140mph convoy on M74
Discussion
MDMA . said:
Johnnytheboy said:
The Selfish Gene said:
finally a thread worthy of PH of old!!
Quick, mods: move it to SP&L so the pedants can talk about how many kittens died!EDIT: oh it has been moved to SP&L - this can only go one way....
There's a website about the history of the speed limit, which btw hasn't changed since 1965!
" It was suggested that a speed limit be used during periods when the road was affected by fog, ice or snow, and that an overall maximum speed limit of 70 mph should be tested out. The four-month trial began at midday on 22nd December 1965."
So it was implemented but then applied continuously. Regardless of road conditions. Hardly seems sensible.
Oh and one incident which lead to it's debate......185mpg in 1964!!!
"On 11th June, 1964 a team from AC Cars met at 4am at the Blue Boar Services (Watford Gap) on the M1. They were there to speed-test a Cobra Coupe GT in preparation for Le Mans. They didn’t have a long enough stretch of straight test track to check the top speed of the car so they opted to use a section of the motorway instead. The driver, Jack Sears, registered speeds of 185 mph during the run, the highest speed ever recorded on a British motorway"
Jesus
" It was suggested that a speed limit be used during periods when the road was affected by fog, ice or snow, and that an overall maximum speed limit of 70 mph should be tested out. The four-month trial began at midday on 22nd December 1965."
So it was implemented but then applied continuously. Regardless of road conditions. Hardly seems sensible.
Oh and one incident which lead to it's debate......185mpg in 1964!!!
"On 11th June, 1964 a team from AC Cars met at 4am at the Blue Boar Services (Watford Gap) on the M1. They were there to speed-test a Cobra Coupe GT in preparation for Le Mans. They didn’t have a long enough stretch of straight test track to check the top speed of the car so they opted to use a section of the motorway instead. The driver, Jack Sears, registered speeds of 185 mph during the run, the highest speed ever recorded on a British motorway"
Jesus
yonex said:
And how often does any of the above apply on a motorway, been affected by a blowout yourself?
I just don’t understand your outrage really. Do you enjoy driving, not trying to be smart but I do feel there’s a level of sympathy for those caught speeding from those that I’d call enthusiasts. Maybe I’m wrong.
Yes I've had a blowout. None event, can't say the same had I been hammering along at 140mph.I just don’t understand your outrage really. Do you enjoy driving, not trying to be smart but I do feel there’s a level of sympathy for those caught speeding from those that I’d call enthusiasts. Maybe I’m wrong.
And don't get me wrong, I'm no saint - I don't have my cruise control set at 69mph cursing those who dare break the speed limit.
I do think you're wrong about the second point. I'm confident that there's a huge huge contingent of 'enthusiasts' whose cars couldn't even get to 70mph.
ThatGuyWhoDoesStuff said:
Deer wanders out?
Fallen branch?
Big pothole?
Tire blowout?
Blocked drain and a bit of standing water?
Before the inevitable, all comparisons to the autobahn are irrelevant - our motorways ain't the autobahn.
Because the above can never happen on the autobahn? Are deer and trees banned in Germany? Does it not rain over there? Are their tyres indestructible? Fallen branch?
Big pothole?
Tire blowout?
Blocked drain and a bit of standing water?
Before the inevitable, all comparisons to the autobahn are irrelevant - our motorways ain't the autobahn.
matchmaker said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotl...
The terrible Trio with an M6 as a camera car?? BBC said:
Police have appealed for information to trace the drivers of four cars who were seen travelling at more than 140mph miles on the M74.
The vehicles were going southbound between Johnstonebridge and Ecclefechan at around 12:15 on Sunday.
A police patrol car observed the blue BMW M6, orange Nissan GTR, red Audi S5 and grey Porsche GT3 travelling in convoy at excessive speed.
Officers were unable to stop the cars. They urged witnesses to come forward.
Okay, who was it!The vehicles were going southbound between Johnstonebridge and Ecclefechan at around 12:15 on Sunday.
A police patrol car observed the blue BMW M6, orange Nissan GTR, red Audi S5 and grey Porsche GT3 travelling in convoy at excessive speed.
Officers were unable to stop the cars. They urged witnesses to come forward.
ThatGuyWhoDoesStuff said:
I appreciate the intent of that statement but I can't help but roll my eyes whenever I see it.
It's a bit like saying "a lifetime of smoking doesn't kill, lung cancer does." Entirely true, but completely stupid.
Deer wanders out?
Fallen branch?
Big pothole?
Tire blowout?
Blocked drain and a bit of standing water?
There's a reason they stick out a safety car when there's debris on a race track. You can say 'clear road' all you like, but if something the other way is doing 70mph whilst you're doing 140mph, in 17 seconds you're 'met' over a mile.
Before the inevitable, all comparisons to the autobahn are irrelevant - our motorways ain't the autobahn.
You really do need to work on your anologies. I mean in smoking, unlike speeding, you are always "causing harm", and a significant number die of complications of things like COPD rather than cancer. As a healthcare professional, to me it literally makes no sense as well as not being comparableIt's a bit like saying "a lifetime of smoking doesn't kill, lung cancer does." Entirely true, but completely stupid.
Deer wanders out?
Fallen branch?
Big pothole?
Tire blowout?
Blocked drain and a bit of standing water?
There's a reason they stick out a safety car when there's debris on a race track. You can say 'clear road' all you like, but if something the other way is doing 70mph whilst you're doing 140mph, in 17 seconds you're 'met' over a mile.
Before the inevitable, all comparisons to the autobahn are irrelevant - our motorways ain't the autobahn.
Your whole argument hinges on 70mph being a speed at which these risks are overcome or significantly reduced. So as adults we are not assessing the risk correctly. Given the speed limit of 70mph was put in place as a means to reduce fuel consumption, and DfT statistics do not support this claim, please could you kindly demonstrate your working?
I think we'd all like to see it. Because as mentioned earlier, whilst I think we all accept that speed limits do need to exist for the benefit of society, to make the claim it is moral indefensible to break them, I think requires evidence.
ThatGuyWhoDoesStuff said:
The Selfish Gene said:
Speed does not kill, incompetence and apathy do.
I appreciate the intent of that statement but I can't help but roll my eyes whenever I see it.It's a bit like saying "a lifetime of smoking doesn't kill, lung cancer does." Entirely true, but completely stupid.
Deer wanders out?
Fallen branch?
Big pothole?
Tire blowout?
Blocked drain and a bit of standing water?
There's a reason they stick out a safety car when there's debris on a race track. You can say 'clear road' all you like, but if something the other way is doing 70mph whilst you're doing 140mph, in 17 seconds you're 'met' over a mile.
Before the inevitable, all comparisons to the autobahn are irrelevant - our motorways ain't the autobahn.
Sometimes I don't do more than 15mph on my commute - because it isn't safe to do so (even though I could go much higher speeds)
Sometimes I would have no problem with doing 140mph on a clear motorway.
at times, 15mph is much much more dangerous than the 140.
This is the crux of it. Speed itself is not a problem. It's inappropriate speed.
Otherwise all racing drivers would get dead every time they raced.
The constant pedalling and attempt to make it seem like a hugely horrendous crime is frankly embarrassing and insulting.
Also - the other poster that said I'm assuming all people driving at 140 are enthusiasts...........when they're not.
I didn't say that - I said I'm assuming these individuals were enthusiasts by the nature of the very capable cars they were driving.
Yes of course a failure could happen. I also could get eaten by an escaped Python in my bed due to this hot weather.
I'll still leave my windows open.
It's called risk assessment, because I'm an adult.
FOLLOW ZEEE RULESSSSSSS!!!
Timmy45 said:
Oh and one incident which lead to it's debate......185mpg in 1964!!!
"On 11th June, 1964 a team from AC Cars met at 4am at the Blue Boar Services (Watford Gap) on the M1. They were there to speed-test a Cobra Coupe GT in preparation for Le Mans. They didn’t have a long enough stretch of straight test track to check the top speed of the car so they opted to use a section of the motorway instead. The driver, Jack Sears, registered speeds of 185 mph during the run, the highest speed ever recorded on a British motorway"
Jesus
185 mpg? Unsafe levels of economy!"On 11th June, 1964 a team from AC Cars met at 4am at the Blue Boar Services (Watford Gap) on the M1. They were there to speed-test a Cobra Coupe GT in preparation for Le Mans. They didn’t have a long enough stretch of straight test track to check the top speed of the car so they opted to use a section of the motorway instead. The driver, Jack Sears, registered speeds of 185 mph during the run, the highest speed ever recorded on a British motorway"
Jesus
The Top Secret Supra hit 197mph on a British motorway, and I'd bet people have gone faster unofficially.
The Selfish Gene said:
I genuinely feel you're not 100% getting my point.
Sometimes I don't do more than 15mph on my commute - because it isn't safe to do so (even though I could go much higher speeds)
Sometimes I would have no problem with doing 140mph on a clear motorway.
at times, 15mph is much much more dangerous than the 140.
This is the crux of it. Speed itself is not a problem. It's inappropriate speed.
Otherwise all racing drivers would get dead every time they raced.
The constant pedalling and attempt to make it seem like a hugely horrendous crime is frankly embarrassing and insulting.
Also - the other poster that said I'm assuming all people driving at 140 are enthusiasts...........when they're not.
I didn't say that - I said I'm assuming these individuals were enthusiasts by the nature of the very capable cars they were driving.
Yes of course a failure could happen. I also could get eaten by an escaped Python in my bed due to this hot weather.
I'll still leave my windows open.
It's called risk assessment, because I'm an adult.
FOLLOW ZEEE RULESSSSSSS!!!
I've never suggested that it's a horrendous crime. I also never said that any variance above 70mph is necessarily to be frowned upon. Sometimes I don't do more than 15mph on my commute - because it isn't safe to do so (even though I could go much higher speeds)
Sometimes I would have no problem with doing 140mph on a clear motorway.
at times, 15mph is much much more dangerous than the 140.
This is the crux of it. Speed itself is not a problem. It's inappropriate speed.
Otherwise all racing drivers would get dead every time they raced.
The constant pedalling and attempt to make it seem like a hugely horrendous crime is frankly embarrassing and insulting.
Also - the other poster that said I'm assuming all people driving at 140 are enthusiasts...........when they're not.
I didn't say that - I said I'm assuming these individuals were enthusiasts by the nature of the very capable cars they were driving.
Yes of course a failure could happen. I also could get eaten by an escaped Python in my bed due to this hot weather.
I'll still leave my windows open.
It's called risk assessment, because I'm an adult.
FOLLOW ZEEE RULESSSSSSS!!!
The problem is that your individual risk assessment is largely irrelevant.
The chav down the road with the Fiesta ST doing 100mph weaving through traffic on the M1 has also done a risk assessment, that he has judged acceptable.
ThatGuyWhoDoesStuff said:
Of course they can.
But you appreciate there's more to the autobahn than the fact it's a motorway in Germany?
Have you driven this section of M74? I just wonder, because if you're picturing a potholed, patched up M25 and wondering how anyone can safely do 140mph on a British motorway, you might not have a clear picture of the situation. The section of motorway in question is superior to most Autobahn. It's a quiet, 3-lane billiard table with views for miles.But you appreciate there's more to the autobahn than the fact it's a motorway in Germany?
Prof Prolapse said:
You really do need to work on your anologies. I mean in smoking, unlike speeding, you are always "causing harm", and a significant number die of complications of things like COPD rather than cancer. As a healthcare professional, to me it literally makes no sense as well as not being comparable
Your whole argument hinges on 70mph being a speed at which these risks are overcome or significantly reduced. So as adults we are not assessing the risk correctly. Given the speed limit of 70mph was put in place as a means to reduce fuel consumption, and DfT statistics do not support this claim, please could you kindly demonstrate your working?
I think we'd all like to see it. Because as mentioned earlier, whilst I think we all accept that speed limits do need to exist for the benefit of society, to make the claim it is moral indefensible to break them, I think requires evidence.
I can't spot anywhere where I've suggested that 70mph is a speed at which risks are overcome, not that breaking the speed limit is morally indefensible. Your whole argument hinges on 70mph being a speed at which these risks are overcome or significantly reduced. So as adults we are not assessing the risk correctly. Given the speed limit of 70mph was put in place as a means to reduce fuel consumption, and DfT statistics do not support this claim, please could you kindly demonstrate your working?
I think we'd all like to see it. Because as mentioned earlier, whilst I think we all accept that speed limits do need to exist for the benefit of society, to make the claim it is moral indefensible to break them, I think requires evidence.
I think my analogy is spot on.
Falling doesn't kill you - stopping does.
Speed doesn't kill you - the sudden lack of speed does
Smoking doesn't kill you - 'insert associated medical condition here' does.
They're all largely meaningless. When someone takes a tumble from a high-rise balcony I don't remember many headlines to the effect of 'man stops to death.'
Yes, the falling didn't kill him but I feel it may have had something to do with it.
ThatGuyWhoDoesStuff said:
I've never suggested that it's a horrendous crime. I also never said that any variance above 70mph is necessarily to be frowned upon.
The problem is that your individual risk assessment is largely irrelevant.
The chav down the road with the Fiesta ST doing 100mph weaving through traffic on the M1 has also done a risk assessment, that he has judged acceptable.
what's the chav in the Fiesta got to do with me? His might be, his might not be. He'll get nicked or get dead.The problem is that your individual risk assessment is largely irrelevant.
The chav down the road with the Fiesta ST doing 100mph weaving through traffic on the M1 has also done a risk assessment, that he has judged acceptable.
I didn't say there shouldn't be speed limits. (well not on this thread).
I said grown ups can make a decision, in this case it was a victimless crime and frankly considering how much the police aren't doing, they should just accept they lost out on this one, and maybe try a bit harder on crime that has a victim. Such as the burglary that they did nothing about, or the shooting or the stolen vehicles.
It's just sour grapes. They didn't get the team that were efficiently travelling from A to B. Nobody got hurt. Nothing happened except some arbitrary out of date number was broken.
load of old s
t in my opinion.ThatGuyWhoDoesStuff said:
I can't spot anywhere where I've suggested that 70mph is a speed at which risks are overcome, not that breaking the speed limit is morally indefensible.
I think my analogy is spot on.
Falling doesn't kill you - stopping does.
Speed doesn't kill you - the sudden lack of speed does
Smoking doesn't kill you - 'insert associated medical condition here' does.
They're all largely meaningless. When someone takes a tumble from a high-rise balcony I don't remember many headlines to the effect of 'man stops to death.'
Yes, the falling didn't kill him but I feel it may have had something to do with it.
You really suck, man.I think my analogy is spot on.
Falling doesn't kill you - stopping does.
Speed doesn't kill you - the sudden lack of speed does
Smoking doesn't kill you - 'insert associated medical condition here' does.
They're all largely meaningless. When someone takes a tumble from a high-rise balcony I don't remember many headlines to the effect of 'man stops to death.'
Yes, the falling didn't kill him but I feel it may have had something to do with it.
TartanPaint said:
Have you driven this section of M74? I just wonder, because if you're picturing a potholed, patched up M25 and wondering how anyone can safely do 140mph on a British motorway, you might not have a clear picture of the situation. The section of motorway in question is superior to most Autobahn. It's a quiet, 3-lane billiard table with views for miles.
Which is why those deer love to walk on it I'm confident it could be safe to drive on, but I'm going to need a little more convincing then 'the cars are capable and the drivers were probably sensible.......' which seems to appease others.
Todd Bonzalez said:
You really suck, man.
Have I shagged your wife or something?What can they be charged with using dash cam footage?
I’m guessing but if the police don’t have their Registrations surely the can’t tie them to the 140?
Can you use ordinary dash can footage to charge with speeding, or would they only get charged if seen doing something particularly dangerous or reckless on camera?
I’m guessing but if the police don’t have their Registrations surely the can’t tie them to the 140?
Can you use ordinary dash can footage to charge with speeding, or would they only get charged if seen doing something particularly dangerous or reckless on camera?
ThatGuyWhoDoesStuff said:
Strudul said:
Because the above can never happen on the autobahn? Are deer and trees banned in Germany? Does it not rain over there? Are their tyres indestructible?
Of course they can. But you appreciate there's more to the autobahn than the fact it's a motorway in Germany?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff