Petition against Speed Humps
Discussion
This one has my vote. If ever there was a way to encourage excessive acceleration and breaking, speed bumps have to be it. 
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Nohumps
If this one is running somewhere else, tell me, and I'll remove. Otherwise, please consider voting.
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Nohumps
If this one is running somewhere else, tell me, and I'll remove. Otherwise, please consider voting.
nailedon said:
Last week I came across a Lancer with it's nearside front suspension caved in due to hitting one of these. I reckon it's the same as speed cameras, that drivers can concentrate on the safety measure or the hazard, but sometimes not both at the same time.
Don't you think he may have damaged his suspension because he hit the hump a damn sight too fast? Which is exactly what they're there for. Sounds like it did a good job.
herewego said:
nailedon said:
Last week I came across a Lancer with it's nearside front suspension caved in due to hitting one of these. I reckon it's the same as speed cameras, that drivers can concentrate on the safety measure or the hazard, but sometimes not both at the same time.
Don't you think he may have damaged his suspension because he hit the hump a damn sight too fast? Which is exactly what they're there for. Sounds like it did a good job.
You intensely annoying person. Claiming a 'victory' when some poor bastard's car is partially destroyed is not the sentiment of someone who is what I would consider a Pistonhead. His suspension, already weakened from the assaults of the many pot-holes that riddle our piss-poor and neglected roads, probably 'let go' under the assault of one of these designed-by-cyclist abortions.
Years ago I was a rally driver and I have competed on forest stages that were more predictable than our roads today. I have signed the petition to remove all these 'Satan's Arse-Cheeks', as the lack of maintenance of our roads makes them an unnecessary hazard.
If your detestation of the motor car, the pleasure to be gained from enjoying the driving experience and your mocking of those who still try to obtain this joy is so overwhelming, perhaps you should consider removing your subscription from the Pistonheads BBS and returning to live under your bridge, to eagerly await the arrival of the Three Billy-Goats Gruff...
Blue Tomcat said:
herewego said:
nailedon said:
Last week I came across a Lancer with it's nearside front suspension caved in due to hitting one of these. I reckon it's the same as speed cameras, that drivers can concentrate on the safety measure or the hazard, but sometimes not both at the same time.
Don't you think he may have damaged his suspension because he hit the hump a damn sight too fast? Which is exactly what they're there for. Sounds like it did a good job.
You intensely annoying person. Claiming a 'victory' when some poor bastard's car is partially destroyed is not the sentiment of someone who is what I would consider a Pistonhead. His suspension, already weakened from the assaults of the many pot-holes that riddle our piss-poor and neglected roads, probably 'let go' under the assault of one of these designed-by-cyclist abortions.
Years ago I was a rally driver and I have competed on forest stages that were more predictable than our roads today. I have signed the petition to remove all these 'Satan's Arse-Cheeks', as the lack of maintenance of our roads makes them an unnecessary hazard.
If your detestation of the motor car, the pleasure to be gained from enjoying the driving experience and your mocking of those who still try to obtain this joy is so overwhelming, perhaps you should consider removing your subscription from the Pistonheads BBS and returning to live under your bridge, to eagerly await the arrival of the Three Billy-Goats Gruff...
I hate speed humps as much as anyone, but I recognise the need for a means to slow cars through residential areas, since some morons feel the need for speed at all times. Save your aggression for the forest.
herewego said:
Blue Tomcat said:
herewego said:
nailedon said:
Last week I came across a Lancer with it's nearside front suspension caved in due to hitting one of these. I reckon it's the same as speed cameras, that drivers can concentrate on the safety measure or the hazard, but sometimes not both at the same time.
Don't you think he may have damaged his suspension because he hit the hump a damn sight too fast? Which is exactly what they're there for. Sounds like it did a good job.
You intensely annoying person. Claiming a 'victory' when some poor bastard's car is partially destroyed is not the sentiment of someone who is what I would consider a Pistonhead. His suspension, already weakened from the assaults of the many pot-holes that riddle our piss-poor and neglected roads, probably 'let go' under the assault of one of these designed-by-cyclist abortions.
Years ago I was a rally driver and I have competed on forest stages that were more predictable than our roads today. I have signed the petition to remove all these 'Satan's Arse-Cheeks', as the lack of maintenance of our roads makes them an unnecessary hazard.
If your detestation of the motor car, the pleasure to be gained from enjoying the driving experience and your mocking of those who still try to obtain this joy is so overwhelming, perhaps you should consider removing your subscription from the Pistonheads BBS and returning to live under your bridge, to eagerly await the arrival of the Three Billy-Goats Gruff...
I hate speed humps as much as anyone, but I recognise the need for a means to slow cars through residential areas, since some morons feel the need for speed at all times. Save your aggression for the forest.
If you could just rid yourself of idea-anchoring and think in a straight line for a moment, I presume 'the need for a means to slow cars' refers to a perceived risk to pedestrians. Pedestrians who are doing what? - wandering around in the road like tits in a trance in the mistaken belief that they're a pedestrian thoroughfare? Adolescents paying more attention to their Ipods/mobile phones than the environment around them? Children who have been imbued with no concept of road safety either at school or in their home environment?
Perhaps we should petition to slow all the trains down in case some anti-social moronic retards think it's their god given right to wander about on the railway and people like you endorse their right to do so.
I despair. We've moved into a parallel universe that makes Alice in Wonderland look like Mrs Normal. The Daily Telegraph advert 'If Britain were a person it'd be sectioned' is so grotesquely true it's tragic.
I believe most ambulance authorities and fire services will agree to remove speed humps as well. While there are few figures that can show any degree of improved safety with these mennacing lumps in the road there is plenty of evidence that shows how many people died as a result of emergency vehicles being hindered by them. Either not getting to the injured or ill person or attempting to get them back to hospital after. I am sure that the number crunchers at new Labour HQ simply added these death stats in to the 'caused by exessive speed' catagory along with all the others
These are just another weapon of choice of the car hating idiots that run our towns and cities.
These are just another weapon of choice of the car hating idiots that run our towns and cities.
herewego said:
nailedon said:
Last week I came across a Lancer with it's nearside front suspension caved in due to hitting one of these. I reckon it's the same as speed cameras, that drivers can concentrate on the safety measure or the hazard, but sometimes not both at the same time.
Don't you think he may have damaged his suspension because he hit the hump a damn sight too fast? Which is exactly what they're there for. Sounds like it did a good job.
I just had to replace the anti roll bar on my A2 as its bushes had been ripped off. I am convinced that the set of speed humps we have to negotiate to exit our estate contributed greatly to its demise, despite our driving over it at fully legal speeds. Its a 30mph limit, and unless you drive a 4x4 anything over 20mph will hurt. They are not made any better by having the tarmac on the exit side collapsing under the constant pummelling - it's a bus route - and sinking a further 3 inches making the total height of the hump about 6 inches (and since they are restricted to single carriage width by calming islands thats the same bit on both sides). It's like negotiating Beeches Brooke. The poor little A2 feels like its going down a hole and never coming out. There is a series of four of these b@stards 30m apart - why? I feel for the people living alongside.
They are a menace. It's about time traffic management by introduction of hazards was stopped. Spend the money on driver training.
herewego said:
Blue Tomcat said:
herewego said:
nailedon said:
Last week I came across a Lancer with it's nearside front suspension caved in due to hitting one of these. I reckon it's the same as speed cameras, that drivers can concentrate on the safety measure or the hazard, but sometimes not both at the same time.
Don't you think he may have damaged his suspension because he hit the hump a damn sight too fast? Which is exactly what they're there for. Sounds like it did a good job.
You intensely annoying person. Claiming a 'victory' when some poor bastard's car is partially destroyed is not the sentiment of someone who is what I would consider a Pistonhead. His suspension, already weakened from the assaults of the many pot-holes that riddle our piss-poor and neglected roads, probably 'let go' under the assault of one of these designed-by-cyclist abortions.
Years ago I was a rally driver and I have competed on forest stages that were more predictable than our roads today. I have signed the petition to remove all these 'Satan's Arse-Cheeks', as the lack of maintenance of our roads makes them an unnecessary hazard.
If your detestation of the motor car, the pleasure to be gained from enjoying the driving experience and your mocking of those who still try to obtain this joy is so overwhelming, perhaps you should consider removing your subscription from the Pistonheads BBS and returning to live under your bridge, to eagerly await the arrival of the Three Billy-Goats Gruff...
I hate speed humps as much as anyone, but I recognise the need for a means to slow cars through residential areas, since some morons feel the need for speed at all times. Save your aggression for the forest.
Are you sure? This seems a bit of a recant from your initial premise of some poor sod getting their car rubbished as a result of one of these pointless bits of road architecture. Have you not read about ACPO admitting that less than 5% of KSI's had excess or inappropriate speed implied in their cause?
Speeding, according to GATSOs is the posted limit plus 10% plus 2mph, so 35 in a 30 limit is the same as 60, which is an utter nonsense.
Most accidents occur at below the posted limit because there are too few BiB patrols to pull them up for simple crap driving.
Finally, who died and made you able to comment on my driving? You would not know me if I walked up to you and kicked you in the balls. I drive with no aggression - there is no place for it on the road or in the forest, track or town centre. Only idiots drive aggressively and they are the ones who take lives - and they are very few and far between, but the ones we remember in our driving experiences...
I challenge you thus:- are you a Pistonhead or should you say 'fol-de-rol' after your name?
Blue Tomcat said:
herewego said:
Blue Tomcat said:
herewego said:
nailedon said:
Last week I came across a Lancer with it's nearside front suspension caved in due to hitting one of these. I reckon it's the same as speed cameras, that drivers can concentrate on the safety measure or the hazard, but sometimes not both at the same time.
Don't you think he may have damaged his suspension because he hit the hump a damn sight too fast? Which is exactly what they're there for. Sounds like it did a good job.
You intensely annoying person. Claiming a 'victory' when some poor bastard's car is partially destroyed is not the sentiment of someone who is what I would consider a Pistonhead. His suspension, already weakened from the assaults of the many pot-holes that riddle our piss-poor and neglected roads, probably 'let go' under the assault of one of these designed-by-cyclist abortions.
Years ago I was a rally driver and I have competed on forest stages that were more predictable than our roads today. I have signed the petition to remove all these 'Satan's Arse-Cheeks', as the lack of maintenance of our roads makes them an unnecessary hazard.
If your detestation of the motor car, the pleasure to be gained from enjoying the driving experience and your mocking of those who still try to obtain this joy is so overwhelming, perhaps you should consider removing your subscription from the Pistonheads BBS and returning to live under your bridge, to eagerly await the arrival of the Three Billy-Goats Gruff...
I hate speed humps as much as anyone, but I recognise the need for a means to slow cars through residential areas, since some morons feel the need for speed at all times. Save your aggression for the forest.
Are you sure? This seems a bit of a recant from your initial premise of some poor sod getting their car rubbished as a result of one of these pointless bits of road architecture. Have you not read about ACPO admitting that less than 5% of KSI's had excess or inappropriate speed implied in their cause?
Speeding, according to GATSOs is the posted limit plus 10% plus 2mph, so 35 in a 30 limit is the same as 60, which is an utter nonsense.
Most accidents occur at below the posted limit because there are too few BiB patrols to pull them up for simple crap driving.
Finally, who died and made you able to comment on my driving? You would not know me if I walked up to you and kicked you in the balls. I drive with no aggression - there is no place for it on the road or in the forest, track or town centre. Only idiots drive aggressively and they are the ones who take lives - and they are very few and far between, but the ones we remember in our driving experiences...
I challenge you thus:- are you a Pistonhead or should you say 'fol-de-rol' after your name?
If you think that people don’t drive too fast in residential areas then you obviously don’t live in one. Speed humps are one of the few means available of reducing residential area speeding. If you think speeds should not be limited in residential areas then we’re not going to agree.
I think you’re misrepresenting pistonheads. I doubt that everybody here wishes to see uncontrolled speed, especially in residential areas.
The aggression I referred to was your aggression towards anyone with an opinion not similar to your own. It doesn’t endear me to your opinion.
OK herewego, a fresh start. I apologise for misinterpreting the sense of your submission and reacting as I did.
I do live in a residential area with bloody 'calming cushions' that have forced me to put poly-bushes on the suspension of the past four cars I have owned. I now use the uncalmed roads to go anywhere, thus adding over a mile to any journey I make traveling southwards.
I would say that 99% of the residents and 95% of the through traffic behave in a responsible and courteous manner in my 'village'. Most of the poor driving I see results from a combination of ineptitude and downright arrogance - the worst offenders being pensioners who just do not understand the techniques required for modern driving and will have no truck with them and thirty-something blonde women in vast four-wheel-drives who simply own the road.
There are a few kids who want the world to see their 'exciting' driving style, but our close proximity to the local Police garage facilities often curbs their enthusiasm (my abiding belief that a few stern words from an angry-looking BiB is far more effective than a machine-generated penalty that some collect as a trophy is here demonstrated).
A good driver (and thus, hopefully, most Pistonheads) drives with the responsibility to ensure the safety of their own progress, the safety of those around them and does so confidently within the tolerances of their driving skill-level. Purposely impeding the progress of a motorist and forcing them to slow down will create a mind-set removing some degree of that responsibility. It also diverts the driver's attention away from more important hazard perceptions as they have to negotiate these imposed extra road hazards.
The ethos of 'corporate responsibility' in this country will only make driving standards worse - an effect that is becoming very noticeable...
BT
I do live in a residential area with bloody 'calming cushions' that have forced me to put poly-bushes on the suspension of the past four cars I have owned. I now use the uncalmed roads to go anywhere, thus adding over a mile to any journey I make traveling southwards.
I would say that 99% of the residents and 95% of the through traffic behave in a responsible and courteous manner in my 'village'. Most of the poor driving I see results from a combination of ineptitude and downright arrogance - the worst offenders being pensioners who just do not understand the techniques required for modern driving and will have no truck with them and thirty-something blonde women in vast four-wheel-drives who simply own the road.
There are a few kids who want the world to see their 'exciting' driving style, but our close proximity to the local Police garage facilities often curbs their enthusiasm (my abiding belief that a few stern words from an angry-looking BiB is far more effective than a machine-generated penalty that some collect as a trophy is here demonstrated).
A good driver (and thus, hopefully, most Pistonheads) drives with the responsibility to ensure the safety of their own progress, the safety of those around them and does so confidently within the tolerances of their driving skill-level. Purposely impeding the progress of a motorist and forcing them to slow down will create a mind-set removing some degree of that responsibility. It also diverts the driver's attention away from more important hazard perceptions as they have to negotiate these imposed extra road hazards.
The ethos of 'corporate responsibility' in this country will only make driving standards worse - an effect that is becoming very noticeable...
BT
They are a complete PITA in my view.
Plus they only seem to slow the people down who care about their car.
In my view...the people who are less likley to be speeding anyway.
We've just had some installed on a road near our house,which has resulted in me not being able to use that road, without scraping something or other.
The result being....i don't use that road.How is that fair ?. I'm paying to use it !
I now have to go the other way (the long way )down to the main road and add to the congestion.
I'd rather have a row of speed cameras down there.
At least they allow you to do the speed limit,or something approaching it.
There's also the fact that some of them cause traffic to swerve around,wildly trying to find the best way to tackle them !
Oh... and BTW....petition signed
Plus they only seem to slow the people down who care about their car.
In my view...the people who are less likley to be speeding anyway.
We've just had some installed on a road near our house,which has resulted in me not being able to use that road, without scraping something or other.
The result being....i don't use that road.How is that fair ?. I'm paying to use it !
I now have to go the other way (the long way )down to the main road and add to the congestion.
I'd rather have a row of speed cameras down there.
At least they allow you to do the speed limit,or something approaching it.
There's also the fact that some of them cause traffic to swerve around,wildly trying to find the best way to tackle them !
Oh... and BTW....petition signed
tybo said:
They are a complete PITA in my view.
Plus they only seem to slow the people down who care about their car.
In my view...the people who are less likley to be speeding anyway.
We've just had some installed on a road near our house,which has resulted in me not being able to use that road, without scraping something or other.
The result being....i don't use that road.How is that fair ?. I'm paying to use it !
I now have to go the other way (the long way )down to the main road and add to the congestion.
I'd rather have a row of speed cameras down there.
At least they allow you to do the speed limit,or something approaching it.
There's also the fact that some of them cause traffic to swerve around,wildly trying to find the best way to tackle them !
Oh... and BTW....petition signed
Plus they only seem to slow the people down who care about their car.
In my view...the people who are less likley to be speeding anyway.
We've just had some installed on a road near our house,which has resulted in me not being able to use that road, without scraping something or other.
The result being....i don't use that road.How is that fair ?. I'm paying to use it !
I now have to go the other way (the long way )down to the main road and add to the congestion.
I'd rather have a row of speed cameras down there.
At least they allow you to do the speed limit,or something approaching it.
There's also the fact that some of them cause traffic to swerve around,wildly trying to find the best way to tackle them !
Oh... and BTW....petition signed
You shouldn't scrape any part of a standard car on a speed hump, so if your car has not been modified in a way that could touch one, you should contact your local authority about it.
herewego said:
tybo said:
They are a complete PITA in my view.
Plus they only seem to slow the people down who care about their car.
In my view...the people who are less likley to be speeding anyway.
We've just had some installed on a road near our house,which has resulted in me not being able to use that road, without scraping something or other.
The result being....i don't use that road.How is that fair ?. I'm paying to use it !
I now have to go the other way (the long way )down to the main road and add to the congestion.
I'd rather have a row of speed cameras down there.
At least they allow you to do the speed limit,or something approaching it.
There's also the fact that some of them cause traffic to swerve around,wildly trying to find the best way to tackle them !
Oh... and BTW....petition signed
Plus they only seem to slow the people down who care about their car.
In my view...the people who are less likley to be speeding anyway.
We've just had some installed on a road near our house,which has resulted in me not being able to use that road, without scraping something or other.
The result being....i don't use that road.How is that fair ?. I'm paying to use it !
I now have to go the other way (the long way )down to the main road and add to the congestion.
I'd rather have a row of speed cameras down there.
At least they allow you to do the speed limit,or something approaching it.
There's also the fact that some of them cause traffic to swerve around,wildly trying to find the best way to tackle them !
Oh... and BTW....petition signed
You shouldn't scrape any part of a standard car on a speed hump, so if your car has not been modified in a way that could touch one, you should contact your local authority about it.
I should have stated that my car is lowered.
But i'm sure there are some standard cars that would scrape.
Blue Tomcat said:
OK herewego, a fresh start. I apologise for misinterpreting the sense of your submission and reacting as I did.
I do live in a residential area with bloody 'calming cushions' that have forced me to put poly-bushes on the suspension of the past four cars I have owned. I now use the uncalmed roads to go anywhere, thus adding over a mile to any journey I make traveling southwards.
I would say that 99% of the residents and 95% of the through traffic behave in a responsible and courteous manner in my 'village'. Most of the poor driving I see results from a combination of ineptitude and downright arrogance - the worst offenders being pensioners who just do not understand the techniques required for modern driving and will have no truck with them and thirty-something blonde women in vast four-wheel-drives who simply own the road.
There are a few kids who want the world to see their 'exciting' driving style, but our close proximity to the local Police garage facilities often curbs their enthusiasm (my abiding belief that a few stern words from an angry-looking BiB is far more effective than a machine-generated penalty that some collect as a trophy is here demonstrated).
A good driver (and thus, hopefully, most Pistonheads) drives with the responsibility to ensure the safety of their own progress, the safety of those around them and does so confidently within the tolerances of their driving skill-level. Purposely impeding the progress of a motorist and forcing them to slow down will create a mind-set removing some degree of that responsibility. It also diverts the driver's attention away from more important hazard perceptions as they have to negotiate these imposed extra road hazards.
The ethos of 'corporate responsibility' in this country will only make driving standards worse - an effect that is becoming very noticeable...
BT
I do live in a residential area with bloody 'calming cushions' that have forced me to put poly-bushes on the suspension of the past four cars I have owned. I now use the uncalmed roads to go anywhere, thus adding over a mile to any journey I make traveling southwards.
I would say that 99% of the residents and 95% of the through traffic behave in a responsible and courteous manner in my 'village'. Most of the poor driving I see results from a combination of ineptitude and downright arrogance - the worst offenders being pensioners who just do not understand the techniques required for modern driving and will have no truck with them and thirty-something blonde women in vast four-wheel-drives who simply own the road.
There are a few kids who want the world to see their 'exciting' driving style, but our close proximity to the local Police garage facilities often curbs their enthusiasm (my abiding belief that a few stern words from an angry-looking BiB is far more effective than a machine-generated penalty that some collect as a trophy is here demonstrated).
A good driver (and thus, hopefully, most Pistonheads) drives with the responsibility to ensure the safety of their own progress, the safety of those around them and does so confidently within the tolerances of their driving skill-level. Purposely impeding the progress of a motorist and forcing them to slow down will create a mind-set removing some degree of that responsibility. It also diverts the driver's attention away from more important hazard perceptions as they have to negotiate these imposed extra road hazards.
The ethos of 'corporate responsibility' in this country will only make driving standards worse - an effect that is becoming very noticeable...
BT
OK, no problem.
Elderly drivers can be a problem, but I’ve found they just need a bit more time, room and tolerance, like learners. I’m prepared to give them that and they don’t really bother me. I just smile sometimes. Sadly I wasn’t always so tolerant.
What are the alternatives to speed humps:
Everybody drives responsibly. Not going to happen.
BiB on every corner. Not going to happen.
Speed cameras every few yards. Not going to happen.
In car speed control. Well just maybe.
I do think there’s scope within sat nav for speed warning systems, but of course these are easily switched off.
I don’t accept that humps dumb down peoples driving. Most recognise them as a necessary evil, sometimes bringing their own problems. People should be able to walk about without feeling oppressed by the thoughtless foot on the floor driving of a minority. Not everybody is a good driver. Not everybody drives with the responsibilities that you describe. If they did there would be no speed humps. I'd like there to be another way but as it is I don’t feel able to oppose them.
People only have to decelerate hard if the accelerate to hard up to the speed hump in the first place! I know some of them are at annoying distances apart, and not all traffic calming humps are the same style and height/ angle, but at the end of the day, they DO seem to improve traffic calming, much that they annoy, (and throw the occupants around), and I can't see a suitable alternative in built up areas...
herewego said:
What are the alternatives to speed humps:
Everybody drives responsibly. Not going to happen.
BiB on every corner. Not going to happen.
Speed cameras every few yards. Not going to happen.
In car speed control. Well just maybe.
So the solution is speed bumps every few metres? give me a break..
The fact is that many councils do not apply or build speed bumps as well as they should
my own route to work includes 11, yes 11, of these things in a 4.5 mile drive. making 44 per day as i tend to go home for lunch
Given that we are supposed to be able (according to the regs.) drive over these AT the speed limit with no damage, how come i've had to have 3 tyres replaced and 4 wheel tracking and alignment on one of my cars and will have to repeat on my other (garage comment? we get loads of these caused by speed humps)
My sister's standard audi has floorpan damage becuase the ones in here area are not of legal construction, but the council still won't remove them (she simply doesn't have the time to sue).
speed bumps cause damage to vehicles, create congestion due to people having to slow down unduly (ie to 15mph in a 30 to avoid immediate damage), create extra pollution due to increased acceleration and braking, cause increase wear on vehicles for the same reason, increased noise for local residents due to vehicles having to accelerate, and delay the operations of emergency vehicles.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff