.Does anyone actually disagree with that? If so why?
One can accept or reject the argument in favour of speed limits per se, and from there the argument in favour of tiered licences. The unique thing about speed limits is that they represent an unambiguous parameter. There is normally no doubt about what speed a car is doing. We can measure it even without a human being in attendance.
"Drifting" around a quarter of a RAB is not, so far as I know, something that is readily measurable by machine. It requires human recognition and assessment.
If it requires the active participation of a human to identify a drift, and that human is a professional at assessing driving, then why at the same time cannot that professional assess whether the driver has control of the vehicle? That same professional's testimony will be relied on in court in many other situations to determine DWDC, CD, etc. If the professional is qualified to make these judgments, and surely he or she must be, by definition, then why should not the test of how one circumnavigates a RAB be on the basis of control, rather that according to another arbitrary, one-size-fits-all law?
The issue is not the yaw of the vehicle. The issue is control. They are not the same thing.
"One size fits all" is how the law is usually drafted. It's a leveller, a school uniform for the road. A drift in the context of this conversation is either an intentional loss of grip with no safety dividend or an unintentional loss of control through an inappropriate action for the circumstance. There should be no need for it, and it's not difficult to avoid.
Either way it will be seen as an act that is below the standard required of a careful and competent driver. When induced intentionally it demands a fluid balance that presupposes road conditions and makes assumptions that will always require an (perhaps only tiny) element of luck, not a factor that has any place in a driving plan.
We generally only get to know about these actions if they go wrong or if the practitioner is an over-zealous exhibitionist prepared to compromise his licence for public display. I've only reported one person for trying such a manoeuvre at a local supermarket roundabout. I was behind him in a marked patrol car. It's the only attempt at a drift I've witnessed on the road while on duty. He ended up facing me on the roundabout!
If these activities take place out of the sight of the rest of the world, then no-one knows and no-one cares until it goes wrong. I don’t attend many accidents where this activity has obviously been the cause, but they will be responsible for a few bent motors shuffling quietly off, or holes in walls etc. If they are done in the full view of a police officer or Mrs Miggins walking round the RAB, then you will and should face the consequences. Like wheelies, J-turns do-nuts etc, they are party tricks in a public place. Any message that we are prepared to tolerate these activities will only have a seriously detrimental effect on road safety.
As you say, control is key. The control is the responsibility not to engage in such an activity that is likely to get you considered for the offence.
Like speeding, witnessed drifting will not get you prosecuted 100% of the time. Unlike speeding it’s more likely to be 33% to 50% of the witnessed events, rather than about 1% (guesses) in the case of speeding. Circumstances and prospect of convictions will play a part, along with officers being prepared to issue warnings, perhaps even Sec59s in lieu of prosecution.
I’d love to know how many in the group have been prosecuted for drifting. If the one chap I’ve reported is a contributor, I fancy he won’t want to ID himself!
Soren2 said:
sleep envy said:
flemke said:
Soren2 said:
I understand that some might be able to perform this manoeuvre more safely than others. But I'd agree with von that to approach a hazard with the intention of losing traction and grip to achieve nothing more than a car park trick is an action that will always render itself punishable.
Does anyone actually disagree with that? If so why?
We have tried above to articulate why we disagree.Does anyone actually disagree with that? If so why?
One can accept or reject the argument in favour of speed limits per se, and from there the argument in favour of tiered licences. The unique thing about speed limits is that they represent an unambiguous parameter. There is normally no doubt about what speed a car is doing. We can measure it even without a human being in attendance.
"Drifting" around a quarter of a RAB is not, so far as I know, something that is readily measurable by machine. It requires human recognition and assessment.
If it requires the active participation of a human to identify a drift, and that human is a professional at assessing driving, then why at the same time cannot that professional assess whether the driver has control of the vehicle? That same professional's testimony will be relied on in court in many other situations to determine DWDC, CD, etc. If the professional is qualified to make these judgments, and surely he or she must be, by definition, then why should not the test of how one circumnavigates a RAB be on the basis of control, rather that according to another arbitrary, one-size-fits-all law?
The issue is not the yaw of the vehicle. The issue is control. They are not the same thing.
"One size fits all" is how the law is usually drafted. It's a leveller, a school uniform for the road. A drift in the context of this conversation is either an intentional loss of grip with no safety dividend or an unintentional loss of control through an inappropriate action for the circumstance. There should be no need for it, and it's not difficult to avoid.
Either way it will be seen as an act that is below the standard required of a careful and competent driver. When induced intentionally it demands a fluid balance that presupposes road conditions and makes assumptions that will always require an (perhaps only tiny) element of luck, not a factor that has any place in a driving plan.
We generally only get to know about these actions if they go wrong or if the practitioner is an over-zealous exhibitionist prepared to compromise his licence for public display. I've only reported one person for trying such a manoeuvre at a local supermarket roundabout. I was behind him in a marked patrol car. It's the only attempt at a drift I've witnessed on the road while on duty. He ended up facing me on the roundabout!
If these activities take place out of the sight of the rest of the world, then no-one knows and no-one cares until it goes wrong. I don’t attend many accidents where this activity has obviously been the cause, but they will be responsible for a few bent motors shuffling quietly off, or holes in walls etc. If they are done in the full view of a police officer or Mrs Miggins walking round the RAB, then you will and should face the consequences. Like wheelies, J-turns do-nuts etc, they are party tricks in a public place. Any message that we are prepared to tolerate these activities will only have a seriously detrimental effect on road safety.
As you say, control is key. The control is the responsibility not to engage in such an activity that is likely to get you considered for the offence.
Like speeding, witnessed drifting will not get you prosecuted 100% of the time. Unlike speeding it’s more likely to be 33% to 50% of the witnessed events, rather than about 1% (guesses) in the case of speeding. Circumstances and prospect of convictions will play a part, along with officers being prepared to issue warnings, perhaps even Sec59s in lieu of prosecution.
I’d love to know how many in the group have been prosecuted for drifting. If the one chap I’ve reported is a contributor, I fancy he won’t want to ID himself!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff