To be annoyed at driving 91 mph on a 70 mph road.

[Jupitertomars]

On a 70mph road with myself in the back as 7 month of DD was crying so 5 year old is in the front.

I was furious. OH rolls eyes when I shout "wow!! Slow down! Your going 91 mph!!"

Then give him death stare.

He replies "stop looking at me like that. I'm not going to crash."

It makes me so frustrated as he just doesn't take it serious.

I know it's common to go slightly over the speed limit but this was too far for me. It's really annoyed me but I don't want it to ruin our day out.

What a selfish ignorant prat with a serious ego problem. Attitude like that is what makes roads far more dangerous for conciencous drivers, my daughter has just started driving and she doesn't worry me but arrogant big headed people who think other drivers are an inconvenience - when they can be showing off like a toddler - are the worst form of lowlife. Damage yourself driving if you really must but don't take innocent drivers and pedestrians with you. Ego. Give it a rest.

Not really sure why having children in the car make it that much different as some as implying....although not quite as catastrophic, losing a parent to a fatal accident is still catastrophic, not to mention killing others, so if it's wrong to speed on a motorway with children in the car, it's wrong to do it without them. So those on their high horse about not speeding with kids in the car, yet are happy to do so on their own, shouldn't be being so self-righteous.

OP driving all the time is hardly a hardship. Driving does not have to be shared equally.

I find driving tiring, especially long distances. I would not be prepared to do all the driving, just because my husband was too much of a cock to just slow down a bit. I would consider it a hardship to have to drive all the way across France and arrive exhausted when we go on holiday because he was too inconsiderate to slow down.

What if they go out for the evening? OP should never be able to have a drink because she can't trust her husband to drive home at a sensible speed? He gets the pass every time?

My DH used to drive too fast and still occasionally gets a heavy right foot. I just quietly ask him to slow down and because he respects me, he does. My kids will also point it out to him, as I said upthread. That works every time.

Unless you are going a very long distance, 90 Vs 70 will not make your arrival time substantially earlier. It just uses more fuel which costs more and is taking a risk with other's lives. If you need to be somewhere, you factor that in to the time you leave, don't speed to make it up.

Always amazed me why our speed limits are so high in general. USA/Canada have lower limits, and they don't have the same congestion or high fuel prices, many European countries are lower too. Our limits were set when not so many vehicles on road and cars weren't so fast so 70 seemed almost impossible to drive at. We need to lower the limits, folk need to stop speeding, it is against the law, penalties need to be more severe. Constantly driving about and some idiots is speeding ahead thinking he/she will get somewhere quicker only to find I arrive same place about 2 seconds later. Speed does not mean efficient or safe driving it means IDIOT.

sit on a motorway at 70mph on cruise control for accuracy

Remembering that the speedo may indicate 70 when you're actually travelling at 63. ;)

coconuttella

So those on their high horse about not speeding with kids in the car, yet are happy to do so on their own, shouldn't be being so self-righteous

Has anyone said that, or have you just assumed it?

Remembering that the speedo may indicate 70 when you're actually travelling at 63. ;)
sorry - should have said, when I test it I use 70 on the satnav (slightly higher on the speedo) and then set the cruise control...

the fact that so many people pass means that their speed is set even higher on the speedo...

Always amazed me why our speed limits are so high in general. USA/Canada have lower limits, and they don't have the same congestion or high fuel prices, many European countries are lower too. Our limits were set when not so many vehicles on road and cars weren't so fast so 70 seemed almost impossible to drive at. We need to lower the limits, folk need to stop speeding, it is against the law, penalties need to be more severe. Constantly driving about and some idiots is speeding ahead thinking he/she will get somewhere quicker only to find I arrive same place about 2 seconds later. Speed does not mean efficient or safe driving it means IDIOT.

And this shows such incredible ignorance about driving it is scary...
do you really think that USA congestion is to do with speed limits?
USA = 9.834 million km2 / 318.9 million people (ish)
UK = 242,495 km2 / 64.1 million people (ish)
So the USA is 40 * the UK in size and c. 5 times the people - so 8 times as empty on average!
and how on earth does anyone think there is a correlation between fuel prices and speed limits - really?!

70mph was set at a time when manufacturers were using the newly opened M1 to test their cars at high speed in december 1965

and have you actually read what you have written?! :
Speed does not mean efficient or safe driving it means IDIOT.
I hate to break the news to you, but if a car is moving you have speed

come back when you have some logic and empirical evidence - this attitude is what is so so wrong with our society - based on fear, mistrust and inaccurate information...

in 2011 the IAM analysed the data released by the government spanning 700,000 accidents across the 2005-2009 period
it raised some very interesting points...
only 13.9% of fatal accidents involved speed above the speed limit
15.9% involved the driver not being able to handle a hazard (e.g. bend) even though under the speed limit

biggest issue at 65%+ of accidents - driver error inc:

• not looking properly (20.5%
• loss of control (34%)
• poor turn / manoeuvre (12%)
• failing to judge another road user's path / speed (11.6%)

second biggest issue - injudicious accident - i.e. not an error of handling - but an error of judgement

• getting hazards wrong / speed into hazards (15.9%)
• exceeded speed limit (13.9%)
• down to failing to observe a give-way or stop sign (2.1%)

third issue - behaviour or experience (28%) inc:

• careless / reckless / in a hurry (17%)
• aggressive driving (8.3%)
• learner / inexperienced (5.3%)

fourth issue - impairment or distraction (19.6%) inc:

• alcohol (9.6%)
• distraction in vehicle (2.6%)

even more interesting - 18%+ involve pedestrians only of which 10% was the pedestrian failing to look properly

so, yes, speed is a factor in a % of fatalities (but breaking the speed limit is only 13.9%) and the over-riding message is that it is driver error not just speed - bearing in mind that 86.1% of fatalities involve the car being below the speed limit...

the focus needs to be on driver training and improvement - not just worrying about a figure on a speedo out of context

many European countries are lower too.

Most European countries (where they have a limit at all) have. 130 km/h limit, or c.80 mph.

A lot of US states have maximum speed limits which are above 70 as well.

Ifitquacks

But where's the fun in that? It's just ruining it for those who are able to handle going fast

Driving innapropriately and not paying attention to your surroundings is dangerous. But the point is that it is dangerous for everyone around that car/driver not just that individual that thinks they know it all.

For police/ambulances etc I get that they may need to speed in the line of their work (but they are at least trained for this) . Might I direct all the car dicks to the appropriate recreational facilities (e.g. a race track) rather tha public roads which we all use

have your fun where it doesnt risk myself and my children

Personally, Im totally with you instasista! For the sake of an extra 10 mins on my journey Id far rather have better fuel economy than drive like a twatlike boy racer. 60-70mpg is my non cool car I'll live with as a grown up...

as for the need to go at 100 to pick up a loaf of bread (WTAF), you save yourself 20 secs, that must make all the difference....

Are people on this thread genuinely defending driving way over the speed limit? Morons should not have licenses, I hope you get caught and prosecuted before you kill someone.

My DH is an amazing driver and I would 100% trust him at 100mph. However aside from the law it's other people's stupidity that I don't trust. We've had several near misses from careless drivers and we live in an area full of 60 roads. I cannot imagine how some people actually get through even a day without writing off their cars 😩🙄

Forgot to add if he drove at 90-100mph with my kids in the car though he'd fucking know about it. But he wouldn't because they're his precious cargo too

Does Nevada still have speed limit free interstates like some German Autobahnen?

I think Montana used to have speed limit free roads too. The danger on some of the roads there is hitting a large animal like a bear, mountain lion, or large deer.

I was driving nicely at 55 mph (on a straight 55 mph road) with three seconds between me and the person in front. A dead deer rolled out of the back of their pick up truck and came rolling down the road at me. Fortunately I managed to swerve and only suffered a broken bumper and fog light, if I'd been going 20 mph faster I'd have probably destroyed the front of my car or ended up in the ditch.

I have also been driving at 65 mph on a 65 mph speed limit interstate watched a pickup with a load of unsecured furniture drive past me and a couple of miles later was confronted with a chair in the middle of my lane.

High speed is great when road conditions are predictable, unfortunately people and animals are not predictable.

So 13.9% of all accidents could be got rid of if people just slowed down! That would be a lot easily avoided.

Just because some accidents are caused by other reasons it doesn't mean we shouldn't try to limit the speeding ones.

True...
but then we could get rid of 9.6% of accidents by just banning Alcohol in the UK ;) (that would go down well on MN!) or get rid of 18% of accidents by banning pedestrians

The point I am making is not that inappropriate speed should be allowed - of course it shouldn't, but that the perspective of many people on this thread, and in society is very skewed and statistically wrong - what we are seeing above is speed kills - people even put up stickers with it on - yet statistically it is a minor contribution to road accidents - no-one seems to believe that, but I think that perhaps stats from 700,000 accidents make a point...

the simple reality is that speed does not kill - it is how the driver makes choices that kills - so doing 90mph as per the OP on a motorway may be fatal in some conditions, but the majority of the time will actually be perfectly safe - we are living in an environment rather like the victorians who thought that a train going above the speed of a fast horse (16mph) would be fatal - groundless, non-scientific fears driving irrational emotions...

the reason so many people are anti speed is because it is the easy option - they don't want to have to face up to improving their driving / don't believe that there is anything wrong with how they drive - esp. as they are within the speed limit - yet you could have a fantastic driver driving really well above the speed limit and they are killing off the unicorns / butterflies and daisies

it is time society grew up and started to use scientific research to drive decisions, not emotional knee-jerk responses - that 13.9% in the stats above probably includes a number of speed related accidents from police chases / thefts / etc. which will skew the figures - the number of excess speed generated accidents on the motorway is miniscule...

so back to the OP - he was totally unreasonable to not take her views into consideration (though even then we have no idea if she was / is an irrational nagging back-seat driver, or being reasonable!) - but he was not necessarily unreasonable to drive at that speed per se...

I was driving nicely at 55 mph (on a straight 55 mph road) with three seconds between me and the person in front. A dead deer rolled out of the back of their pick up truck and came rolling down the road at me. Fortunately I managed to swerve and only suffered a broken bumper and fog light, if I'd been going 20 mph faster I'd have probably destroyed the front of my car or ended up in the ditch.

as for this... - had you been driving at 20mph faster (75) you would have overtaken their pickup truck and would have had no accident at all - drive fast it is safer! And lets be blunt here - an accident like this has nothing to do with speed, and everything to do with not securing a load!

Are you seriously all saying that you've never been over 70mph on a motorway? I'm just not buying it.

Agreed excessive speed is idiotic, however common sense is a wonderful thing. I do a lot of long journeys in France, here the limit is 130kph which is approx 81 mph in normal dry conditions. It changes to 110 in rainy conditions and there are various other changes according to particularly winding or hilly road sections. Works brilliantly. Frequently pass gendarmerie (police) at 81-82 mph no problems, no blue flashing lights. But here, road users use common sense generally and drive to the conditions. They also use lanes 2 and 3 to pass, then return straight back into the slower lanes so traffic keeps moving, something which we can't seem to do in the UK.

I can't claim to be a goody-two-shoes on the motorway all of the time and when on a track, I think that the top speed I managed was 117. My brother, father and other family members have always been car-fiends and my dad used to do rally-driving in the 60s and 70s.
Having said that, I know perfectly well that if I speed I am less in control of the situation than if I'm driving more slowly. No doubt those words will be hacked to bits by some of the posters on here.
The stats and causes of accidents quoted above are all relevant to speeding anyway. If an accident is caused by lack of concentration and numerous of the other reasons listed, they apply to speeders just as much, if not more. If I drive fast, I'm less able to observe potential hazards due to covering a lot more ground before reaching the relevant stretch of the road and also having to increase my concentration on maintaining a 'save' drive at speed.
Although I'm still not the best behaved driver, a big dent in my attitude came from working in a Police department that dealt with speeding fines. Wow!! It had a major effect on my driving habits and (probable) over-confidence, almost instantly restricting my speed to the legal limits. After leaving there, it took a couple of years before I went even a mile or two over the specified limits. The stories about the accidents and nut-jobs racing around were horrendous. There was not one case I read where the speeder didn't have a staggering level of confidence in themselves and their abilities. Even the office manager had a very sad, personal story about his niece being hit by a van, resulting in severe and permanent brain damage.
It's pointless some of the MNers here making sarcy comments that we may as well ban children from cars, cows and horses from the roads etc. That has nothing to do with our driving habits. We all know that some drivers are better than others and yes, some shouldn't have a licence. Some of the cases that I read about when in the Police department, involved ordinary drivers who had failed to notice the petrol-head driving fast in the outside lane or who had been intimidated or surprised by them. Both sides were responsible for the accident, but the outcome was always the main issue. It makes no difference to a dead, bereaved or person.
I can recommend working in a Police dept that deals with speeding, it's a great kick up the arse!

the reason so many people are anti speed is because it is the easy option - they don't want to have to face up to improving their driving / don't believe that there is anything wrong with how they drive - esp. as they are within the speed limit

Totally agree... I think drivers who measure their safety by rigidly following the speed limit, and castigating those who don't, may be giving themselves a false sense of security. How many of those so critical of speeding can honestly say they've have never driven tired or angry. It's not that people are critical of speeding, it's the disproportionate weight they can give to it. The 'people in glass houses' etc

Thank you for that well-balanced post

My comment above was to HelpTheTigers