Conference terri::cars_uk

    
    Yo lads,
           lets get serious, The act of travelling at 150+ mph is not
    dangerous ! The act of travelling at 150+ mph with unknown variables
    can be dangerous. ie: empty road, dual carriageway, visability over 2
    miles.. go for it. against:  same road same conditions except 1 vehicle at
    the end of your vision, at 150+ mph that car will be very close before
    the brakes have had time to slow you (sight, react, apply), but which
    lane is the other car in ?
    
    Alan

    re.92
    
    >>else's. After every major pile up I can remember, the Police say that
    >>people were travelling too fast for the conditions. I heard one
    
    Bingo! Thats exactly it! The speed MUST be safe for the conditions. In
    a high powered car with brakes to match, and a driver with decades of
    experience, and perfect weather conditions, going over 70mph is
    probably not going to result in an un-safe situation. However, winding
    a Mini up to 80mph could well do (even winding a 2CV up to 60 ? ;-)
    
    A road safety quiz answer surprised me the other day (source: Observer
    Magazine), to the effect of :- What is the major cause of road traffic
    accidents? a) Excessive Speed, b} Lack of concentration, c) Bad weather
    
    Answer b)
    
    Both a) & c) can be made safe by concentrating on what you are doing,
    and knowing the limits of your (and your vehicles) ability.
    
    I will continue driving at whatever speed I consider safe (and cos I
    don't want the bother of getting nicked, no more than 10-15mph above
    whatever speed limit is in force).
    
    Andy
    

>>           lets get serious, The act of travelling at 150+ mph is not
>>    dangerous ! The act of travelling at 150+ mph with unknown variables
>>    can be dangerous. ie: empty road, dual carriageway, visability over 2
>>    miles.. go for it. against:  same road same conditions except 1 vehicle at
    
    ... and then you have a punture.  I had a blow out on my way home on
    the motorway last week.  At the time I was doing in the region of 70-80
    mph and so the consequences were very undramatic, but if I had been
    doing 150 mph...
    
    
    Shaun.

    Shaun, you'r dead right and if the sky falls down we'll be all dead!
    
    As I stated before the government should make laws and regulations as
    general guidelines but also apply them in the most effective
    way. Not the most limitating.
    Also I believe that individuals should be made more aware of their
    individual responsiblities. Both to themselves as to others. Obviously
    I feel that individuals should carry the consequenses of their choises
    a lot more as well.
    
    P.e. a high-rope dancer. If he/she decides to take the risc so bit. No
    need to make a net obligatory. There should be however regulations
    about the quality of safety nets and aslo a regulation about noit
    performing above members of the public.
    
    I am very much against involuntary "safety" measures as they directly
    infringe my personal freedom I am even more opposed to them if they are
    discriminative: p.e. safety belts, helmets versus no law on safe sex!
    What applies to the one applies to the other, no grey this time!
    
    I do realise however that this is strictly a personal view which I
    don't expect others to share but as I respect the view of others I
    expect mine to be too.
    
    Peter

    I suppose the acid test as to whether you're a safe driver is the
    number of accidents you're involved in. Other than a couple of careless
    parking incidents, I score zero in 12 years.
    
    Perhaps I'm just lucky! :-)

    
    I agree with Tony. If you ever needed proof of what Tony is saying you
    don't have to look far. Take the big accident on the M4 near Newbury
    a couple of years ago. Fog produced appalling driving conditions, I
    can't think of a better reason to moderate one's driving. If everyone had
    heeded that warning the accident might never of happened, and for sure
    it would not have resulted in the carnage. Simular thing happened on
    the M25 around the same time, and Look at the weather last night.
    Raining cats and dogs, dead easy to aquaplane. People still have to
    rush around. Unfortunatly its a bit like school , if children can't
    be trusted to behave then the rules punish those who can't behave.  
    
    It would be nice to be free of regulation but it only take one idiot.
    
    
    Garry
         

>>    Shaun, you'r dead right and if the sky falls down we'll be all dead!
    
    I would just like to state that I am not a pessimist, and given the
    right road conditions and laws which allowed me to travel faster, I
    would do so happily.  However, doing a relatively high mileage (30k +
    per year) I have seen a number of frightening things on the road, from
    people just drifting between lanes, with a complete disregard of
    anything around them, to people getting so close to my rear bumper
    that I can no longer see the front of their car that if I had to break
    sharply, there would be no doubt about them joining me in the front seat
    of my car.
    
    I would prefer to consider myself to be a cautious driver, hoping that
    if and when exceptional circumstances occur, I might be more prepared
    for them. 
    
    Shaun.
    

    
    ...didn't think Citroen's could reach 150 ! ;-)
    
    Graham_the_hippy

    re. 98
    
    The number of accidents you had in a given time period doesn't always
    give a true indication of how safe a driver you are. If you live the
    North of Scotland you're less likely to have an accident than if you
    drive in central London. Also if you drive very high mileages (I'll
    cover 40k+ miles this year) you are statistically more likely to have
    accident. I mean the longer you're on the road the more morons you're
    likely to come across. You need to take account of many factors. 
    
    By the way I would now consider myself to be a cautious driver but I
    learnt the hard way. I've never hit anyone else but I've gone straight
    on at a corner a couple of times. I now classify myself as an
    ex-hooligan.
    
    Andy.
    

    I mean't to add a couple of examples to my last note.
    
    Is someone who has five minor bumps in London a safer driver than
    someone who has had one accident but happened to kill someone.
    
    Is someone who drives 50k miles a year and has an accident once every
    two years safer than someone who drives 10k miles a year and has an
    accident every 10 years. Accidents per mile are equal.
    
    Andy.

    re: .102
    
    The BX 16V is good for 135, and Car magazine got the old CX GTi Turbo 2
    up to about 138 at Bruntingthorpe during a Giant Test in '85.  My old
    GS would reach - and maintain - an indicated 95 on the A3 out of London
    coming home in the evenings.  I can't vouch for the accuracy of the
    speedo, of course, but I was keeping well up with the outside lane lot. 
    Whih isn't bad for an aircooled 1220cc saloon with over 100K on the
    odometer....
    
    I also (inadvertently) drove my GSA from Wokingham to South Harrow
    (about 35 miles) on the M4, 70-80 mph, early morning rush-hour, with a
    flat front tyre.  I didn't spot this until after I had reached my
    destination....
    
    I'm not sure how fast the XM 3.0 V6 24 valve will go....
    
    
    Richard
    
    PS Oh yes, the old SM was good for about 140.  Of course, it had a
    version of the Maserati Bora engine in it.....
     

    re:several
    
    My mother in law is a good driver. She's never had an accident...seen
    hundreds, though.
    
    In other words, just becuase you've not had an accident, doesn't mean
    you're a good driver. We've all seen/heard of drivers who have cuased
    an accident, but get away scotfree becuase it ends up happening behind
    them.
    
    Colin
    

re.98:

Here's a challenge for you Mr Safety. I stopped counting how many accidents I've
been involved a few years back but then it was somewhere in the mid twenties...
The challenge is, you sit in my car while I drive you around, you make notes
on my bad habits. Then we reverse roles and compare notes at the end.

Dave ;-)

    Re.105
    
    SM + Bora motor? Nice thought, but did you ever count the cylinders?
    
    Merak methinks!

	Mr Kerrell, if you want someone to observe you and comment, then I'm
	willing.  Then I'll take you out in the Marlin and you can comment on
	my driving.  I'm certainly not perfect, but I do drive with the aim
	of being safe *and* quick ("safety fast")...

	Dave

        RE  (even winding a 2CV up to 60 ? ;-)
            
        60. A reasonable 2CV will do 80. A friend of mine races them 
        good for 85 - 90. Not bad for a 600 cc flat twin.
        
        
        Simon 
        
        :-)

	I'm not sure yet but ...

	I thinks there's going to be another "Road Safety" day at
	Hadley's Moter Park in Basingstoke. The event last year
	attracted a reasonable crowd for the weather conditions.
	There are tests of driving skills, demonstration and
	observed drives. The Emergancy services, RoSPA and the
	IAM were there.

	I'll get more details later, but I think it on Sunday
	20th June this year.

	If you think you're a good driver come along and find
	out!

	Graham

    re: .106
    
    >We've all seen/heard of drivers who have cuased
    >an accident, but get away scotfree becuase it ends up happening
    >behind them.
    
    This happened to me about a year ago, I was travelling on the M4  doing
    about 70, when this guy who was doing about 20 mph on the hard
    shoulder, suddenly emerged into the lane I was in (about 15-20 ms
    away),   I swerved to avoid him and in the process lost control and
    rolled my car and wrote it off.  Luckily I had a witness behind me, and
    this guy backed my story up, the guy who caused the accident (who was
    knocking on for 75) got done for wreckless driving and fined about
    500 quid, which meant I've eventually got my no-claims back
    (after 10 months).
    
    The point of this being, if this guy had taken the obvious steps of
    looking in his mirror and getting up to motorway speed before moving
    out, none of this would have happened. 
    
    Trev
    
     

    Weren't you able to give him room to come out? Doesn't alter the fact
    that he was found guilty of wreckless driving but could have saved you
    a lot of hassle.
    
    Simon

    Drivers predictable and travelling in the same direction>>
    
    which race are you talking about?
    
    In racing however everyone gets to practice being out of control
    and learning not to panic. One learns how to avoid other cars out
    of control.
     One learns the limits of ability of the car you are driving and your
    self.
     And above all you learn to concentrate on what
    you are doing and observing in minute detail what the current
    conditions are and the behavior of those around you.
    
     For example. at Oulton park in a race (motorbikes same principle
    applies) a bike went down immediatley in front of another bike at
    90 mph + The following biker avoided the bike and the rider.
    
    Last weekend in the wet ( boy was it wet) loads and loads of clubmen
    coped at high speed with aquaplaning doing the equivalent of 90mph
    down a narrow country lane.
    
    Captain Volvo plodding along at 45  to 60  brain in neutral is the 
    accident looking to happen. Thats why he needs a Volvo
    

    RE .113
    
    Just before the accident occured, there was a stream of traffic in the
    outside lane (only a 2 lane mway), he had already started emerging
    before I had chance to move out (lucky there was no traffic there when
    I did swerve !!!!)
    
    Trev

re.109:

Dave, it will only work if you've never had an accident, the point being, that
I've been involved in loads therefore I'm an unsafe driver.

Dave.

    
    Anyone remember the story of the F1 driver being stopped on a motorway
    for speeding a couple of years back ??. After all his years of F1 he
    still hadn't got around to passing his driving test !.
    
    Not sure who , when or where but Im sure its true .
    
    
    Gary
    

	Maybe I should mail this to Mr Kerrell (ok, from now on it's Dave, I think
	we know each well enough now), but I have had an accident.  I very
	nearly wrote off an XR2i in France (it cost nearly as much as the car
	was worth to re-build it).  If that's not enough then I can go out and
	have the odd accident if you want a better batting average than one accident
	in 15 years of car driving (and never a motorbike accident nor so much
	as a scratch on the Marlin).  

	I'm trying to make a serious point; we can all improve, but we
	can only improve if we recognise our mistakes - driving safely is 20%
	technique and 80% attitude.

	Dave

    re: my .98 & susequent replies
    
    Ok, ok I admit it ! I just have been lucky on the roads, and have had
    lots of near misses. If I was on the M62 last year in a mega-pileup in
    the fog, I don't think I could have avoided it just cos I was doing 45.
    
    To the moderators: what about moving a few of these notes to a new
    topic of road safety/accidents etc.
    
    Andy (who-isn't-so-safe-after-all)

>driving safely is 20% technique and 80% attitude.

I agree 100% (you should see my attitude!).

Dave.

    
    < Note 2077.118 by KERNEL::WITHALLG "Never heard of him" >
    
    I also remember a few years back that Ron 'rocket' Haslam who was
    currently competing in the 500cc World Motor Cycling Championship was
    stopped by the police. After the checks were done by the police it
    transpired that he'd never sat his bike test!!!!!
    
    POL.

    One thing that would realy enhance road safety is including motorbike
    riding in the car driver's training!
    And I'll say another thing: any motorcyclist that does serious mileage
    for any number of years without having an accident can realy ride!
    
    Another plus would be a circuit test to experience just how much
    adhesion a vehicle needs under different circumstances. Unless one 
    learns where the limits are one has no chance to acquire proper driving 
    skills ever. Like with riding bikes: you don't realy learn untill you've 
    dropped it.
    Most accidents that happen could have been avoided by the drivers if
    they'd have had any idea of what modern vehicles are capable of.
    
    I am convinced that driving tests should be a LOT tougher. More road
    testing, stricter physical tests and some sort of psychological test.
    Having a license is not a right! From what I experience daily I'm sure
    that about 50% of driveres should not be in control of a vehicle.
    The resulting impovement of average driving capabilities would then
    make it possible to rewrite the traffic codes into something sound too!
     
    Peter
                                                                      

    Raise the driving age to 25.  The insurance companies could do this
    unilaterally.  This would cut out a lot of accidents, and tend to
    discourage a percentage of the population from ever starting to drive.
    
    Richard (over 25)
    

    Well said .34!
    
    Laurie.

I totally disagree with .34 & .35.


Warren  (only 22)

    Why not .34 Warren? If you're a sound driver and pass the test, no
    sweat. If not you should be allowed on the road!
    
    I'd like to add that I consider driving- and physical tests every five
    year to be a neccessity considering how much people change in a year.
    If'd happen to fail than that would have been in my interest as well!
    
    Peter

Sorry all,

I meant I didn't agree with 35 & 36 (not 34).
It's not ALL the young drivers that are bad.
Blame high insurances on the folk that steal the cars.

In my book, the older you are does not mean you are a better driver.

    	I agree with .34 but would say that the level of training would
    need to be greater than the current CBT, judging by some of the L-plate
    motorcyclists that I've seen.
    
    Gwyn (with both Car & Bike licences)

	As an "oldie," I agree.

	Being older, in my case, has brought me to realise I sometimes miss 
seeing things that I should have seen, especially at road junctions.

	After driving around a million miles now, in many parts of the world, 
I hope that I am now realising that I've not been as good as I thought at the 
time, rather than now deteriorating, if you see what I mean.

	An Oldies view.  

	BTW 8^) the insurance companies equate being under 25 as being 
inexperienced from their actuarial experience, it not some form of prejudice
against them.  I suffered in the same way in my childhood too! 8^).

	The Americans say "there ain't no substitue for cubic inches," I add 
here that "there ain't no substitute for experience."

				Malcolm.

What I have found from talking to people is...

You could be under 25 and have say three years driving experience -
     insurance coys class you as inexperienced

BUT

You could be over 25 and have the same experience (or less)  - 
     insurance coys class you as experienced !

The magical 25 year old barrier is rubbish.
Calculations should be done on no of years experience and amount of claims during
that time.


Warren - 4 yrs, no claims, still crucified for premiums

    
    Warren,
    
    I hate to disappoint you, but the mythical 25 year barrier is just
    that. A myth!
    
    Before I was 25, insurers and acquaintances said 'It'll be cheaper when
    you're 25', then it was 30 and now I can only look forward to cheaper
    insurance in 20 years time when I qualify for the Codgers in Allegros
    policies! :^)
    
    Mark

>    insurance in 20 years time when I qualify for the Codgers in Allegros
>    policies! :^)
    
    As opposed to Codgers in Calibras policy now, Mark ? ;^)
    
    P.S. It's good to see you making a concerted effort to retain your
    CARS_UK Noter Of The Year awards - that's at least two this week.
    
    Terry 

    No, no, no. Mr. Saxby said he'd never note in here again... I
    distinctly remember... ;^)
    
    Laurie.

    Any thoughts on restricted cars for under 20's (25's etc), just like
    motor bikes? I remember having real difficulty trying to show off on my
    30mph (in a tail wind) sports mo-ped at the age of 16!
    
    Andy

    I don't think mechanical restriction is necessarily a good answer. 
    Restrictions in power and capacity that have been applied to bikes have
    resulted in a class of vehicles that are frighteningly vulnerable, and
    are more difficult to drive safely than a normal motorcycle. IMO, this
    is iniquitous.  The least skilled motorcyclists get sent out on bikes
    that can't keep up with traffic, and get blown about by overtaking
    trucks etc.  The lack of adequate accelleration tempts them into
    injudicious overtaking when the traffic slows down, leaving them
    marooned on the outside of a line of faster traffic when it speeds up
    again.  I had to slow down quite a bit at one point on my way home last
    night, to extricate someone from just this situation.  I would imagine
    that a fair percentage of accidents could be blamed - at least in part
    - on the learner bikes that have been created by this legislation.
    
    It isn't necessary to create "restricted" cars - quite a few cars have
    fairly restricted performance anyway, and the insurance companies do a
    lot towards limiting the ambitions of younger/inexperienced drivers.  I
    think that what may have let the bike situation get out of hand was the
    insurers' practice of classifying bikes only by capacity, rather than
    the broad spectrum of cost and performance used with car insurance.  If
    you were a 17-year-old tearaway, would you have chosen an MZ250 Supa
    over a Yamaha RD250LC Power Valve Race Replica etc for the same
    insurance cost?
    
    Richard
    

    This may have been mentioned here, but....
    
    I heard a suggestion (from a policeman I think) that drivers in the
    first couple of years (or whatever) should have a much lower threshold
    of penalty points required to have their license confiscated  and so
    require a retest. I think he mentioned 4 points rather than 10 or
    whatever it is. The theory was that this would tend to encourage good
    driving behaviour in the critical stage of the driving career. It made
    sense to me, but I probably just missed the obvious flaws. 

    c$%P 
    
    It wont discourage them at all, even death doesnt discourage them, it
    didnt discourage me. Its best to find another outlet for testing 
    the immortality of youth rather than stiffer fines. 
    	Compulsory kart or banger racing before going on the road. 
    Then they'll
    		be so scared of driving fast
    		enjoy it so much that they'll take it up
    		Find street racing so tame they wont do it.
    		Actually be able to control the cars they  wont crash
    		They'll have "proved themselves" or otherwise!
    
    Another side effect will be more and better racing drivers from
    GB in  F1 and women in Racing	
    

    Of course, not all accidents are caused by the young.  The guy who
    pulled out of a minor road into the side of me this morning couldn't
    have been a day under fifty....
    
    Richard
    

    RE: .49
    
    Excellent idea!
    
    I started driving (tractors, cars, karts) at about 12, and controlling
    a car on the road at 17 was no problem. Dealing with other road users
    was the difficult part!
    
    Laurie.

    
    I never had an accident till I was 24 and when I look at the cars I
    drove and the way I drove them until that point, I simply wonder how
    come? I had a 3 litre capri and drove it like a maniac at 19 but I
    never put so much as a scratch on it ...see miracles do happen!
    
    The problem is that when I was young , immature and inexperienced I was
    too young immature and inexperienced to realise!
    
    Richard
    
    Ps. I think the racing experience thing is a good idea but banger
    racing is something that needs a lot of thought (Due to it being a
    contact sport and in road cars) Go Karts sounds like a good idea (
    makes you feel vulnerable due to lack of bodywork)
    
    

I agree that some kind of racing is a good Idea.

I have been driving for about 5 years and clas myself as a reasonable good driver.
until yesterday.....

I had my first attempt at racing, (Banger Racing).  

Race 1		Only when I got half way around the first corner and so ended 
		the first race. (Sat on embankment)I saw that its a bit different .

Eace 2.  Going well .... 3rd place 2 laps to go ... Run out of fuel.

Major engine problem, Caused by the automaitic choke jamming open.
need to get a twin choke webber. Points closing still due to one of the retaing
screws being thread bear. 


Race 3.  Made 2 laps this time.  Points closed up and engine died.
		Rear light are now in the rear wheel arch. Blown rear tyre.
		Need to clear the rear body work from wheel area.


Race 4.  Lap 3  Ended up in the tyres. Car no not very well,, Have to cut all the back
		end away from the wheel area. No go now till next week.

End thoughts........ Good fun after getting over the shakes from the first couple 
of races.  (It's a bit scarey when your sat in the middle of a track with people who 
know what they are doing and u don't.)  It was worth it...........

BTW..... The Renault 19 16v is not a good idea for towing car/trailer  
	  When manovering the trailer around the clutch over heats very rapidly.


	Well..... Till next week.......?


			Roger

    
    Roger,
    
    	Where did you go?  (banger racing).
    
    
    Andy.

    
    Roger practices his banger racing on the bends between Reading and
    Swallowfield.

  Thanks Simon......


 I race at Swindown..............

    
    
    Where's Swindown ?
    
    

    Swindon.