i am a dangerous driver
Discussion
this weekend for an experiment
i drove at the speed limit without breaking it
it was 10 am to 12 am roughly
i had a full nights sleep
i kept the car on cruise control at the limit
and for the first time in my life while driving i felt sleepy
i was so bored i wanted to nod off
i had to fight to stay awake
the car didnt talk to me telling me about the road or nothing
it was just 2 hours of sheer boredom
if they enforce the limits any tighter i will end up falling asleep at the wheel
is it just me??
and in all that time i over took a few lorries but i think the total of cars on the m20 that i over took was 2
i am doing 70 and being overtaken at least every 5-10 seconds
its insane
i drove at the speed limit without breaking it
it was 10 am to 12 am roughly
i had a full nights sleep
i kept the car on cruise control at the limit
and for the first time in my life while driving i felt sleepy
i was so bored i wanted to nod off
i had to fight to stay awake
the car didnt talk to me telling me about the road or nothing
it was just 2 hours of sheer boredom
if they enforce the limits any tighter i will end up falling asleep at the wheel
is it just me??
and in all that time i over took a few lorries but i think the total of cars on the m20 that i over took was 2
i am doing 70 and being overtaken at least every 5-10 seconds
its insane
Vesuvius 996 said:
iaint said:
splatspeed said:
it was 10 am to 12 am roughly
...
it was just 2 hours of sheer boredom
that'd be 14 hours then. Unless you meant 10am to 12pm...
PistonHeads: Pedanticism Mattes
Safe (motorway) speed for me is about 80-85 given decent conditions (just fast enough to concentrate, and out of the boomy bit of my exhaust in 5th gear so my ears don't bleed).
Just fast enough to cruise past the MLM's sat doing 75 mph, waiting to overtake the lorry 2 miles ahead of them...
Just fast enough to cruise past the MLM's sat doing 75 mph, waiting to overtake the lorry 2 miles ahead of them...
This is one of the problems with dictating one-size-for-everyone speed limits.
It's a fact that the more slowly you are moving when you have a collision, the less damage there will be.
However, if you are driving too slowly to maintain your alertness, the more likely you are to have a collision in the first place.
It's a fact that the more slowly you are moving when you have a collision, the less damage there will be.
However, if you are driving too slowly to maintain your alertness, the more likely you are to have a collision in the first place.
flemke said:
This is one of the problems with dictating one-size-for-everyone speed limits.
It's a fact that the more slowly you are moving when you have a collision, the less damage there will be.
However, if you are driving too slowly to maintain your alertness, the more likely you are to have a collision in the first place.
It's a fact that the more slowly you are moving when you have a collision, the less damage there will be.
However, if you are driving too slowly to maintain your alertness, the more likely you are to have a collision in the first place.
To keep yourself awake sounds a very bad reason to drive faster.
I have, as an experiment you understand, driven religiously at the speed limit on the motorway.
Its not a problem, frankly. I even overtook a few cars doing 55 etc. No idea why people think its dangerous - doesn't seem it to me. Its a bit dull but so what?
It does take longer to get places. Quite a bit longer on my runs because I drive the M4 at relatively quiet times (middle of the day) and can ordinarily be making pretty swift progress. The odds of being caught have increased, damnit, as they now have those sneaky evil mobile vans between Swindon and Bath. Just not sporting, that...and its likely to get worse.
I tend to observe the lower speed limits (30s, 40s etc) anyway as, unless one of those annoying dumb politically motivated limits - which you DO get, its reasonably obvious why they're there for the most part.
My wife finds the behaviour amusing and refers to NSL signs as meanint "No Speed Limit" to me...perhaps she's right
Its not a problem, frankly. I even overtook a few cars doing 55 etc. No idea why people think its dangerous - doesn't seem it to me. Its a bit dull but so what?
It does take longer to get places. Quite a bit longer on my runs because I drive the M4 at relatively quiet times (middle of the day) and can ordinarily be making pretty swift progress. The odds of being caught have increased, damnit, as they now have those sneaky evil mobile vans between Swindon and Bath. Just not sporting, that...and its likely to get worse.
I tend to observe the lower speed limits (30s, 40s etc) anyway as, unless one of those annoying dumb politically motivated limits - which you DO get, its reasonably obvious why they're there for the most part.
My wife finds the behaviour amusing and refers to NSL signs as meanint "No Speed Limit" to me...perhaps she's right
herewego said:
flemke said:
This is one of the problems with dictating one-size-for-everyone speed limits.
It's a fact that the more slowly you are moving when you have a collision, the less damage there will be.
However, if you are driving too slowly to maintain your alertness, the more likely you are to have a collision in the first place.
It's a fact that the more slowly you are moving when you have a collision, the less damage there will be.
However, if you are driving too slowly to maintain your alertness, the more likely you are to have a collision in the first place.
To keep yourself awake sounds a very bad reason to drive faster.
From what I understand though, German research has indicated that the faster the flow of traffic the more alert the drivers and the less sleepy they are. So in reality you get a better flow of traffic, less accidents and more alert drivers if you can maintain an average of 80-90 on the motorway.
But as Flemke says, the artificial enforcement of an outdated speed limit means that it breeds resentment, road rage and ultimately is more tiring to drive. All these factors then contribute to making the whole experience ever-so-slightly more dangerous.
Although it sounds a poor analogy, its actually quite a good one - take a river - flow rates vary across any chosen section. In places its fast in others its slow, but when we (as in humans) artificially enforce a fixed and rigid flow rate to the river it almost always results in problems. The river (a natural system with its own forces) then has to do something to get back to its own natural state again. Rivers dont like going dead straight and neither do drivers. A good motorway should have curves, rises and dips and equally it should be allowed to ebb and flow (just like a river). That way the natural system will resolve itself. Artificially enforcing a maximum speed means that this is not possible and can have many undue and unforeseen affects - phantom jams being one. I think we will see this in the coming years as the death rate will plateau and then start to rise again as the early gains are lost. Safe driving is SOooo not about speed but the use of speed.
herewego said:
flemke said:
This is one of the problems with dictating one-size-for-everyone speed limits.
It's a fact that the more slowly you are moving when you have a collision, the less damage there will be.
However, if you are driving too slowly to maintain your alertness, the more likely you are to have a collision in the first place.
It's a fact that the more slowly you are moving when you have a collision, the less damage there will be.
However, if you are driving too slowly to maintain your alertness, the more likely you are to have a collision in the first place.
To keep yourself awake sounds a very bad reason to drive faster.
I know from my own experience that the time I make mistakes is when I've been in some mind-numbingly slow flow of traffic for some time.
Bing o said:
Safe (motorway) speed for me is about 80-85 given decent conditions
I would have said the same a few years ago, but I'm finding my natural cruising speed on Mways is slowly creeping up.
I don't feel any more dangerous or any quicker, but looking down and seeing 88/89/90 is a little concerning given the prevalence of 'law enforcement professionals' focusing on speed...
Calorus said:
iaint said:
splatspeed said:
it was 10 am to 12 am roughly
...
it was just 2 hours of sheer boredom
that'd be 14 hours then. Unless you meant 10am to 12pm...
PistonHeads: Pedanticism Mattes
"Pedantry", actually.
I'm a beginner and I bow to your mastery of the skill
(and you Vesuvius et al.)
off_again said:
From what I understand though, German research has indicated that the faster the flow of traffic the more alert the drivers and the less sleepy they are. So in reality you get a better flow of traffic, less accidents and more alert drivers if you can maintain an average of 80-90 on the motorway.
If you could point me at that research I would be very grateful - I'm doing a bit of private research into such issues... Indeed if anyone else knows of any research with similar findings, the same goes!!
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff