Speed limits - please explain

[wherestheaircon]

You're driving through the country roads. You're in a 30mph zone going through a school - fair dos - best not to risk any kids running into the road so let's stick to the limit. HOWEVER. You drive another mile or so and pass a clearly labelled "40"mph but you carry on doing 30 - sometimes you even dip down to 25, and break randomly with no reasoning (to add, I'm keeping a very reasonable and safe distance between our vehicles). The roads aren't that busy - couple of cars here and there but it's definitely safe to go up to 40mph otherwise they wouldn't put that restriction on.

So why in the world are you STILL doing 30 when you've entered a 40 zone??!!! You even drive through a 60mph zone and creep up to 40mph but no further than that. I am being so genuine when I ask that, if this sounds like you, why? I'm sure if there's a reasonable explanation I will be ok...

30 in a 40 isn’t a problem. You won’t fail a test for that.

You would if it was a clear road with no hazards and you were causing a queue of traffic behind you.

and when people go significantly under.

How would you ever monitor WHY someone is significantly under? I've even followed an ambulance with blue lights going at snail pace - god knows who was in it, but that didn't look good.

The queue of traffic behind you means nothing either - don't tell me you've never been in areas where cars just speed. Zone with road work suddenly going to 30mph come to mind, despite constantly repeated 30 signs , cars just try to zoom past and make it clear you should drive a lot faster. Why isn't there more cameras in these zones, I'll never know, they' ll make a fortune.

I can think of many more where traffic catches up with you far too fast even when you are going slightly over the limit yourself, and builds up behind. Being at the front of a huge queue of traffic doesn't mean you are too slow - if you NEVER are, it means you are going way too fast.

That's your problem, but I won't pull over to let you go through, I won't accelerate because you try to intimidate me, if you are not happy with the limit, contact whoever is in charge of them, don't try to push people to crash.

If you plan your trip at the second and cannot tolerate anyone in front of you , you are a bad driver. There are lorries, slower vehicles, learners, road incidents, thousands of reason why the traffic won't go as fast as you think you should. SO WHAT?

Most drivers completely overestimate their own driving skills.

it's definitely safe to go up to 40mph otherwise they wouldn't put that restriction on.

I disagree. I live in an area surrounded by twisty turny country roads and I’m shocked by the speed limits on some of them.

I also know someone whose little house is on a bend on one of these roads and she’s had her front wall knocked down (at best) 17 times.

People have acknowledged there are some things that would require you to go under the limit for safety. A clear road in good conditions is selfish.

Instead of retests every ten years, I'd put black boxes in very single car that monitors speed and GPS position. It would then know which road you're on, what the limit is and could issue tickets and license points as soon as the car exceeds the limit of the road.

er, the tech isn't that great. I worked with for an insurer, and it became quite a running issue that drivers would discover they'd been flagged as speeding - most often 60 or 70 in a 30 when they hadn't.

Looking at the boxes, they sometimes get confused where roads on a map cross (because they only have lat/long without altitude). So it looks like you briefly broke the speed limit, when you didn't.

Last I knew of it, there wasn't an automated solution and agents had to correct peoples records by hand. It was one of the reasons we ended up allowing drivers a certain number of hits before penalising them ...

In general - as the techiest nerd I know - I'm not a fan of looking to technology as a magic bullet to correct the foibles of human behaviour. As this thread demonstrates in spades, there are plenty of people who will insist they know better than a black box how to drive.

Anyway, I think a combination of continued lowering of speed limits, coupled with more use of zones (20 mph in particular) and automated enforcement (loads more average speed cameras) will result in traffic being held pretty much to the speed limit. You already see this along some A roads in Birmingham. Because the entire stretch is covered with average speed cameras then enough drivers do obey the speed limit to make it impossible for others to break it. Similar to smart motorways.

I guess I'm a bit out of touch but less drivers exceeding the speed limit overall sounds like a Good Thing to me.

I guess I'm a bit out of touch but less drivers exceeding the speed limit overall sounds like a Good Thing to me.

This thread isn't about drivers exceeding the speed limits. It's about dangerous drivers who continue to go too slow for the road conditions and get nowhere near the speed limit. I don't think there are many (any) posters suggesting speed limits should be breached.

As this thread demonstrates in spades, there are plenty of people who will insist they know better than a black box how to drive.

well when I get stuck behind a cyclist on a national speed limit road, I do know better than a black box about the safe speed to drive at until it's safe to overtake!

This thread isn't about drivers exceeding the speed limits.

But it has speed limits in it

well when I get stuck behind a cyclist on a national speed limit road, I do know better than a black box about the safe speed to drive at until it's safe to overtake!

I really don't understand that at all ? You might. But then you won't be in the "plenty of people" set that was being referred to ? Which won't obviate the fact that it's not an empty set ...

@otra
No. We are not obliged to drive faster for the satisfaction of other drivers. We’re just not.

DGRossetti
was just pointing out the very obvious reason why a black box monitoring and penalising low speed would absolutely not work.

This thread proves that a lot of drivers who willingly drive way under speed limits on clear roads, do not have the excuse of being elderly/ill .......

A lot of them are supposedly intelligent middle aged MNetters.

I freely admit I'm a hypocrite because this gives me rage often but on occasion it has totally been me going well under the limit.

Usually because (as a homecare worker) I'm desperately trying to spot a side road or driveway of a client in the middle of nowhere - so a satnav following a postcode has several square miles to aim for! Couple of weeks ago it was because I was heading home after AA had just done a temp fix on the car and I felt that going slower gave me the best chance of controlling the car should it stop working again.

We cant possibly know if there's what we consider a legitimate reason for driving slowly (but I will continue to see the when behind them!!!)

And FYI because clearly a lot of posters are not quite understanding this for some unknown reason ....

This thread is about:

drivers going way under the speed limit
Vs drivers sticking close to or at the speed limit.

Not slow drivers vs speeders

A lot of them are supposedly intelligent middle aged MNetters.

is that who MNetters are supposed to be?

We cant possibly know if there's what we consider a legitimate reason for driving slowly

my point exactly
and going into a rage because someone is driving too slowly for your liking is just being a bad driver. It really doesn't matter.

We cant possibly know if there's what we consider a legitimate reason for driving slowly

Most sensible people would pull over and let others pass if they were going too slow for the road limits/conditions. If you've a problem with your car, then don't just plough on at 20 letting a huge queue build up, pull over and let it pass. Likewise if you're snailing along looking for a side road.

30 in a 40 isn’t a problem. You won’t fail a test for that.

I failed my first driving test for exactly that reason.
The speed limit changed from 30 to 40, I didn’t notice the 40 sign and continued driving at 30 mph for quite a while.
It was a clear road with no hazards, and also a quiet time of day, so no cars being held up by me driving 10 mph under the speed limit. But still a fail despite me not creating an unnecessary queue of traffic.

Clearly there’s some roads where it’s not possible to drive safely at the speed limit, for whatever reason, a prime example being those twisty narrow rural lanes that are NSL by default rather than by design.

But if the road conditions are such that it’s possible to drive safety at the speed limit, then as a general rule, drivers should be driving at or near the speed limit.

No. We are not obliged to drive faster for the satisfaction of other drivers. We’re just not.

Absolutely you're not. But if you're holding up a queue of traffic while driving considerably under the speed limit then you should pull over - not just out of common decency but because the Highway Code says you should.

Holding up a queue of traffic for no good reason is dangerous and not good driving. You should be using your mirrors and pulling over to allow traffic to pass when possible, not trundling along at whatever speed you fancy while totally ignoring the build up of traffic behind you!

We cant possibly know if there's what we consider a legitimate reason for driving slowly

The point is, it doesn't matter what the reason is. If you're driving considerably under the limit and holding up traffic you should pull over when it's safe to do so and allow people to pass you.

I failed my first driving test for exactly that reason.

Hmm....

The speed limit changed from 30 to 40, I didn’t notice the 40 sign and continued driving at 30 mph for quite a while.

Seems to me the fact you missed the sign is contributing factor. Driving without due care and attention.

Seems to me the fact you missed the sign is contributing factor.

Of course missing the sign was a contributing factor, given that the fail was about not driving at the speed limit posted on the sign.

But that aside - do you seriously think I’d have passed if I’d said to the examiner “I know the speed limit has just changed to 40 but I’m going to keep driving at 30 anyway”?
Given that I’ve also said it was a clear road with no hazards and therefore a road where it was possible to drive safely at 40mph?

I don't think black boxes will work. They can be fooled, they can be hacked, give incorrect data etc.

Retesting every 10 years means people are kept up to date on their driving skills, their hazard perception is tested, their eyesight is tested, and they are kept up to date on how to handle different scenarios. So many professions get retested every few years, my own profession for a qualification you get retested every year to check you still understand. Yeah it costs money, but if you actually tell me that's not right, you are essentially saying that the cost of a test is worth more than a humans life. I would actually prefer every 5 years but we don't have the resources for that.

I don't think retesting every 10 years is necessarily a bad idea, but I do know a lot of drivers would have quite a shock. I am not sure how they'll react when they are being told they are not the great driver they assume they are.

I know, they would hate it. But it's in the best interests of everyone.

Thimg with retesting is that people change their driving in test situation.
I've just driven for 30 minutes on the motorway, all clear no visibility issue so trundling along at 70.
At one point a couple drivers decided 70 wasn't fast enough so bollocked by at god knows what... Then they spotted the cop van a little further up the road.. all of sudden the brake lights come on, they pull in to the left hand lane and their driving becomes within confines of the limits. Consciously they know the laws, but when know one is watching they hapily break them. Be the same on a test, people would alter their natural habits.

With the advent of driverless cars and improved GPS systems etc. Monitoring boxes will become common place, I hope they do. Free up resources from the police.