Franglais:
“The speed limit isn’t a target.” True, but youve been around long enough to know that isnt the thinking for many drivers out there. And some regard it as a minimum with a 10% “get away with it” allowance on top.
+1
We’ve had people on this very forum asking for legal advice after being caught speeding because “they were within the 10% extra margin” and were actually outraged and felt they had unfairly penalised!
With that mentality, what hope have you got?
As I said I don’t see any problem with a temporary over speed to around 65 mph to reduce overtaking times.So 65 mph lane 2 no problem.Over 60 mph lane 1 or over 65 mph lane 2 means summary indefinite loss of LGV entitlement. Sorted.
You dont see any problem? Apart from the fact the “temporary” part will get ignored by those muppets behind the wheel who want to drive flat to the floor whenever possible.
Let’s just say that even under the 3 points per offence rule I don’t even drive the car on a motorway at more than around 75 mph,even if I can be bothered using motorways any more on that basis anyway.Bearing in mind speed cameras,average speed cameras,mobile speed cameras and unmarked car patrols.On that note no one who wants to keep their licence is going to drive an unlimited wagon at silly speeds even at 3 points per offnce let alone one strike and you’re out.
Having said that fine keep the limiters but raise their setting from 90 kmh to 65 mph with that strictly applied 60 mph limit in lane 1.
cav551:
What potential speed do we reckon vehicles would reach if this went ahead with speed limiters also abolished, 85mph plus?
My old man’s Volvo FL6 would hit 80mph no problem. Not sure on the power output but it couldn’t be much more than 200bhp. The F16s of the time with 400 plus would sail past like you were going backwards.
Contrast that with todays V8s and FH4s knocking out 500/600/700 plus. My guess is it’d be closer to 100mph.
It’s never going to happen. Never ever. And nor should it.
wouldn’t the top speed also depend on the gearing, modern trucks are geared for for the present limits.
I’d already edited my original post to include the gearing comment
But if limits went out the window and companies felt it necessary to drive at 80mph plus I’m sure the trucks could be geared accordingly.
Some drivers are total morons, you have to be really naive if you think going faster will do anything to help us drivers out. The extra 14mph will be factored into the planning & you’ll just be expected to go further/do more work.
rob22888:
Some drivers are total morons, you have to be really naive if you think going faster will do anything to help us drivers out. The extra 14mph will be factored into the planning & you’ll just be expected to go further/do more work.
Quite so. And anyone on mpg bonus can expect a healthy pay cut for their efforts. Loose. Loose.
rob22888:
The extra 14mph will be factored into the planning & you’ll just be expected to go further/do more work.
On the positive side that means trunk runs at least which are at present unviable become viable = more demand for drivers = more jobs.While existing runs can be completed faster = more time at home and more daily rest period.
wing-nut:
I see op has had 2 more signatures since he started this thread with his stupid idea.
Come on, own up, who was it??
Maybe CF was one or even both depending on which ‘knowledgeable’ head he had on at the time
If I’ve read it right the muppet is calling for trucks to be allowed to run at 70 mph.Which obviously isn’t what I’m saying which is just ditch the EU bs and re instate the ‘existing’ 60 mph limit,subject to usual margins in lane 2 to help overtakes and increase speeding penalties to summary indefinite loss of LGV entitlement instead of 3 points.What’s not to like.
rob22888:
The extra 14mph will be factored into the planning & you’ll just be expected to go further/do more work.
On the positive side that means trunk runs at least which are at present unviable become viable = more demand for drivers = more jobs.While existing runs can be completed faster = more time at home and more daily rest period.
OK, so it might benefit some job & knock night trunkers, but employers will eventually cotton on to the reduced hours required to get the job done & increased fuel consumption and i’d expect salaries would soon start to decrease in line with that.
rob22888:
The extra 14mph will be factored into the planning & you’ll just be expected to go further/do more work.
On the positive side that means trunk runs at least which are at present unviable become viable = more demand for drivers = more jobs.While existing runs can be completed faster = more time at home and more daily rest period.
Don’t be DAFt - CF
If work can be done faster then fewer drivers will be needed - slower speeds and shorter working weeks would put us in greater need and ultimately push up wages.
rob22888:
The extra 14mph will be factored into the planning & you’ll just be expected to go further/do more work.
On the positive side that means trunk runs at least which are at present unviable become viable = more demand for drivers = more jobs.While existing runs can be completed faster = more time at home and more daily rest period.
Don’t be DAFt - CF
If work can be done faster then fewer drivers will be needed - slower speeds and shorter working weeks would put us in greater need and ultimately push up wages.
Slower speeds mean longer shifts to do the same amount of work,and runs which were viable at 60 mph being unviable at 90 kmh max.Which probably explains better wages in real terms pre limiters v post limiters.The idea of lower productivety resulting in more jobs and higher wages goes against all the laws of economics.
Having said that I can see the attraction for any guvnor saving a few bob in diesel at the expense of a driver who wants to spend longer at work,for what can only be the same money in the job,therefore what can only be a lower hourly rate. IE rates didn’t increase to provide higher wages with the introduction and lower speed limit of limiters.
Eu dictated 56mph 90 k the uk laws were 60mph and still are for old lorries, i wouldn’t have an issue with returning back to 60mph once we leave the dictatorship EU, though this would create issues for those that do euroland with their police and BAG men, but for those operating within the uk , it could help us compete with the flip flops, as they would have to observe the 90k max eu rules
I don’t know why it has made 6 pages, because the o/p is either an idiot, a teararse artist, or on a wind up, or all three.
Also judging by the negative responses on here to this derisory petition, it aint gonna get off the ground, let alone actually happen.
tommy t:
it could help us compete with the flip flops, as they would have to observe the 90k max eu rules
The speed difference would only affect the small UK part of an international freight journey unless it’s cabotage operations.
i was meaning domestic national work were we could have an upper hand , as the flip flops would have to obey their countries laws when running their trucks over here, unless they registered some on uk plates of course, but as we are rip off britain when it comes to road tax insurance i doubt they would go for that
tommy t:
it could help us compete with the flip flops, as they would have to observe the 90k max eu rules
The speed difference would only affect the small UK part of an international freight journey unless it’s cabotage operations.
i was meaning domestic national work were we could have an upper hand , as the flip flops would have to obey their countries laws when running their trucks over here, unless they registered some on uk plates of course, but as we are rip off britain when it comes to road tax insurance i doubt they would go for that
That’s what I meant that it would only really affect cabotage operations which obviously ( shouldn’t ) be an issue after any decent Brexit move anyway.Realistically it would only affect domestic operations and put us back where we were pre limiters in that regard which certainly meant shorter shifts in many cases.Which just leaves a tougher speed penalty regime to stop any pish taking.
robroy:
I don’t know why it has made 6 pages, because the o/p is either an idiot, a teararse artist, or on a wind up, or all three.
Also judging by the negative responses on here to this derisory petition, it aint gonna get off the ground, let alone actually happen.
Maybe because the actual wording of the plan is wrong but the idea of going back to the pre 90 kmh limiter regime would be a reasonable one.Especially bearing in mind the more dangerous traffic bunching situation which limiters are causing for all road users.If not that just at least increase the limiter setting to the uk limit.
Dipper_Dave:
Unfortunately due to the quality of driving and sheer stupidity of a minority (and I’m being kind) of HGV drivers 70mph would not be a good idea.
All you will see is nose to tail HGVs in the middle lane of motorways and outer lane of dual carriageways, like cars each one wanting to go that little bit faster.
It’s more likely overtaking restrictions are placed on HGVs than any speed increase.
Only drivers like myself who have experienced unrestricted HGV travel should have 70mph available to them
Do I want to travel faster? Hell no! I don’t even run on the limiter now (with the exception of overtakes), so why as an hourly paid worker would I want to?
Sorted.
IE rates didn’t increase to provide higher wages with the introduction and lower speed limit of limiters.