advertisement


Speeding Offences

I remember following a police van doing exactly this a few years ago; I followed it for about 10 miles, losing it through the 30 limits and catching back up with it in the 60 limits.

Might have been a reason for that. I never had an issue with a motorist overtaking me if I was travelling well below the speed limit, provided it was safe to do so - even if I was in a T5, Impreza, Cosworth etc.

If you were in a car, and the police were in a non-car based van, you probably would catch up with it on the national speed limit roads. They’d have been limited to 50mph.

Police vehicles are not usually limited. Especially the marked ones.
 
Good point.

The human brain really seems to have a problem operating without visual stimuli.

We see the kid, we slow down or hit the brakes, whatever. But to adapt speed to what we can't initially see, but which could potentially appear from behind parked car etc. seems difficult if not impossible, for us to process.
35 in a 30 will pretty much always get you a ticket
 
Might have been a reason for that. I never had an issue with a motorist overtaking me if I was travelling well below the speed limit, provided it was safe to do so - even if I was in a T5, Impreza, Cosworth etc.



Police vehicles are not usually limited. Especially the marked ones.
They are, by law as mentioned above.
 
They are, by law as mentioned above.
Yes. I took it to be a reference to the fact that vans and commercial vehicles are often subject to lower speed limits than the posted road limit. Something not everybody is aware of. I found out the hard way, about 35 years ago when I got done for doing 63 in a 70 limit. The marked car had followed me for a mile or two, I knew he was there and ‘knew’ I was fine, because 63 in a 70 limit. Pulled me over and gave me the lecture, the goods vehicle limit was, from memory, 50. Then he pulled up the vehicle details and, due to its weight carrying limit (it was just a Transit, but a heavy-duty one) he gleefully informed me my limit was actually 40. Gave me a ticket, which I thought was grossly unfair, my driving had been impeccable otherwise, and a lecture and lesson learned would have done just as good a job. :mad::mad: Still rankles a bit, all these years later, mostly down to the obvious glee on his face.
 
Yes. I took it to be a reference to the fact that vans and commercial vehicles are often subject to lower speed limits than the posted road limit. Something not everybody is aware of. I found out the hard way, about 35 years ago when I got done for doing 63 in a 70 limit. The marked car had followed me for a mile or two, I knew he was there and ‘knew’ I was fine, because 63 in a 70 limit. Pulled me over and gave me the lecture, the goods vehicle limit was, from memory, 50. Then he pulled up the vehicle details and, due to its weight carrying limit (it was just a Transit, but a heavy-duty one) he gleefully informed me my limit was actually 40. Gave me a ticket, which I thought was grossly unfair, my driving had been impeccable otherwise, and a lecture and lesson learned would have done just as good a job. :mad::mad: Still rankles a bit, all these years later, mostly down to the obvious glee on his face.
People get caught out like this in campers that are converted from vans but not re registered. A friend of mine has one such, she was ticketed for 70 on a dual carriageway, where the commercial limit is 50 or 60 for that class of vehicle. She has since re registered it as a camper and it now has normal car limits, mostly because the heaviest thing it has in the back is now a fridge and a bed rather than a pile of bricks.
 
Haha, I bet!
I took my Z4m out in the snow a couple of times, it was twitchy but the biggest issue was ground clearance... lots of scraping noises coming from underneath!

My wife's SLK is the worst car in snow that I've ever driven. It's the diesel and has an enormous amount of torque from low in the rev range which makes it very tricky in really slippery conditions as the traction control struggles.
 
The issue with car speedometers is that there is no negative tolerance in the indication, therefore the car makers have to adjust to some small percentage higher. This is to allow for inflation levels (temperature or maintenance) or the car being fitted with non-OEM tyres
As you say Construction and Use regs allow up to +10% but -0% on a speedo, so it can be optimistic but never under read. This has to be right for all tyre and wheel options, all states of wear, inflation, etc. As a result most manufacturers set it to about +5% and have done, that way they will never be wrong and individual models may show 62, 63, 64 for an actual 60mph depending on their exact spec but all will be within tolerance.
 
So after checking my tyre pressures were all ok just got back from a short run out on a flat straight bit of inter-urban dual carriageway with the missus, she called out the satnav speed so I could do a direct quick speedo glance.... and the results are (sat/spdo); 40/43, 50/53, 60/64, 70/74 so not that bad after all.
 
My wife's SLK is the worst car in snow that I've ever driven. It's the diesel and has an enormous amount of torque from low in the rev range which makes it very tricky in really slippery conditions as the traction control struggles.
Winter tyres would cure it. I had a 3 series tourer which was terrible on snow, wide wheels & daft tyres sometimes come as standard.
 
True.

Worst I've experienced was (rather foolishly) being out in an Elise in the snow one day. Lose traction at all either through acceleration or braking - quite easily done in a bantamweight car with big fat tyres - and with the engine and bulk of the weight at the back, the rear of the car, the tail used to slide down the camber of the road and leave you facing sideways or back towards the direction you were coming from. And that was at about 5mph. D@mn thing was nigh on undrivable.
 
My wife's SLK is the worst car in snow that I've ever driven. It's the diesel and has an enormous amount of torque from low in the rev range which makes it very tricky in really slippery conditions as the traction control struggles.
I’m guessing it’s an auto too so no clutch to feather. Traction control is fairly useless in snow, I switch it off on my Golf because it goes into panic on snow.

PS, I didn’t make a habit it driving the Z4 in the snow, a snow drift had buried my Golf under 3-4’ of snow, the Z4 was pretty much clear, so that’s the car I used... but I did beach it in a parking space...pretty undignified (and cold) lying on the ground trying to dig snow from under the car!
 
I remember taking an RS3 on a skid pan. With or without traction control, it's hilarious! And that's 4WD
 
I remember taking an RS3 on a skid pan. With or without traction control, it's hilarious! And that's 4WD

The 928 is hopeless; did get stuck once at the bottom of a hill, it would neither drive up or reverse up the other way; luckily someone had gritted the pavement so i could eventually get a wheel onto that.
 
So after checking my tyre pressures were all ok just got back from a short run out on a flat straight bit of inter-urban dual carriageway with the missus, she called out the satnav speed so I could do a direct quick speedo glance.... and the results are (sat/spdo); 40/43, 50/53, 60/64, 70/74 so not that bad after all.

Are we talking about a Honda CTR? If so I agree from my experiments with new/old tyres and rev counter readings only. 40 PSI ?
 


advertisement


Back
Top