Should drivers of "fast' cars have tougher test to pass ?
Discussion
I am constantly aware that the driving test is a minimum standard to keep the roads "safe" and allow people and goods to move about the country.
This leads me to wonder if, due to the constantly increasing performance of cars and the nannying of the state, in principle, there is a need for a higher standard of driving test for such cars. I say "in principle" because I know the workability of such an extra test would be a pain.
Personally I think so. Based on a formulae of BHP / FtLB / Tonne. That one could only own and run, tax and use such a car if you had passed said test. Surely this principle is precisely the way Motorbike and HGV / specialist vehicle licences already work and we are in-consistant with that re cars ?
This leads me to wonder if, due to the constantly increasing performance of cars and the nannying of the state, in principle, there is a need for a higher standard of driving test for such cars. I say "in principle" because I know the workability of such an extra test would be a pain.
Personally I think so. Based on a formulae of BHP / FtLB / Tonne. That one could only own and run, tax and use such a car if you had passed said test. Surely this principle is precisely the way Motorbike and HGV / specialist vehicle licences already work and we are in-consistant with that re cars ?
I suppose you could argue for drivers to need to take an advanced car control test in order to drive higher performance cars, but in practice I wouldn't be surprised if the boost in confidence that that gave was actually greater than the increase in control, leading to more accidents not less. A better option might be to limit the power and/or performance of the cars that you can drive for a given time after passing your test - maybe three years?
On the whole, however, I'd just like to see the test made harder and more appropriate, and perhaps strengthened further with compulsory retests.
On the whole, however, I'd just like to see the test made harder and more appropriate, and perhaps strengthened further with compulsory retests.
Ved said:
BHP makes next to no difference. Not driving beyond the conditions or like a tool does.
I think insurance statistics would beg to differ, although of course the statistics don't tell us whether the bad driving is caused by the fast car or vice versa... it's perhaps more likely that dangerous drivers are simply more likely to buy a fast car in the first place. Err why. Not sure you have thought this through.
High performance car with giant tyres and giant brakes built for motorsport gets to do 70mph in this country.
2CV with virually no brakes and god awful ability to take a corner gets to do 70mph in this country.
Are you suggesting that the speed limit gets raised for the better driver/car combination, or are you really suggesting the high performance car driver above should go to the expense of doing further tests to be able to do the exact same speed as the driver who hasn't.
High performance car with giant tyres and giant brakes built for motorsport gets to do 70mph in this country.
2CV with virually no brakes and god awful ability to take a corner gets to do 70mph in this country.
Are you suggesting that the speed limit gets raised for the better driver/car combination, or are you really suggesting the high performance car driver above should go to the expense of doing further tests to be able to do the exact same speed as the driver who hasn't.
Six Fiend said:
What's the proportion of "fast" cars involved in crunches compared with "slow" cars?
Compulsory Pass Plus for all car drivers perhaps with a performance restriction similar to that faced by bike riders makes the most sense to me.
I suppose the difference is that I can pop out and buy a 600bhp/ton bike for a grand, and that bikes tend to fall over if either end loses grip. High performance cars are much less accessable, and tend not to fall over.Compulsory Pass Plus for all car drivers perhaps with a performance restriction similar to that faced by bike riders makes the most sense to me.
I know this means that Jonny-rich-dad can pop out and get a GTR when he's 17, but I think that's rare enough that we can discount it when it comes to making changes that affect everyone (and potentially warp the specifications for new cars sold in the UK). Plus I can't think of any car at any price that has the crash potential of a 20 year old Fireblade.
Although I see rubbish driving every day I can't remember the last time I saw rubbish driving which was related to vehicle performance. So maybe for cars just make the training better/harder for everyone (I've no idea how, as the problems mostly seem to be caused by not knowing things that are already in the test).
julian64 said:
Err why. Not sure you have thought this through.
High performance car with giant tyres and giant brakes built for motorsport gets to do 70mph in this country.
2CV with virually no brakes and god awful ability to take a corner gets to do 70mph in this country.
Are you suggesting that the speed limit gets raised for the better driver/car combination, or are you really suggesting the high performance car driver above should go to the expense of doing further tests to be able to do the exact same speed as the driver who hasn't.
My first car was a 2CV. I definitely did all my most dangerous driving in that car, and not because 0-60 in 29 seconds was too fast. All of the rubbish driving was down to me being rubbish, not the extreme performance of the car.High performance car with giant tyres and giant brakes built for motorsport gets to do 70mph in this country.
2CV with virually no brakes and god awful ability to take a corner gets to do 70mph in this country.
Are you suggesting that the speed limit gets raised for the better driver/car combination, or are you really suggesting the high performance car driver above should go to the expense of doing further tests to be able to do the exact same speed as the driver who hasn't.
Would 17 year old Private Muppet have been more likely to be dangerous in an 80's 911 turbo? I think so, but most of the risk would still be down to me being rubbish.
Not really necessary as insurance costs tend to apply a filter to how fast people can go and the accident statistics for particular types of car show how much of a risk that is.
What some people don't appear able to comprehend is that you can actually drive a fast car slowly and a slow car fast.
What some people don't appear able to comprehend is that you can actually drive a fast car slowly and a slow car fast.
LuS1fer said:
Not really necessary as insurance costs tend to apply a filter to how fast people can go and the accident statistics for particular types of car show how much of a risk that is.
What some people don't appear able to comprehend is that you can actually drive a fast car slowly and a slow car fast.
Yeah - the accelerator is progressive. It's not a on/off switch...What some people don't appear able to comprehend is that you can actually drive a fast car slowly and a slow car fast.
I think everyone understand that the accelerator is an analogue device, but I doubt that many people buy a 300bhp car intending to never use more than 150bhp of it. Generally speaking, people buy fast cars to drive them faster than it would be possible to drive slow cars, at least occasionally. I know I do.
I don't think I know enough to decide whether a graduated licence system would be worthwhile (I doubt anyone does, to be honest), but I can certainly see the arguments in favour of it.
I don't think I know enough to decide whether a graduated licence system would be worthwhile (I doubt anyone does, to be honest), but I can certainly see the arguments in favour of it.
Ved said:
I'd have to say no. The driving test as a whole should be tougher and more appropriate (motorways etc) as a bad decision at 30 in a 1.4 Polo is can be just as hazardous in a v10 Audi at 70.
This. If it were to include anything other than driving I'd say a tougher more common sense testing theory exam too, we need to stop people who can't make decisions effectively being allowed to drive anything.
Lets not forget that overall the standard of driving in the UK is very high compared to almost anywhere else in the world. I think the only country I've been to where it's significantly higher overall is Germany and I've driven in a lot of countries where it's much, much worse. Of course that doesn't mean that we shouldn't work to improve it further, but I think it does need to be put in context.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff